DUST Search - [Request] Cover system implemented

Cal Predine wrote:

I think it warrants investigation, rather than dismissing out-of-hand without reason. In current-day military actions, cover usage represents the difference between tactical movement such as Fire and Movement, and throwing yourself headlong across a free-fire zone hoping you won't get shot...
In general if I (the player) can do something easily, like peep 'round a doorframe, but I can't easily make my character do the same, then I'm fighting the control interface rather than the enemy, and that's not a great thing.

Incidentally "Camping" (in the context used above) is not a military term I recognise. OP, ambush, foxhole, sentry, picket, guard and lookout are.

But I'd be interested in reading any evidence that this wouldn't work in Dust. No-one had ever found a way for hundreds, even thousands, of people to take part in a single virtual space battle before CCP did it with EVE - don't be limited by what's gone before.
As noted above, a decent cover system would make grenades a very important weapon, but would also create huge potential for the HMG in its correct role of suppression and area-denial. There would also be a significant openings for man-portable indirect-fire weapons to damage those suppressed targets. It would broaden the combined-arms nature of engagements.
The comments that it's already hard to take targets out have clear merit, and no-one wants to see the game become totally bogged-down and static. We really need a way to test new ideas out and see if they work.

We could call it a "beta" Roll

But, much as I love the exchange of ideas we have here on this forum, and hope that CCP keeps these on record and gives them all due consideration, I'd like to see the core gameplay issues (especially framerate and lag) nailed down first. Little steps...

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
DarkShadowFox Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 238	Posted - 2012.09.18 05:09:00 - [1] - Quote Needs to be a stick push into cover system like GRAW and RB6, with peek and blind fire, would add more tactical advantage and have you go into third person, RB6 did it and it went over well in multiplayer, plus it would set you apart. Please guys, if you are going to say no dont say it, its not nessicary to hate something just because you cant grasp it. Be real here, this is a discussion not a shut out party :V
STB Vermaak Doe 558	Posted - 2012.09.18 05:20:00 - [2] - Quote Cover systems fail in mp fpses
DarkShadowFox Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 238	Posted - 2012.09.18 05:25:00 - [3] - Quote STB Vermaak Doe wrote: Cover systems fail in mp fpses Never know till you try :V
STB Vermaak Doe 558	Posted - 2012.09.18 05:27:00 - [4] - Quote DarkShadowFox wrote: STB Vermaak Doe wrote: Cover systems fail in mp fpses Never know till you try :V Can't think of specific but others have tried and failed. This thread=ROLFSTOMP
EnIgMa99 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 219	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:16:00 - [5] - Quote no
Gcember Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 123	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:18:00 - [6] - Quote It does not work with cover systems in FPS,s it is in it must be a third person shooter for this to work.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:09:00 - [7] - Quote Not taking a side, but I keep hearing about how it doesn't work in multiplayer FPS without specific examples why.
Gcember Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 123	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:13:00 - [8] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Not taking a side, but I keep hearing about how it doesn't work in multiplayer FPS without specific examples why. Imagine how clunky it would be, Personally I would think that, but that is my opinion, you will have a hard time controlling your character, thats how I see it but I am open to suggestions why it shouldnt be.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2012.09.18 14:08:00 - [9] - Quote Gcember wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Not taking a side, but I keep hearing about how it doesn't work in multiplayer FPS without specific examples why. Imagine how clunky it would be, Personally I would think that, but that is my opinion, you will have a hard time controlling your character, thats how I see it but I am open to suggestions why it shouldn't be. Not sure if clunky would be an issue, after playing Killzone 2 and 3, I am confident that first person cover can work miraculously well.
Laurent Cazaderon Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 1155	Posted - 2012.09.18 14:21:00 - [10] - Quote Cover system.... Those thing turn camping into a new form of art. Lean on a wall and still see all the battlefield then pop out and kill. Repeat .... Yay !

flegmat tropku Algintal Core Gallente Federation 23	Posted - 2012.09.18 14:35:00 - [11] - Quote Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Cover system.... Those thing turn camping into a new form of art. Lean on a wall and still see all the battlefield then pop out and kill. Repeat .... Yay ! Nope..the camera needs to adapt as well. Not just crouching with your weapon ready like the current system, but taking cover would mean you're not able to fire your weapon without aiming and shooting blind without aim would mean you don't see a darn thing what you're shooting at. Mass Effect 3 has a clever cover usage and it's a 3rd person shooter running on Unreal Engine 3. Implementing something similar with adjusted camera angle shouldn't be impossible.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2012.09.18 14:39:00 - [12] - Quote This video shows some effective FPS cover http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mgoa-yO_d0
Gcember Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 123	Posted - 2012.09.18 14:43:00 - [13] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: This video shows some effective FPS cover http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mgoa-yO_d0 I was impressed by this actually, but as dust is an online shooter with terrains that are not like those on the video it would not be the same feeling.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2012.09.18 14:54:00 - [14] - Quote The map builder can be programmed to add more of those boxes that act as cover, or just to have more small elevation spikes spread out through the terrain that can be used for cover. Cover system or not, I think the maps are currently too flat. A cover system could lead to camping, but I'm not really sure. Nothing is stopping people from camping by just crouching behind an object for cover and peeking out to kill people, and doubt a cover system would make much of a difference. I also don't think a cover system is really needed as well, but might be kind of cool. To be safe, a cover system could make someone's head vulnerable when shooting from cover.
RHYTHMIK Designs BetaMax. 50	Posted - 2012.09.18 15:04:00 - [15] - Quote The problem I have with most cover systems (TPS particularly) is that they're not realistic enough. I you take cover should you have you field of view limited unless you're peaking around or over your cover...that's the trade off for safety. I have not seen a game do this yet. And even as good as that KZ video looked, you're still able to see too much.
Avenger 245 Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 477	Posted - 2012.09.19 01:19:00 - [16] - Quote I do not support a full blown cover system, however having a few cover mechanics like peach would be to bad crysis 2 did have some cover elements and it worked pretty well. But basing combat around cover system no this is one of those gameplay>realism cover system are hard to implement right, and are the worst when implemented wrong, they also slow the game down a good bit. As for CCP trying their fps developers are from games like bf3 not kz, and the rest of their devs can barely make a good fps much less a good fps cover game. No offense devs.
Jane DeArc Militaires Sans Jeux 87	Posted - 2012.09.19 06:00:00 - [17] - Quote STB Vermaak Doe wrote: Cover systems fail in mp fpses This is a rare occasion, but I have to take his side on here. It turns into an event of everyone in cover taking pot shots at someone else who came out of cover to take pot shots. Grenades become a primary mode of killing people.
flegmat tropku Algintal Core Gallente Federation 23	Posted - 2012.09.19 06:46:00 - [18] - Quote Jane DeArc wrote: This is a rare occasion, but I have to take his side on here. It turns into an event of everyone in cover taking pot shots at someone else who came out of cover to take pot shots. Grenades become a primary mode of killing people. Killing people in cover requires tactics and teamwork and yes grenades would be valuable part of it too while other tactics might include suppressing fire from the team whilst another is advancing to flank the enemy, using vehicles and stealth to get behind the enemy etc.. Sure it would slow down the game-play, but then using cover is natural and one primary focus everyone should have is the tactic how to survive the battlefield. Currently I think the penalty for dying is not high enough. Extending the re-spawn delay or removing the option to choose to re-spawn immediately thus forcing everyone to wait until they've bled out might be enough to do the trick. The cost of dying has to be high enough so that people will try to do their best to make killing them as difficult as possible for the other team.
Templar Two Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 459	Posted - 2012.09.19 08:31:00 - [19] - Quote Cover system in a FPS can be implemented at one condition: the game must have very low TTK. If you can already take lots of bullets before dying, like in Dust 514, then a cover system is pointless/useless. An example of a game with good TTK with cover is Ghost Recon:Future Soldier; it takes very few bullets to die there. I don't like that game but the TTK was right and really made cover useful/meaningful. Killzone cover system is fantastic and IMO ti's the best in any FPS becuse, unlike Rainbow, it keep you in First Person. GG din't implement it in the MP because they wanted to keep the game fast but the TTK in Killzone is almost right to have it in the MP as well. Prey 2 also has a great cover system as well as great mobility for the character. Still Dust is light-years away from the quality of Killzone, form animation to collision to gamepaly, so at this rate a cover system would take years to be implemented.
carl von oppenheimer Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 158	Posted - 2012.09.19 11:48:00 - [20] - Quote Just add ability to lean and you have your cover system no need to implement anything more fancy, leaning is quite common feature in PC FPS's. Might add that most games where you have cover you die from 3 hits or head shot and sniper/grenade/anything is one shot kill no matter where it hits.

Bishop Sunrunner Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 8	Posted - 2012.10.19 12:48:00 - [21] - Quote DarkShadowFox wrote: Needs to be a stick push into cover system like GRAW and RB6, with peek and blind fire, would add more tactical advantage and have you go into third person, RB6 did it and it went over well in multiplayer, plus it would set you apart. Please guys, if you are going to say no dont say it, its not nessicary to hate something just because you cant grasp it. Be real here, this is a discussion not a shut out party :V Iam with you. In cover the damage should be reduced by 30-50%
Bishop Sunrunner Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 8	Posted - 2012.10.19 12:55:00 - [22] - Quote Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Cover system.... Those thing turn camping into a new form of art. Lean on a wall and still see all the battlefield then pop out and kill. Repeat .... Yay ! Say what? In your dreams... I mean, no one says that everyone has to use it. you can use it or not.. Is up to you,
Herpn Derpidus Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 11	Posted - 2012.10.19 13:24:00 - [23] - Quote the killzone 2 single player had a pretty good low effort cover system that i wouldnt mind seeing in this game
Jason Punk DUST University Ivy League 71	Posted - 2012.10.19 16:11:00 - [24] - Quote Cover systems are fine and work really well in a lot of games. Personal favorite was RB6 and New Vegas 1 and 2 and the gameplay was a blast. I've never really found it worked out great for campers as much as it simply allowed people to defend an area longer and more effectively than in other games. (There is something really ridiculous about constantly having to run and gun in order to stay alive) That being said however, I don't think Dust would really benefit from such a system as it is a much larger game in scale and the combat is much more vehicular-oriented. It would be cool to be able to crouch and lay down though. Honestly, I would like to see similar flow of ground combat as seen in BF3 or Arma 2. The Dust IP is certainly very differentiated, but it could take a few lessons from the feel of those games.
Cal Predine StarKnight Security 37	Posted - 2012.10.19 17:13:00 - [25] - Quote I think it warrants investigation, rather than dismissing out-of-hand without reason. In current-day military actions, cover usage represents the difference between tactical movement such as Fire and Movement, and throwing yourself headlong across a free-fire zone hoping you won't get shot... In general if I (the player) can do something easily, like peep 'round a doorframe, but I can't easily make my character do the same, then I'm fighting the control interface rather than the enemy, and that's not a great thing. Incidentally "Camping" (in the context used above) is not a military term I recognise. OP, ambush, foxhole, sentry, picket, guard and lookout are. But I'd be interested in reading any evidence that this wouldn't work in Dust. No-one had ever found a way for hundreds, even thousands, of people to take part in a single virtual space battle before CCP did it with EVE - don't be limited by what's gone before. As noted above, a decent cover system would make grenades a very important weapon, but would also create huge potential for the HMG in its correct role of suppression and area-denial. There would also be a significant openings for man-portable indirect-fire weapons to damage those suppressed targets. It would broaden the combined-arms nature of engagements. The comments that it's already hard to take targets out have clear merit, and no-one wants to see the game become totally bogged-down and static. We really need a way to test new ideas out and see if they work. We could call it a "beta" But, much as I love the exchange of ideas we have here on this forum, and hope that CCP keeps these on record and gives them all due consideration, I'd like to see the core gameplay issues (especially framerate and lag) nailed down first. Little steps...
Jason Punk DUST University Ivy League 71	Posted - 2012.10.23 18:14:00 - [26] - Quote Cal Predine wrote: I think it warrants investigation, rather than dismissing out-of-hand without reason. In current-day military actions, cover usage represents the difference between tactical movement such as Fire and Movement, and throwing yourself headlong across a free-fire zone hoping you won't get shot... In general if I (the player) can do something easily, like peep 'round a doorframe, but I can't easily make my character do the same, then I'm fighting the control interface rather than the enemy, and that's not a great thing. Incidentally "Camping" (in the context used above) is not a military term I recognise. OP, ambush, foxhole, sentry, picket, guard and lookout are. But I'd be interested in reading any evidence that this wouldn't work in Dust. No-one had ever found a way for hundreds, even thousands, of people to take part in a single virtual space battle before CCP did it with EVE - don't be limited by what's gone before. As noted above, a decent cover system would make grenades a very important weapon, but would also create huge potential for the HMG in its correct role of suppression and area-denial. There would also be a significant openings for man-portable indirect-fire weapons to damage those suppressed targets. It would broaden the combined-arms nature of engagements. The comments that it's already hard to take targets out have clear merit, and no-one wants to see the game become totally bogged-down and static. We really need a way to test new ideas out and see if they work. We could call it a "beta" But, much as I love the exchange of ideas we have here on this forum, and hope that CCP keeps these on record and gives them all due consideration, I'd like to see the core gameplay issues (especially framerate and lag) nailed down first. Little steps... Uhh, well evidence is a tricky thing, especially in a realm of opinions and pure subjective revelation. As far as being able to do it, I have no doubt CCP is fully capable and if the demand is great enough, certainly would. However, to implement cover systems into a large-scaled game (5km-large maps, space ships, vehical comabt, etc.) is somewhat counter intuitive. Regardless though, I think with more game modes, Tighter Urban Combat, NPC missions, and especially espionage missions and the like...we could definitely see some great means for this. Maybe even allowing commanders to drop down "barricades and cover" or bunker outlets to provide these opportunities. Who knows, but it's worth bringing beyond the simple sticky cover everywhere template. This is after all a pretty open dev community
Jason Punk DUST University Ivy League 71	Posted - 2012.10.23 18:17:00 - [27] - Quote I mean, take this with all the salt of the earth, but what if you simply had "Urban Warfare Training" or "Infantry Tactics" which allowed you to move to cover on maps that involved such objects or in tight quarter missions.


Pages: 1 :: [one page]