| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nguruthos IX
Kameira Lodge
Amarr Empire
144
   |
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:30:00 -
[1] - Quote
That's just what this games needs. A game with specialization and variety of skills to be broken apart into subsets.
Now I have never driven a tank and never want to. However look at this from my perspective as a DS pilot.
If I want to use my dropship I'd have to queue against an entire team that's either using tanks
(which instantly kill me)
Or against AV
(which is balanced against tanks, and also instantly kill me)
So um.... Yeah. Essentially this would ruin the game for me or anyone who enjoys having diversity in their matches. Where each game is different, team is different and you don't know what to expect.
Now we know why this idea came about. It's because presently tanks own everyone. If there was more content in the game this wouldn't be a problem. If there were fighters and gunships that killed tanks, properly balanced AV and less free/militia gear ruining the cost-risk-balance then Infantry only Ambush would not have been considered.
So how about instead of ruining the game early be segregating AV vs Tanks and Guns vs Guns to their own games maybe just wait for new content. You could lobby for it, but it won't speed CCP up. Or you could lobby a quick and short sighted band-aid that would be easy to implement but completely devastating to the entire point of this game.
Nobody who plays this game really want it to try to be a COD clone. CoD is boring as balls and CCP would fail in that market.
It's supposed to be some kind of MMO FPS but like eve. Imagine someone in eve suggesting a frigates only sector of the universe... |
Winscar Shinobi
Better Hide R Die
98
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
You want the freedom to be diverse and drive your ship, but won't respect the freedom of others to want to play a mode where vehicles don't roll over them? |
lordjanuz
Norwegian Dust514 Corporation
92
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:33:00 -
[3] - Quote
+1 |
DUST Fiend
Immobile Infantry
2132
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
Winscar Shinobi wrote:You want the freedom to be diverse and drive your ship, but won't respect the freedom of others to want to play a mode where vehicles don't roll over them?
This
More gametypes is better than less. If you want to fly your dropship, join a standard game. No vehicle matches are a great idea, unlike the idea for vehicle only matches, which doesn't even make sense from a gameplay perspective. Dropships are a joke right now anyways, no matter what gametype you play. |
Harkon Vysarii
Dead Six Initiative
Daringly Inserting Large Dangerous Objects
73
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:36:00 -
[5] - Quote
Seriously a plus one for that? Man its easy to get likes.
No its not that he doesnt respect peoples freedom to do as they please its that sometimes people shouldnt have that freedom as in having it actually hurts them more than they know.
Breaking down the diversity of dust will see an entire generation of people who cant AV for their lives because they spend all day in NO VEHICLE games, who consequently will complain and moan about AV and vehicles in all other game modes. |
Vermaak Doe
SVER True Blood
Unclaimed.
605
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:36:00 -
[6] - Quote
Segregation of the player base isn't a good enough reason that infantry only is a bad idea? |
Nemo Bluntz
Chatelain Rapid Response
Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:38:00 -
[7] - Quote
I'm going to reply to this thread by making my own thread.  |
Winscar Shinobi
Better Hide R Die
99
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:39:00 -
[8] - Quote
You do realize when secs get put in the game is going to be severely segregated. |
DUST Fiend
Immobile Infantry
2132
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:40:00 -
[9] - Quote
Vermaak Doe wrote:Segregation of the player base isn't a good enough reason that infantry only is a bad idea?
So I take it that means we have to scrap all PvE game types right, since it would split people up? |
Vermaak Doe
SVER True Blood
Unclaimed.
607
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:41:00 -
[10] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Vermaak Doe wrote:Segregation of the player base isn't a good enough reason that infantry only is a bad idea? So I take it that means we have to scrap all PvE game types right, since it would split people up?
Not at all, there's a difference between wanting competitive without certain weapons ane just wanting to shoot Ai |
|
|
DUST Fiend
Immobile Infantry
2132
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:43:00 -
[11] - Quote
Vermaak Doe wrote:Not at all, there's a difference between wanting competitive without certain weapons ane just wanting to shoot Ai
Indoor maps. No vehicles. Done.
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2106
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:43:00 -
[12] - Quote
Vermaak Doe wrote:Segregation of the player base isn't a good enough reason that infantry only is a bad idea?
A lot of people are getting the impression that Ambush will be turned into an infantry-only mode.
NOT that we'll get a new mode with no vehicles, but that Ambush will no longer exist in its current form, and will be an infantry-only mode.
Ambush (with no vehicles)
Ambush OMS (as normal)
Skirmish (as normal)
That's what the thread CCP said they're "considering" was asking for.
I don't want that.
I'm not TOTALLY against the idea of an infantry based game mode. But I'm VERY strongly against the idea of replacing one of our existing modes with it.
And the player-base split is another reason against it. |
Sloth9230
Reaper Galactic
574
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:44:00 -
[13] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Vermaak Doe wrote:Segregation of the player base isn't a good enough reason that infantry only is a bad idea? So I take it that means we have to scrap all PvE game types right, since it would split people up?
Down with the PVE! |
Vermaak Doe
SVER True Blood
Unclaimed.
607
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:44:00 -
[14] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Vermaak Doe wrote:Not at all, there's a difference between wanting competitive without certain weapons ane just wanting to shoot Ai Indoor maps. No vehicles. Done.
Yes because indoor maps will be too small for vehicles |
EKH0 0ne
RestlessSpirits
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:46:00 -
[15] - Quote
Winscar Shinobi wrote:You want the freedom to be diverse and drive your ship, but won't respect the freedom of others to want to play a mode where vehicles don't roll over them?
Discrimination does not equal freedom.
Also this games is 10000000 x's "boringer" than COD which is why people are partying in the MCC.
You ever heard of people turning on COD to go afk?
Call of Duty:
Zombie mode
Team Deathmatch
Multi-Team
Free for all
domination
ground war
demoliton
kill confirmed
hard point
headquarters
capture the flag
search and destroy
Gun game
One in the chamber
Sharpshooter
Sticks and Stones
Leauge modes
Dust 514
Skrimish
Ambush
Ambush OMS
And the all new ambush without tanks.........SO MUCH FUN!!!! |
Aqil Aegivan
The Southern Legion
82
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:46:00 -
[16] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Vermaak Doe wrote:Not at all, there's a difference between wanting competitive without certain weapons ane just wanting to shoot Ai Indoor maps. No vehicles. Done.
This. Maps with 100% no RDV access. Doesn't even take a new game mode. |
DUST Fiend
Immobile Infantry
2132
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:47:00 -
[17] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:I'm not TOTALLY against the idea of an infantry based game mode. But I'm VERY strongly against the idea of replacing one of our existing modes with it.
I think replacing standard Ambush with it would be stupid, but adding a new gametype could only serve to help make the game more enjoyable. Vehicle drivers are against this because they know that players with some skill will join matches where vehicles can be dropped, increasing their chances of dying. Right now, you can roll around in vehicles mostly unimpeded thanks to newberries who don't really know how to play the game. So really, this split would only serve to balance out vehicles more, instead of allowing them to roflstomp all over players who don't even know how to fire a swarm launcher  |
Lance 2ballzStrong
SyNergy Gaming
937
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:47:00 -
[18] - Quote
Winscar Shinobi wrote:You want the freedom to be diverse and drive your ship, but won't respect the freedom of others to want to play a mode where vehicles don't roll over them?
QFT
Since when having more game modes is a bad thing?... I don't get it. |
Sloth9230
Reaper Galactic
577
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:48:00 -
[19] - Quote
lol I'm going to tell my friends that they're discriminating against me next time they want to go get sushi. They know I hate fish, and yet they still want to go eat sushi THOSE BASTARDS! |
Tony Calif
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
2030
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:48:00 -
[20] - Quote
So it's a big problem if people get infantry skills, then AV once they are comfortable with the game? I don't see how or why.
Infantry only players will get called carebears, but of they are having fun, that's sort of all that matters yeah? |
|
|
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
792
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:49:00 -
[21] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Vermaak Doe wrote:Not at all, there's a difference between wanting competitive without certain weapons ane just wanting to shoot Ai Indoor maps. No vehicles. Done.
I'm cool with this, there is a small but important difference between throwing a couple on infantry only maps into circulation and making a new game mode entirely, it also helps counter the amount of vehicle friendly maps in the current queue |
Sloth9230
Reaper Galactic
577
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:51:00 -
[22] - Quote
Tony Calif wrote:but of they are having fun
No, no one plays video games for fun. BTW if you don't use Falco or Fox in Super Smash Bros, then your're a scrub. |
Vermaak Doe
SVER True Blood
Unclaimed.
607
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:54:00 -
[23] - Quote
Tony Calif wrote:So it's a big problem if people get infantry skills, then AV once they are comfortable with the game? I don't see how or why.
Infantry only players will get called carebears, but of they are having fun, that's sort of all that matters yeah?
Absolutely because being unable to play a.game mode with certain weapons is SO fun |
Sloth9230
Reaper Galactic
577
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:54:00 -
[24] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:
Now we know why this idea came about. It's because presently tanks own everyone.
False, tanks don't own everyone, I'd go so far as to call them underpowered, tanks only own newberries.
Sloth9230 wrote:Vermaak Doe wrote:
Because now every butthurt infantry person will be hiding in regular ambush if CCP goes through with this.
You mean newberries? You're right, I'm sorry tankers won't get to slaughter noobs anymore. Honestly, the only people who don't know how to fight a tank are noobs charging at them with their little ARs. I take back what I said about the lack of supply depots, newberries are the reason tankers hangout in ambush. |
DUST Fiend
Immobile Infantry
2132
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:56:00 -
[25] - Quote
Vermaak Doe wrote:Tony Calif wrote:So it's a big problem if people get infantry skills, then AV once they are comfortable with the game? I don't see how or why.
Infantry only players will get called carebears, but of they are having fun, that's sort of all that matters yeah? Absolutely because being unable to play a.game mode with certain weapons is SO fun
Then just....choose a different gametype?
No one would be forcing you to play that gametype. |
Sloth9230
Reaper Galactic
577
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:57:00 -
[26] - Quote
Vermaak Doe wrote:Tony Calif wrote:So it's a big problem if people get infantry skills, then AV once they are comfortable with the game? I don't see how or why.
Infantry only players will get called carebears, but of they are having fun, that's sort of all that matters yeah? Absolutely because being unable to play a.game mode with certain weapons is SO fun
Ughh...go whine at taco bell because they don't offer chinese food, clearly they hate the chinese. Or would an infantry only mode, not necessarily ambush, prevent you from playing with tanks elsewhere? |
Crimson Moon V
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
242
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:57:00 -
[27] - Quote
Sloth9230 wrote:Tony Calif wrote:but of they are having fun No, no one plays video games for fun. BTW if you don't use Falco or Fox in Super Smash Bros, then your're a scrub.
I play games to smash people. That's fun for me. |
Nguruthos IX
Kameira Lodge
Amarr Empire
146
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:58:00 -
[28] - Quote
Winscar Shinobi wrote:You want the freedom to be diverse and drive your ship, but won't respect the freedom of others to want to play a mode where vehicles don't roll over them?
Let's be honest here. What you're complaining against isn't vehicles. When's the last time a LAV or DS owned you?
Its strickly tanks. And that's likely because there's not enough other vehicles in the game yet to dethrone their god status and level things out.
Most people advocating infantry only don't mean infantry only. They mean No Tanks. Because they're tired of being pubstomped by tanks.
But such a hasty generalization of "no vehicles" rather than "no tanks" is unjustified. |
Harkon Vysarii
Dead Six Initiative
Daringly Inserting Large Dangerous Objects
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 19:59:00 -
[29] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Vermaak Doe wrote:Not at all, there's a difference between wanting competitive without certain weapons ane just wanting to shoot Ai Indoor maps. No vehicles. Done.
See now when you put it like that it makes sense. Theres no point in putting a no vehicle mode for no reason. |
DUST Fiend
Immobile Infantry
2132
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 20:01:00 -
[30] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Most people advocating infantry only don't mean infantry only. They mean No Tanks. Because they're tired of being pubstomped by tanks.
No, I see it as no vehicles. Smaller, close quarters indoor maps like underground bunkers or production facilities, where RDVs can't reach. Strictly infantry. You could either mix this into the normal map pool, or make its own gametype. I say have its own gametype, so dedicated pilots don't get shafted when rolling these maps. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |