It is released. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Now you are just showing your ignorance. Faction warfare is very much in the game, it's just a complete dodgefest to find anyone to fight. You can pick the system, planet, and district to conquer. And you pick which side. However the system requires consensual pvp, which is downright lame.

So they are taking that exact mechanic, slapping a logistics "daily timer" on it, and calling it PC. FW is getting a UI change to probably be more like the merc battles where they are constantly running. Still, nothing new besides the passive vendor trash for owning a district.

None of that has any bearing on how the game actually plays though...

I like the slow speed. When bigger maps come in, and those slutty free LAVs are taken out, I'm going to roll up in my Methana and be all like: "Me? I'm just going to the battle, you know, several kilometers that way. What's that? You'd like a ride?"

And this is why testers cannot take you seriously.

Also this is the agenda behind every word you speak, you have been poisoned.

*****-please, we have dropship's for that.

"Oh hey what's up. I was just going to the Grocery Store, you know, several Kilometers behind those mountains. You need anything? This dropship has so much trunk, I think I'll hit up Ikea."

Lol at ^ "willingly raped" ^

But, more to the point of this thread, when you say layered objectives, do you perhaps mean the game mode that we originally had in.......Replication, I believe it was? Those were the days.

I'm thinking even more freeform than that.

The facility is a 2 storied warehouse with a trio of null cannons on the roof. It is surrounded by a defensive wall 200m distant with railgun and blaster turrets surrounding the main gate. The alternate gate is much smaller and partially obstructed by mountains - the only way in is by foot through switchbacks. Each gate has a separate power grid so the have to be knocked out independently. The main building has automated defenses on the first floor. The null cannon and warehouse defense controls are located on the 2nd floor. The roof has a dropship pad flanked by two control towers with autocannon antiair turrets and sniper platforms. The clone storage is in the basement of the warehouse. The owners have also chosen to install a small HAV garage is housed by the main gate and a tunnel connecting the main gate tower to the basement. As a minor base there is not a MCC in position to direct the defense.

Now when an attacker arrives, they pick the objective. If they are there for sabotage, they just have to reach the basement and destroy what is in storage. If they want to steal resources they must get their MCC over the facility to lift out the resources. If they want to take over the facility for their own, they have to wipe out every single clone in storage, destroy the control room, park their MCC above the warehouse and maintain possession for 24 hours (so the defenders can try to take it back). Most importantly, there is no clear "best" way to do any of this. Do you suicide rush the roof with dropships and hope to establish a foothold? Do you sneak in through the back gate while feinting at the main gate? Do you simply wreck the main gate completely and push through with heavy armor up to the main door of the warehouse? Also remember, the more damage you cause, the more that needs repaired, no matter who retains ownership afterwards.

That is the depth and complexity I expected of DUST.

Actually it was just a tangent to the main idea. So far the best response is more movement options.

Possible ideas:

Combat Rolls

Dives

Slides

Climbing

Blindfire

Bullrush

Looking for more good suggestions.

These are old ideas that existed before the shift away from arcade style.

How about the ability to reassign controller buttons better click to melee is a bit cumbersome on the ps3?

How about the ability to reassign controller buttons better click to melee is a bit cumbersome on the ps3?

I'm thinking even more freeform than that.

The facility is a 2 storied warehouse with a trio of null cannons on the roof. It is surrounded by a defensive wall 200m distant with railgun and blaster turrets surrounding the main gate. The alternate gate is much smaller and partially obstructed by mountains - the only way in is by foot through switchbacks. Each gate has a separate power grid so the have to be knocked out independently. The main building has automated defenses on the first floor. The null cannon and warehouse defense controls are located on the 2nd floor. The roof has a dropship pad flanked by two control towers with autocannon antiair turrets and sniper platforms. The clone storage is in the basement of the warehouse. The owners have also chosen to install a small HAV garage is housed by the main gate and a tunnel connecting the main gate tower to the basement. As a minor base there is not a MCC in position to direct the defense.

Now when an attacker arrives, they pick the objective. If they are there for sabotage, they just have to reach the basement and destroy what is in storage. If they want to steal resources they must get their MCC over the facility to lift out the resources. If they want to take over the facility for their own, they have to wipe out every single clone in storage, destroy the control room, park their MCC above the warehouse and maintain possession for 24 hours (so the defenders can try to take it back). Most importantly, there is no clear "best" way to do any of this. Do you suicide rush the roof with dropships and hope to establish a foothold? Do you sneak in through the back gate while feinting at the main gate? Do you simply wreck the main gate completely and push through with heavy armor up to the main door of the warehouse? Also remember, the more damage you cause, the more that needs repaired, no matter who retains ownership afterwards.

That is the depth and complexity I expected of DUST.

Choosing objectives of attack sounds great and will offer alot of variance to fights and gives capturing a district more tactical decisions which is always good imo

Laheon, we get that you want to support CCP. But honestly, relax for a minute. Noc and others have been here for months (almost a year for some), and its painfully obvious that slowing down gameplay has ruined a lot of what the game was about initially.

It's good to support CCP, but some of us remember a time when the game was broken in terms of technicalities, but the gameplay was faster, funner, and better overall, for new players and old ones. Go back a few thousand pages to the essays Protoman, Tony, and tons of other people from before the Closed Open Beta posted, about how the slower speeds were leading to a worse game.

All that needed fixing wwas hit detection, which allowed people to absorb bullets, but instead, CCP opted to take the easy way out, and slowed down the speeds to give the illusion of better hit detection. It's duct tape, and all the way up to now, it's been wearing real thin.

In response to you Noc, I believe that hacks should be about 2 seconds faster (without mods), and rehacks should be about 10 seconds faster.

Also, maps needs layers. For anyone that remembers CraterLake, the map had at least 3-5 levels of rocks and outcrops that provided diverse gameplay. It also had a large bridge connecting the two sidepaths to the objectives, and small installation turrets. This was only the first part of the map.

Upon taking out 2 objectives, attackers needed to hack 2 CRU's, basically 2 mini bases near the outskirts of the second part of the map. Then they'd cross a large open expanse of land, usually in tanks/lavs' and fight for the 3 objectives in the type of skirmish we have now. Defenders got random spawning, attackers needed to spawn outside or on uplinks.

@Icy - I played in July, I followed the initial announcement, and I've tried selling this game to so many of my friends. Sadly, they're lazy idiots and don't want to try a free-to-play game.

I'd show them some gameplay, but then again, I'm lazy, and they're lazy, so they don't come visit my place very often.

Anyway. Back on point. I have a huge interest in DUST being able to becoming fully developed, as quickly as possible, but I don't want CCP to rush, as I've seen a lot of rushed games, especially MMO's. For one, SW:TOR. I've also known a lot of grind, so I'm used to the long, hard slog of grinding. Yes, the game can be slow. But the game can also be quick. It depends entirely on the situation.

I've been here since July, which puts me pretty much at the latter half of the closed beta. Not for the E3 build, true, but I caught most of the OP free-tank build. Not to mention tower-camping with dropships.

What I'm trying to tell people is to relax, to give CCP some slack. They're working on it as hard as they can, and it's not as if they can things through without paperwork. They have to push new builds through Sony, which is very time-consuming, and they can hardly "fix" hit detection without a new build.

Basically, haranguing them about certain issues, daily, over a time period of six months, does nothing but a, waste your time, b, raise blood pressure, and c, cause less people to post constructively.

Trust CCP. 11 months from (what I've heard about the E3 build) an unpolished, very early version of the game to a fully working product is really great work.

Also 3 years of previous development time, and E3 build was only decent. The last "good" build in terms of gameplay I saw was the one before it, Replication. If they'd build off of that, they would've made greater progress.

@Icy - I played in July, I followed the initial announcement, and I've tried selling this game to so many of my friends. Sadly, they're lazy idiots and don't want to try a free-to-play game.

I'd show them some gameplay, but then again, I'm lazy, and they're lazy, so they don't come visit my place very often.

Anyway. Back on point. I have a huge interest in DUST being able to becoming fully developed, as quickly as possible, but I don't want CCP to rush, as I've seen a lot of rushed games, especially MMO's. For one, SW:TOR. I've also known a lot of grind, so I'm used to the long, hard slog of grinding. Yes, the game can be slow. But the game can also be quick. It depends entirely on the situation.

I've been here since July, which puts me pretty much at the latter half of the closed beta. Not for the E3 build, true, but I caught most of the OP free-tank build. Not to mention tower-camping with dropships.

What I'm trying to tell people is to relax, to give CCP some slack. They're working on it as hard as they can, and it's not as if they can things through without paperwork. They have to push new builds through Sony, which is very time-consuming, and they can hardly "fix" hit detection without a new build.

Basically, haranguing them about certain issues, daily, over a time period of six months, does nothing but a, waste your time, b, raise blood pressure, and c, cause less people to post constructively.

Trust CCP. 11 months from (what I've heard about the E3 build) an unpolished, very early version of the game to a fully working product is really great work.

And why would we need fast paced gameplay?
Can't we have a slow shooter from once in a while?
Seriously are you guys that impatient that you have to kill someone every 0.4 seconds?

PS3 cell architecture...? Surely that's Sony's fault, they did design it.

Meh, I'm getting sick of arguing my POV. I officially give up.

Just... Try to cut CCP some slack. Don't go so hard on them. It's a little bit disheartening to see people bash your product 24/7, and your hard work, after you've put four years into it.

Also: Read FoxFour's posts re: the next build. He says Sony QA takes about a month, which seems right.