Only the default (TGN Light) theme for now. Dark them is also coming back soon. Then CSN. Then Wrestlin' Nation. A lot of WIP stuff right now. There are a couple of things still not working either. Sorry.
It really is down to engine limitations, balance and keeping it a Battlefield game.
It wouldn't have been in the developers priorities at ALL to make it easy for one player to single handedly destroy the enemy titan and win the game. Battlefield games are largely teamwork focused and Titan mode does help bring that out. If you can get yourself a good squad or a group of your clan it can be very fun organising what silos you are going to cap, loading apcs and tank columns and move across the map, then changing your plans once the enemy sheilds are down, taking a loaded apc or air transport to the enemy titan and resupply and assist each other in destroying the consoles and core.
It's a shame though that it doesn't happen too often. Titan could be vastly improved but only with a very new engine.
You're misunderstanding me; I don't want single-handedly destroying the titans to be easy, I want it to be possible!! And of course I want it to be extremely challenging!
Originally posted by TheRealWolfgang
'Combat' inside the Titan is just one giant cluster****. Narrow corridors are far too easy to defend using nadespam, PK rocket spam, APMs, and RDX, considering you know exactly where the enemy will have to go if he wants to take your console. Sure, a dedicated squad can take out a lone defender, but if you have 3 people defending the same corridor and they're good at timing their hand grenade spam, it's impossible for the attacking team to bust through. If people were forced to use their guns (engineer AV weapons as well, of course), Titan combat would have been a helluva lot more fun, kind of like it is in the BF2142 intro movie. Instead it's just the worst example of spam in a BF game to date.
Originally posted by Euro Noob
During beta testing 2142 the titans lagged like hell, so its definately engine limitations. Just having them move at all was causing huge problems. BF2 engine doesnt like big vehicles especially if you try to move them. Thats why the carriers in BF2 dont move at all.
Okay, so like iQu'e said, we need a frostbite-type engine. Guarded entrance? Blow a hole in the wall. Nade spammers in the halls? wait till they blow out the floor. Seems like it could work, but I'd probably end up trying to cut the titans in half :thumbsup:
Originally posted by TheRealWolfgang
Therefore, if it weren't for the silos, which as Chael mentioned make it pretty much a glorified conquest mode, the match could theoretically last forever until the defenders of one of the two Titans finally just say '**** it' and let the attackers in just so the round will end.
That sounds like the best game ever! That is exactly what I want, but I would never settle for giving up; I guarantee you I would down that titan. I can't believe you have a problem with this. My mind is blown.
You can take out a titan single handed, if you have the right unlocks (rdx shotgun) and the other team are not defending well.....seriously, it's happened like twice in 1000 rounds!
If there is 2 of you (support and recon), it's a lot quicker & easier!
If there is a good defence, you have no chance even if your whole team is attacking, unless you use the 'is it an exploit?' tactic.
So....you post a tutorial on the glitch? I highly doubt it was a purpose introduction to the game, as i missed that whole part in the tutorial on Titan game mode.:shakehead: wtf man.....
I get everyone saying it's a spam fest, because it is. But, if your team can't break through 2 corridors being guarded (and let's say there's 2-3 people in each corridor, which means 4-6 people are just defending the Titan), then don't. Cap the silos instead. If your shields aren't down but theirs are, either the spammers will continue to "defend" (which would be funny since no one's boarding), or they'll peel off in a panic to get the silos. At that point you could launch a massive attack.
And when it comes down to it, if you have all 5 silos, it really doesn't take all that long to destroy the Titan.
That sounds like the best game ever! That is exactly what I want, but I would never settle for giving up; I guarantee you I would down that titan. I can't believe you have a problem with this. My mind is blown.
Continuously running into, and dying from, hand grenade spam 'sounds like the best game ever'? :shock: You may have determination, but the people that are defending are going to be even more satisfied farming you for points and Titan Defense pins, I guarantee.
Or do you mean a game that would theoretically last forever? Because in that case perhaps MMOs are more your thing, with their persistant game worlds, etc. Personally I like battles to be between 15 minutes to a half an hour. Longer than a cup of coffee, but not too long so as to wear out its welcome. That way when I sit down to play I don't get the feeling that I have to devote three hours to play a single round, although that would certainly make those 'in a round' award easier to get I suppose.
Personally I like really long games. I like to sneak around a lot on foot, but it kinda takes the fun out of it when the game only lasts 15-20 minutes. Ever walk from one end of Dragon Valley to the other? Yeah, it takes a while. It can be pretty annoying when you sneak for ten minutes to get to the enemies main base (refinery on dragon or factory on karkand) only to have the round end just before you get there.
As for MMOs, they don't require any skill! I watched my little godbrother play WOW and it was ridiculous; The winner of a fight between players is determined by whoever has the higher level (usually). And everything auto-aims! No thank you, I'll stick to BF2. I do like the idea of persistent game worlds but I would prefer a FPS with a persistent world, dig?
Wolfie, why don't you tell me how a round of BF2 usually goes for you, and what you're favorite aspects of the game are; it would really help me understand where you're coming from.
Personally I like really long games. I like to sneak around a lot on foot, but it kinda takes the fun out of it when the game only lasts 15-20 minutes. Ever walk from one end of Dragon Valley to the other? Yeah, it takes a while. It can be pretty annoying when you sneak for ten minutes to get to the enemies main base (refinery on dragon or factory on karkand) only to have the round end just before you get there.
As for MMOs, they don't require any skill! I watched my little godbrother play WOW and it was ridiculous; The winner of a fight between players is determined by whoever has the higher level (usually). And everything auto-aims! No thank you, I'll stick to BF2. I do like the idea of persistent game worlds but I would prefer a FPS with a persistent world, dig?
Wolfie, why don't you tell me how a round of BF2 usually goes for you, and what you're favorite aspects of the game are; it would really help me understand where you're coming from.
A persistant FPS game world would be fun, but you'd have to have a few things happen that currently don't happen in the BF games:
1) Servers would have to be more stable. Server crashes happen all the time and in the case of a persistant world frequent crashes simply aren't acceptable.
2) With no clear goal in sight (winning the round), people would have to have something worth achieving. In an MMO it's better gear/more levelups. In an FPS you wouldn't want something like that because if a high-'levelled' player had better guns/more accuracy/etc. it would really put a strain on newbies even moreso than it already does. The stat system makes for a decently effective segue way between old-school BF game and MMOFPS, as well as the unlocks system (moreso in BF2142, obviously), but there's still a clear goal in sight when it comes to winning a round. In a persistant world with no clear winner or loser, there would have to be some kind of goal each player would be rewarded for achieving, as with any game.
3) If it were an MMO-type game, the servers would most likely need to be centralised, as though everyone is fighting the same war, which would mean literally thousands of people online on the same server at once (something I'm sure I needn't tell you would cause untolled amounts of lag). For something to be persistant it would need to be worthy of being persistant, which means a large game world (persistant Karkand? too easy to explore completely in under a half hour, would get boring quickly IMO), and in order to make a large game world fun when your goal is, in short, to shoot the other players, you'd need a large number of players to shoot. Just what I would envision for the 'massive' part of the MMO.
The idea behind an MMOFPS is good, but it would have to have many changes both with its ideas as well as it's hardware/software capacities to morph from BF2/BF2142 into one.
As for my typical game of BF, I don't really have a typical one, I guess. I try to play many different maps, which is obviously made difficult as I'm really at the mercy of what maps the server owners choose to run, and I like to play every kit. So some rounds I'll tank whore, some rounds I'll fly, some rounds I'll just be assault, other rounds I'll snipe, sometimes I just drive around trying to run people over, and so forth. Really whatever I'm in the mood for. But if I'm constantly on the team that's getting beaten bloody (teamstacking, etc.) I'll leave because I find close games to be the most enjoyable regardless of what I personally am doing.
Personally I like really long games. I like to sneak around a lot on foot, but it kinda takes the fun out of it when the game only lasts 15-20 minutes. Ever walk from one end of Dragon Valley to the other? Yeah, it takes a while. It can be pretty annoying when you sneak for ten minutes to get to the enemies main base (refinery on dragon or factory on karkand) only to have the round end just before you get there.
A persistant FPS game world would be fun, but you'd have to have a few things happen that currently don't happen in the BF games:
1) Servers would have to be more stable. Server crashes happen all the time and in the case of a persistant world frequent crashes simply aren't acceptable.
2) With no clear goal in sight (winning the round), people would have to have something worth achieving. In an MMO it's better gear/more levelups. In an FPS you wouldn't want something like that because if a high-'levelled' player had better guns/more accuracy/etc. it would really put a strain on newbies even moreso than it already does. The stat system makes for a decently effective segue way between old-school BF game and MMOFPS, as well as the unlocks system (moreso in BF2142, obviously), but there's still a clear goal in sight when it comes to winning a round. In a persistant world with no clear winner or loser, there would have to be some kind of goal each player would be rewarded for achieving, as with any game.
3) If it were an MMO-type game, the servers would most likely need to be centralised, as though everyone is fighting the same war, which would mean literally thousands of people online on the same server at once (something I'm sure I needn't tell you would cause untolled amounts of lag). For something to be persistant it would need to be worthy of being persistant, which means a large game world (persistant Karkand? too easy to explore completely in under a half hour, would get boring quickly IMO), and in order to make a large game world fun when your goal is, in short, to shoot the other players, you'd need a large number of players to shoot. Just what I would envision for the 'massive' part of the MMO.
The idea behind an MMOFPS is good, but it would have to have many changes both with its ideas as well as it's hardware/software capacities to morph from BF2/BF2142 into one.
As for my typical game of BF, I don't really have a typical one, I guess. I try to play many different maps, which is obviously made difficult as I'm really at the mercy of what maps the server owners choose to run, and I like to play every kit. So some rounds I'll tank whore, some rounds I'll fly, some rounds I'll just be assault, other rounds I'll snipe, sometimes I just drive around trying to run people over, and so forth. Really whatever I'm in the mood for. But if I'm constantly on the team that's getting beaten bloody (teamstacking, etc.) I'll leave because I find close games to be the most enjoyable regardless of what I personally am doing.
~Wolfgang
I agree with #1 and #3, but not #2. The round doesn't have to last forever for the game world to be persistent, the game just has to remember where I parked my car last round, etc. Like you said though, a lot of changes would have to be made. Now I feel like we're almost on the same page here, so thanks.
BTW, I wasn't able to infer much about your play-style from what you said. Wanna have a couple rounds? I'm usually on the (pRc) Dragon/Dalian server.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
wtf man.....
Comment