Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

[jake_]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

For the first time in my entire internet life I will place the appropriate "TL;DR."

This. I've stopped reading all the posts at this point.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Jake, Kyle, who cares? Its not adressed to you, if you find it too long of a read, just dont read it. Stop your complaining, saddle up and get back to OT.

[Kylee!]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Jake, Kyle, who cares? Its not adressed to you, if you find it too long of a read, just dont read it. Stop your complaining, saddle up and get back to OT.

Psh, don't be so defensive, I wasn't making fun of ya buddy. That OT comment was a low blow man...

But seriously - TL;DR. For anyone else who thought Not Long; DID Read - I applaud you.

[jake_]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Jake, Kyle, who cares? Its not adressed to you, if you find it too long of a read, just dont read it. Stop your complaining, saddle up and get back to OT.

I'm just teasing. :wee:

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Just this one right now; don't now how to quote it without quoting everything else:

"In comparison, you talk about fairness and balance. I can go to a COD4 pub server and obliterate the entire opposing team with inpunity, most of the time. And COD4 is the landmark of gameplay balance. You think thats fair that I get to win the round for my team singlehandedly? "

COD4's only objective is kill a lot of people; in that particular game, even in the demolition modes; a great K/D ratio is more useful since you'd get streaks, and with the streaks the free kills from the chopper and carpet bombing.

So youre saying that COD4 gamemodes are all about killing, while BF has been about... what exactly? Capturing flags, reviving, resupplying? BF has always been about a combined arms warfare, and that is directly associated with killing. Alternatively, you can play all gamemodes except for FFA and TDM without killing.

From the rest; you can't say a guy with 5 hours in the AA stinger is a noob, Even if you sat in the damn thing for whole rounds, you will never have a similar time spent on them vs time spent in a vehicle.

I didnt say he is a noob. A noob is a derogatory term. A newbie is a noun, a statement of a fact, meaning inexperienced. If you want to make a point-and-click weapon which every newbie could use, it has to come with severe disadvantages. In this case STA in BF2 are not meant to be the proverbial scissors to jets being paper. Its meant to fend off immediate danger from around the flags. Unfortunately with the exception of mobile STA-s, most maps in BF2 do not have any "scissors".

And we are never going to see each other eye to eye on this; I believe firmly that gameplay should be tailored for pubbing on principle; clans by themselves are not the majority of players.

Who cares about clans? I was in a pubbing clan in BF2, we only played the ground and I occasionally went airbourne to keep the game balanced for the players. Pubbing doesnt mean the game should be completely equalized and vehicles reduced to big boxes that make a lot of sound but dont really do anything else than provide the players with a different killing method. Right now youre justifying the elitism of competitive players who look down on pubbers.

the very fact any kit can hop in any vehicle and be able to drive it it fact that the game revolves around pubbing and is much more enjoyable when played clan vs clan; but it shouldn't be designed with clan play in mind first, when it's basis are for pubbers.

The game is about experience, immersion, fun. If your idea of fun is points, score, stats, then I wouldnt be surprised if you were a major supporter of IO. Part of that experience is actually feeling like a simple infantry troop facing difficult situations and going against all odds when youre defending a flag and a power-multiplier drives in to help the attacking team. Youre supposed to react differently to a rolling armor. The fact that everyone in the 32 player team can pick an anti-tank kit should enable armor to be a force to consider. Not something a single player can take down with minimum effort. Pub play isnt infantry play. Pub play is combined arms play and part of that is the immersion gained from being at the bottom of the food chain, using the support of your armor and air to overcome the enemy. In POE2, tanks had different armor/hitpoint zones. The front sustained a lot of pounding, while a dedicated anti-armor tandem-warhead RPG to the back killed it in one shot. Regular RPG took it down to below half health. It took skill, situation awareness and help of your squadmates (or inexperience from the tanker) to get behind the tank and get a shot off. At the same time rear view for tanks was disabled. This created a situation where a player could not survive a head-on shootout with a tanker, so he had to make a considerable effort to take one down solo, the odds were SEVERELY against him. Youre asking for something entirely different. Youre asking for something which is frustrating to use, until you get to a level where youre good enough to be able to score a lot of kills in it while not really shaping the battlefield, but exploiting weaknesses of individual players who arent doing anything useful anyway.

I can believe you a dedicated squad can lock down zones of the map; but not the whole map -I'm talking vanilla BF2.

Have you ever seen that? You can, and Ive seen that happen maybe once or twice. People dont give a sh!t. Not enough to put aside their greed for points to actively gang up against air power anyway.

I'm telling you, I have no problem with vehicles being a heavy factor into the equation, but they should be weighed with a lot of risk vs the reward

Make tanks as poweful of a force as in BF2. Decrease damage tolerance for the rear of the tank, increase for the front, increase cooldown time for the cannon by 20-30%. What you have is a vehicle which obliterates squads in a head-on fight against a sea of hapless medics, has enough hitpoints to support heavy pushes in the hotzones and has a structural weakness if it loses infantry support in close range fights. Combined arms, man.

it's not really difficult if you dedicate yourself to it, to get good in a relatively short ammount of time. That's why I sustain that vehicles should be very difficult to use effectively, since they have this great potential to turn the tide of a game.

Not in the new games they dont. In BFBC2 people were already complaining that tanks are not joining the fight, but staying far away and shelling individual soldiers. I saw tanks left completely unused. The whole point is that newbie in a tank should have 5:1+ odds against a newbie on the ground. Taking an armor down should be a team effort, not a 5 second kit-change problem for one guy. This can all be balanced around with tank spawntimes, damage locations, weapon cooldowns, and their numbers per map.

I'm not saying they should be reduced to "toothless" assets, or that they should become a non-factor, just that they should have a lot of risk involved.

So, basically, cannon with limited splash damage which only really kill if the player has a 10ms ping, no anti-infantry weapons platform unless you unlock the machine gun (which I dont even know how powerful is or will be). If youre in a tank, and you have to shoot a guy two to three times, then you cant come down and offer your support where it matters.

And don't try to kid me, name one single pilot in BF2 that doesn't choose to invest on the jets for the points

Every pilot I know who was above average and who started flying first, has been doing so because of the fun. High scores came with improved skill. If they didnt think it was fun, they wouldnt be flying. Alternatively, I know a LOT of people who have clocked a max of 5 hours in jets and who just think its not fun to fly, but not fun enough to dedicate themselves to it. The whole appeal in BF2 was that people who liked a certain vehicle in RL, or felt drawn to a certain vehicle in the game because of their perception of it being either badass or fun, if they actually entered that vehicle, it wasnt much different from what theyd imagine it to be. That is an amazing feat DICE accomplished.

; if the case was just the fun of flying they'd just drop a bomb hre and there.

You think that if someone has fun playing the game they just have to move around doing nothing? You have fun in infantry combat, why are you killing people? The fun in flying is enhanced with fulfilling your role in the game. In this case bombing, dogfighting, evading and escaping is all part of the package, the responsive controls, "natural" feel of the craft, all make these tasks that much more enjoyable.

All of you like to brag, to one extent or the other, how awesome you are cos you dominated a game.

Dude, shut up. You obviously havent been around here for long. In TBF2, pilots only bragged when they were flying the inferior jet against a much, much, much better one, and succeeding. And people actually gave them props for that. Even one of the better users at TGN, PlaneWhore, who also flew the superior jets a lot, never bragged about using an inbalanced plane. Your assumptions are ridiculous.

Even that is ****ing fine with me, but it should be goddamn difficult for you to get that 100:0

To get 100:0, you would have to invest at least 300 hours into the art, and very often thats not enough. Additionally, 100:0 rounds are a rarity, even among the top pilots. Youre probably thinking 50:0 runs, which are less rare, but still require hundreds and hundreds of hours of practice. I would have no problems with a dedicated STA platform which would reward a player with a similar score if that much practice was invested.

, no matter how many hours you have in that plane, every minute should have you sweating to get rid of lock ons from both ground and air; as the game stands, AA is useless for pubbers.

As an infanty player, I only sweat when Im actively engaging people. In other times Im smooth sailing. If I told you you had to sweat every second while youre being an infantry player, you would quit the game. Im all in for every bomb drop to be associated with risk, but not every second of the flight. Youre just showing how ridiculously little you know about air. And its nothing new to me. Ive seen this ever since I joined TGN 3 years ago.

I'm not even suggesting that AA should be lock on in one second-fire and forget and get an automatic kill. As things are right now, you can fire the flares, practically turn a 180° snipe the AA with the damn plane, and go your merry way. A guy in the AA should make you cry for teammates to go take care of the guy in the turret, and distract you from everything else until he's taken care of.

If the guy in the STA had 300 hours invested into it and it showed, I would be thrilled for such an opportunity of challenge. Unfortunately if all he had to do was to scan the skies and click the mouse key twice to score the kill, and cover a diametre of 600 ingame metres, this would be ridiculous. You expect an infantry player to jump in and perform with high efficiency with just a few hours experience against a player with hundreds of hours of experience. If I told you that you expect an infantry with 5 hours of AT experience to kill a tanker with 300 hours head on, would you say the comparison is correct? Those STA turrets are effective at scaring jets away and killing choppers. Good pilots evade them to get kills from other locations or take out every active STA before dropping their payload.

They send planes to take care of bases, other planes and assets, but never directly against an AA emplacement; why do you think is that?

When they drop MOABs on infantry, or carpet the ground with cluster bombs, do you know what happens? Youre talking about a counter to jets, while leaving the potencial power of jets and choppers completely unmentioned. Selective argumentation?

Here we have one game where a single plane can destroy both AA turrets in a DAMN AIRCRAFT CARRIER BY ITSELF HOW IS THAT OK?

How often have you seen both turrets manned at the same time? Do you know how incredibly efficient the Essex is in hands of a good commander and a very experienced operator? 2-3 crates at the tower will mean that the jet has to shoot it for more than 2 times longer. Two towers manned means that even if the pilot manages to get one down, hell get raped by the second one. Instead, a guy with 5 minutes of Essex time thinks he can take a jet pilot down by just jumping into that thing. Additionally, the hit detection is rotten in BF2. In LAN environment, nothing stands a chance against that cannon. It kills a jet in 0.5 seconds of sustained fire. DICE never tried to get a solution to it, either by adding spead to increase the chances of a hit, or making the shells explode when they are close to the jet and dish out explosive damage.

And that has always been my point. DICE is incompetent. They create simple solutions that cater to people with no intention of adapting. Almost all of the fixes in the game were to cater to people who played 1-2 maps. You think after all this complaining about IO, there was a significant increase in smaller 16 sized servers with different rotations than Karkand?

What does it say? with advantage to the pilots, not guaranteed win.

It should be an almost guaranteed win for a pilot. Alternatively, if we were talking about a movile Surface To Air platform like a Tunguska, for example, a head-on fight between the two, both investing an equal ammount of time into their skill, the pilot should have just as little chance to succeed. It shouldnt be EQUAL, it should be BALANCED. Theres a colossal difference obviously not many people see.

A single player on your same skill level should make you sweat it

Infantry vs infantry. Jet vs Jet. Tank vs Tank. Yes. But not when youre singlehandedly taking on a power multiplying platform. Thats stupid and immersion breaking. The equality should be reached with either teamwork, or using the same platform, or one designed to counter it.

Ok, so what about this compromise on design; controls are left as they are, but they increase tracking time for the stinger by one whole minute, and they add 500 meters to the range of the carrier guns and stingers, plus some flak cannons in all of the maps with aircraft. TV missiles get a reduction in the time you can control them of 2 seconds before becoming dumb. Plus around 20% more speed on the stinger missiles, and we don't touch a damn thing on the control scheme of choppers and jets; we'll assume all planes become balanced with this among them for all practical purposes.
We don't change a thing on the damage the gatling gun does, nor reduce its range, nor we change how the planes handle.

In short. Its ridiculous. You have a completely wrong understanding of how to balance these things. I can throw you a collection of the best ideas Ive come across in the TBF2 section. Some are proposed by only a couple infantry players who saw both sides of the fence. Others are suggested by pilots. If youre interested, of course.

Hell, even a small change like in BC2, that the choppers don't repair themselves on the helipad, let's make jets have to take down on the runway, and have an engineer repair them, I'd ask for them having to be rearmed too by an assault for missiles and bombs.

Think about the downsides. Like I said, you lack the necessary experience to propose fixes based on what you just wrote. The second that jet lands, its never going to take off again. Theres a much better fix to this, to make a jet stay off the battlefield for a longer time, after it has spent its ammo.

Is that a good enough compromise? You get your flying fun, we get a fighting chance.

Its funny that you immediately disregard me as a jetwhore.

---------- Post added at 09:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:06 PM ----------

Psh, don't be so defensive, I wasn't making fun of ya buddy. That OT comment was a low blow man...

But seriously - TL;DR. For anyone else who thought Not Long; DID Read - I applaud you.

I know it was, it was intended to be. If youre interested in the content of the posts, read them. If they are too long, dont. Im not going to shorten them up for you if they arent adressed to you. We have a real 2007 old school argument going. Its our fun. You can either be a part of it, or just move on.

---------- Post added at 09:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:08 PM ----------

I'm just teasing. :wee:

I dont like being teased. I was hoping BC2 would bring some oldschool champs back to the camp. Youre treading on my frustration

[Kylee!]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Well TBH I just played BF2 in a good server and yea.

I want BF2 back lol.

[Rambo]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Well TBH I just played BF2 in a good server and yea.

I want BF2 back lol.

Yes faster in a controlled way! but tactically Epic too.Not sure anything but BF3 will better it!

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Yes faster in a controlled way! but tactically Epic too.Not sure anything but BF3 will better it!

Yep, thats the only way.

Crunch

[Kylee!]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Yes faster in a controlled way! but tactically Epic too.Not sure anything but BF3 will better it!

Still don't know what you mean by "faster." I do a lot of ground pounding so - it was pretty fast.

I was playing Mashturr (sp?) and we kept capping all the flags except for two or so. Led to some pretty awesome infantry engagements in the hills... I hope BC2's conquest is like that haha.

[jake_]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Yes faster in a controlled way! but tactically Epic too.Not sure anything but BF3 will better it!

I still think that BF2142 was the most "epic" game I've played to date. Maybe I should play it again a bit over the weekend while I'm waiting for BC2. ^_^

[Lordsethonan]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

yes it's fun.

Ok, post for clarification.

I did play BC1 on single player, for the story, I tried a couple of multiplayer matches, but it didn't feel right, not the game mode; the overall feeling.
I did originally dismiss BC2 as yet another iteration of the consolized Battlefield that couldn't pull it off, for whatever reason. A couple trailers later, it started to intrigue me, specially when I read news that it would get released on PC with a higher player count. 32 Player maps are less chaotic than 64 ones, less spam and all. I got to see the PS3 beta first hand, and it really piqued my interest.
Cue the PC beta. If you had ask me my opinion on DICE abilities pre-BC2, I would have agreed with you, that was my opinion on most of their games; nice setting, ingenious proposal, badly executed, I do believe 2142 was a step in the right direction that got mismanaged just like BF2 was.
I did enjoy BF2's premise, enjoyed BF2142 gameplay a lot more; same sandbox experience, better balance between kits and weapons, wider variety between styles of playing due to unlocks. Titan mode was a refreshing game that couldn't get off because of bugs, not design itself. I would have said that too: DICE are incompetent and don't know how to program.

Download and install of BC2 PC beta. I was astonished at the polish of the code since it came from DICE. You can clearly feel the difference between different weapons, kit loadouts do change the way you have to move on the field of battle, registratiion of hits is way better than last retail patches for BF2 and 2142 over the internet.

On deraild topic: Vehicles feel just right, if you have any experience manngin them from previous titles, it shows. You can't change people tough; you are given enough tools to team up and move forward. I've been in rounds where you can tracer dart armor or choppers, and no one will spawn as engie to take them down; but the system is there. It's not automatic, it's not fire and forget; you also have to know what you are doing while defending.
the scenarios you propose happen: assault and medic against tank have no chance of survival, one single engineer can't step out of cover and blow up a tank, you require at the bare minimum, 2 people to destroy a tank. Engies have to choose, AT mines or AT rocket, but not both. C4 for assault could work, but he's confined to short range shotguns, and lose the 40 mm noobtube. Recon has the option of a mortar, but that requires you to stand still for 5 seconds to unload a barrage, with a long cooldown; tanks can move out of the strike area in time.

If you miss a ground soldier with the tank cannon, the shell shock will give him blurred vision for over 5 seconds, and he'll be deaf for almost the same ammount of time; it's a less capable ground unit that has to go look for cover that you can blow up with the tank. Standing up against armor has a real risk for infantry, but at the same time, armor has to play much more smart this time around, you can't go hide behind a house to repair your vehicle, you need support from ground troops; and you have to have a gunner.
Tanks are still power multipliers, but they are no longer overpowered, same for choppers. There is only one fly by wire rocket in the game, and it goes to engies; you can try to tracer dart a chopper, but it requires a fair ammount of skill; even when you get a tracer planted on you, you can maneuver around structures to fend off rockets.
There are some items not unlocked in the beta, like the ability to remove tracer darts, and the smoke screen tanks get that disables 3D spotting over units that are inside the range of the smoke; we didn't get all the weapons from the beta of PS3 either.
If the console versions are any indication, on release choppers wont take damage anymore from small arms; so only the AA vehicle, tank and engies can take it down, and sniping the pilot with the AT rifle.

This is the compromise I'm talking about. Risk vs Reward, that I don't feel BF2 has.

Chris I commend you on acknowledging there are problems with Vanilla BF2; most vehicle operators I've talked too just dismiss you as a player lacking "skill" to take them down.
I do think however, that mods are not a solution; and that the game should be better right off th ebox. Patches should be relegated to fine tuning, not complete overhauls; I think DICE will be able to pull it off this time unless they drastically want to change basic game design.

Ont he other topic: Yeah, what's more epic than fighting for survival during an Ice Age? I think PAC won in the end.

[jake_]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

yes it's fun.

Ok, post for clarification.

I did play BC1 on single player, for the story, I tried a couple of multiplayer matches, but it didn't feel right, not the game mode; the overall feeling.
I did originally dismiss BC2 as yet another iteration of the consolized Battlefield that couldn't pull it off, for whatever reason. A couple trailers later, it started to intrigue me, specially when I read news that it would get released on PC with a higher player count. 32 Player maps are less chaotic than 64 ones, less spam and all. *snip*

That's much how I first felt about BC2. I dismissed it as not worthwhile until I started seeing some of the early official gameplay trailers. I still wasn't sold on a lot of things (like no prone) until I played the beta though.

On the other topic: Yeah, what's more epic than fighting for survival during an Ice Age? I think PAC won in the end.

I seem to recall that the latest patch would include more maps where the PAC is pushing the EU further back or something along those lines. I didn't mind how weak the plot was in the game since it wasn't really an important focus, just some nice framework for a general setting for the game. I wouldn't have complained if they had done much more with it though. :)

[Lordsethonan]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Well yes, they will release Northern Strike for free with 1.51;and from what I know it's abot EU trying to retake northern europe.

[jake_]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Well yes, they will release Northern Strike for free with 1.51;and from what I know it's abot EU trying to retake northern europe.

I know about that. I bought NS when it was first released. I thought they were including an additional two maps or something with it as well.

[Lordsethonan]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

I don't know, maybe operation shingle and wake? Those got released with 1.50 I think, haven't found a Wake server yet, but I been playing Shingle lately.