IF there is a perk system in RO:HoS

[Zetsumei]

IF there is a perk system in RO:HoS, (and if there is I hope it wont give a level 5 unfair advantages over a level 1)

It would be nice that if you die like in mmorpgs you actually loose some perk stats. A lot of people if there is a perk system will play to increase their perks, if they loose stats when they die people will perhaps be more carefull.

Of course such a system should be class based as the kill death ratio of a sniper is generally higher than an smg soldier.
While a smg will probably have a higher point/death ratio.

But if deaths are punished in things such as a perk system, people will have a bigger fear of death generally. And then its done without doing things considered tedious like increasing the respawn time.

 

[Killarfromspace]

IF there is a perk system in RO:HoS, (and if there is I hope it wont give a level 5 unfair advantages over a level 1)

It would be nice that if you die like in mmorpgs you actually loose some perk stats. A lot of people if there is a perk system will play to increase their perks, if they loose stats when they die people will perhaps be more carefull.

Of course such a system should be class based as the kill death ratio of a sniper is generally higher than an smg soldier.
While a smg will probably have a higher point/death ratio.

But if deaths are punished in things such as a perk system, people will have a bigger fear of death generally. And then its done without doing things considered tedious like increasing the respawn time.

The perk system sounds bad.

And that you get punished by dying is ****ing horrible.

 

[Zetsumei]

Atm in ro there is an issue in my opinion with people completely not caring wether they die or not (especially in public games). This leads to people often taking too many chances with extreme risk, and rather die while ramboing to respawn with full ammo than walking to an ammo crate.

The easy solution generally means a gamemode where you only have 1 life, however then you fight on a nearly empty battlefield. Thats why i prefer other methods to make dying more bothersome without punishing the player too much by waiting too long.

For example currently nobody cares about dying in the game and will munch through reinforcements to their hearts extends. people only start caring about playing carefully when they have run out of reinforcements. So another option could be say making reinforcements more individually based so they exactly know howmany lives they have left (with the ability to give another player some of your personal lives).

Im not a fan of perk systems however, but if there is a perk system anyway it can allow for a some sort of way to make people more reluctant to die, without actually changing anything gameplay wise.

 

[Fedorov]

I think that dying should affect your morale in the next spawns (should be realistic, as the next soldier perceives that there are many casualties on his side)

by morale, I mean what I think that TWI is doing with it (reloading speed, steadiness of weapon, stamina level... etc)

 

[Reise]

Nobody is going to play a game that punishes you if you die.

Especially an FPS where the mystical "fear of death" is never, ever going to be accurately represented.

It's just a fact we have to live with.

 

[Bashenka]

This isn't an mmorpg, though. The only reason it works in mmorpgs is because you never die that often, and therefore it only affects you on occasion. In Red Orchestra you die all the time, and it would be almost depressing how often you would lose stats if you were having a bad day (if there is a perk system that is, which I hope there isn't, but will reserve judgement until RO:HOS is released).

 

[Ralfst3r]

If you lose stuff by dying, it will be one big campfest and not very satisfying to play imo.

 

[Zetsumei]

The exact amount dying takes can be scaled logically you shouldn't loose half your stats for dying once. As an average person in all reality should have a kill/death ratio of 1.

 

[Bashenka]

I think people are more concerned about the principle of being "punished", so to speak, for playing a game a certain way. People should be able to play the game however they want to play it, without getting penalized for it.

And Ralfst3r makes a good point as well. People will be discouraged from playing agressively, which will slow the game down considerably (or speed it up when playing the Lockdown mode )

 

[Zetsumei]

Its exactly that people should be able to play the game how they want and not face ingame consequences so much. If stats for say perks are based on a points - 2* deaths ratio or a summation of kill/death ratios, then people will always try to optimise that.

In a lot of games people don't find it a punishment if the scoreboard is based on a kill/death ratio and they end up getting lower because they died a few times without killing.

As that is exactly the same thing pretty much. You don't force people to play in a different way allowing them all freedom, but through different motivation steer people to play in a more realistic method.

How well point and stat systems motivate people to do things can easily be seen in regular ro. Where as a mg you immediately have 5 people running behind you trying to give you ammo. If points and possibly perk systems are well thought out to truly stimulate people to play as a team. And does this without inflicting direct punishments that affect an individual's freedom in how to play, but simply getting more rewarded by playing in the right way then its a win situation in my eyes.

Punishing or Rewarding are relative terms as well, you could say instead of punishing people that die often, to say reward people that don't die often. Because of that people that die less gain perks faster.

The game doesnt have to slow down it depends on how things are scaled against each other. It depends on the importance of obtaining objectives and the benefits that come with that.

 

[-[SiN]-bswearer]

tbh i'm not too worried about the perk system. I can't believe TW would recycle the perk system for KF in ROHOS......they do want to make money selling this game dont they?

i think that the perk system will really just be a "ranking" type system with mostly asthetic features like medals in your profile, customized ingame weapons/gear etc.... the heroes thing is the only thing that could involve some type of "perk" and it will probably be like they have said so far....access to rare weapons, ability to increase morale, and maybe though a stretch, slightly improved basic abilities like breathing, speed, recoil etc...

yeah in RO right now, mostly in pub, some will run and gun and not care about their deaths, but then you've also got people who sit 50m away from the capzone with a rifle camping and not doing anything. imo, it's already balanced ok and adding punishments for dying wouldn't make anything better.

 

[Zetsumei]

Your post got nothing to do with my thread though .

My idea is basically in a nutshell is to include deathratios somewhat in the perk heroes or whatever system.

So people that try to exploit or maximise the system will end up playing more concious with their lives. Logically it should never only be based upon deaths as that will cause people to sit in spawn and stay too save.

Like in RO you have the achievement destroy 5-10-20 tanks with a tiger in one life. Now with killing 100 people achievement or something you could make it kill 100 people while dying less than 50 times (just to call a number).

 

[Reise]

I still think people are over-analyzing the whole hero business.

For all we know, "hero status" could simply be a fancy icon displayed next to your name.

I seriously doubt there will be anything included with it that gives players any significant advantages over others. That's just silly.

So is the entire idea of perks.

 

[LionbI4]

A lot of people if there is a perk system will play to increase their perks, if they loose stats when they die people will perhaps be more carefull.

Idea is nice, but..
The problem is, everyone else, who play for fun will not get much help from people, who play for perks. Since they are afraid to die.
We need same death penalties for everyone to have proper team-play.
How about introducing different spawning rules for maps, lets say you have 10 lifes, and you can spawn once in a minute.
If you are defender, you have ~6 lifes.
For some maps we could have 1 life per round rule (as an option).
If we will have multiple spawning rules to choose, then we will come to most fun rule (after playing and experimenting).

Regarding hero system - I hope, people with higher 'hero' rank will be able to select a weapon BEFORE people with lower rank. This should be the only one benefit. Similar to americas army system.

 

[FlyXwire]

I seriously doubt there will be anything included with it that gives players any significant advantages over others.

I'm expecting the same too Reise.

I'm hoping the RO:Heroes "perks" system is there to give achieving players more "identity", and not so much superior fighting attributes.

Identity could be things like: rank-ups/leadership abilities (arty/AT command & control), uniform/gear choices, and some addtional choices within weapon classes.

 

[-[SiN]-bswearer]

Your post got nothing to do with my thread though .

actually it does. you are worried about some aspect of the "perk" system and like i posted, i am not worried. look at the last thing i said: "adding punishments for dying wouldn't make anything better". this topic is about the "fear of death" and punishing a players stats because of their deaths right? though it was brief, that should have summed up my feelings towards your post about the "fear of death" and kill/death ratios.

perhaps i should have explained more so i will do that now. every player has their own unique playing style. some camp, some rambo. some play sniper alot, some play assualt a lot. i first of all think it would be way to complicated to attempt to base a players "perk" progression (should there even be any) off of k/d ratios even if it was per class. restricting players to play a sepcific way just isn't good for keeping players. if you have a system that punishes players for playing a certain way in which they have a lot of deaths, you think that would encourage them to change their style of play just to increase their perks? no, they'd just quit playing the game.

any type of perk system should instead only work to reward players for advancement (again assuming this to be the "KF" type of perk system). players would be more inclined to "adjust" their playing styles in order to advance as opposed to being influenced by fear of punishments. it's basic psychology. in a video game, that concept really applies because players have nothing to lose....if they play one way and are punished, they'll simply quit playing because they didn't "like the style of the game" which is one of the most popular criticisms you'll hear from people who didn't like ROOST.

k/d ratios are interesting stats to display, but punishing a player because of them isn't going to force a player to change their style of play.....not even just to get acheivement or rank their perks. encouragement on the other hand may have a chance at getting players to play a certain way but still may not even work. just look at how many players play longterm and how many play for a week or two and stop....that should help prove what i'm getting at.

 

[FlyXwire]

I don't see how a system that would factor k/d ratios for "perks" assessment punishes players.

Instead, ignoring friendly deaths (the costs) by a system meant to assess combat effectiveness based on kills (the benefit), is to ignore the significance of the numbers altogther.

Dying 20 times to achieve 20 kills = 0

 

[Cpt-Praxius]

Atm in ro there is an issue in my opinion with people completely not caring wether they die or not (especially in public games). This leads to people often taking too many chances with extreme risk, and rather die while ramboing to respawn with full ammo than walking to an ammo crate.......

I think the problem is more to do with your generalized view of what other players think and/or do, then it does with how people actually play..... either that or you're taking a few bad apple examples and thinking it applies to everybody to justify changing the game system 180 degrees from where it currently is, when it's not needed.

I care about dying in the game, as explained elsewhere in another thread.... and just about everybody else I talk to online care as well.

Some people will be low on ammo, some may think they have an advantage on the enemy and could ambush them, or maybe they've been waiting for the rest of their team that was killed off to come back them up, or some may have another reason why they think a quick rush and gun is a good or final option (which is valid in some situations of the game play don't forget..... it is a tactic.) and then they end up being killed, followed by them giving out a text of "LOL, I almost had you" or similar.....

.... they're having fun with the game and for whatever reasons they have for doing what they did, they don't diserve to have some system in place to force them to play as you think they should.

If someone is running and gunning your team down, then pick them off, they make very easy and very loud targets not to miss. If it's someone on your team and they're knocking down your reinforcements, then ignore them and continue to beat the game.

Or if it bothers you that much, start your own clan or join a clan that plays as you do and only play against others who play as you do, thus avoiding the public servers.

They are afterall, "Public."

I think that dying should affect your morale in the next spawns (should be realistic, as the next soldier perceives that there are many casualties on his side)

by morale, I mean what I think that TWI is doing with it (reloading speed, steadiness of weapon, stamina level... etc)

That type of system might work in a game like Leisure Suit Larry where you get drunk and your response and co-ordination are affected, but doing something like that to this type of game will make a lot of people quit or just not buy the game, because in a sense, all that's happening is the more you die, the drunker your actions become..... you're slower reloading then the next guy, your aim is all over the place and can't hit the side of a barn, you can't run as far.

You might as well play the class of the wandering town drunk and wait to be killed over and over again because eventually it reaches a point where you're so crap in your response that you can't get out of the hole you're in and you leave the server to play somewhere else, or perhaps another game.

Both the Perks and Reinforcement ideas I've been hearing laitly are not giving me good hopes for the next game.

 

[Zetsumei]

Once again you are exaggerating badly with how things would affect the game.

There are loads of issues with red orchestra still there are many bugs and exploits, they existed for so long that its not uncommon to see quite some people know and use them in a game.

The base system is awesome for teamplay with clans, friends etc, however with publicplay its everybody for themselves. In 2004 it had the best teamwork of any game i've ever seen, compared to some systems in games now it nearly feels like team deathmatch when on a public.

 

[Rak]

Atm in ro there is an issue in my opinion with people completely not caring wether they die or not (especially in public games). This leads to people often taking too many chances with extreme risk, and rather die while ramboing to respawn with full ammo than walking to an ammo crate.

It's a part of core RO gameplay. Without it RO would be extremely boring. People are already get punished by 15-20 seconds of wait, and it's more than enough.

Actually with RO:HoS I'm betting that gameplay will speed up even more, to make it more action oriented and attract "new players" TWI devs desire.