• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

The problem isn't in the bugs - it's in the design

Status
Not open for further replies.

DingDong09

Grizzled Veteran
Sep 4, 2011
74
102
When I began playing the beta it was buggy, horribly buggy, the game is still pretty buggy. However, I have patience for bugs if I see potential, since I liked RO1 so much I gave the game the benefit of the doubt.

Now that it's in a more playable state I can finally evaluate the game on what it actually is. Personally, I don't have some kind of obsession with realism, or arcade or "casual" to me it's all about the gameplay. Does the game work well? Is it fun? Is it designed well? I will try to answer those questions in no particular order.

The largest issue I noticed initially is the small map size which has a lot of consequences . The maps are, compared to RO1, extremely small which means that any defense type of map is a nightmare. Why is this? It's because defenders have to be in the area they need to defend to successively block the attackers, this means effectively that because the zone to defend is so SMALL the tools a squad leader has are extremely effective. Artillery simply clears a point every time, that's it , period, this wasn't the case in RO1 where the much larger points meant that artillery could at best limit the options for the defending team, but not effectively wipe them out. In RO2 seeing arty blow up a whole team isn't rare and it isn't their fault - if they spread out the point would be promptly taken and then they'd almost certainly have to retreat. In this sense the defending team is often stuck between a rock and a hard place.

The map size also means that automatic weapons are disproportionately better, can you do well with a rifle? Yes, but a rifleman's tactical choices are limited, his best option is always to simply pop out, fire a round, hide and then keep doing so. A soldier with an automatic/semi automatic weapon can do the same plus clear out buildings , kill multiple people in a short time period and in general just be overall better. In the end rifles are just an inferior weapon to hand out to people who are late to the party whereas in RO1 they were extremely useful for skirmishing at medium distance where SMG's had no chance. The fact that most people have access to autos also means that ultimately the rifle is just something to use for fun. Most people will choose autos for their apparent superiority.

The map size produces yet another issue - if the defenders suffer losses at any point their chances to regroup are bad. Why? It is because they spawn far behind the next point and by the time they can reach the point they have to defend it's often already occupied by the enemy which means that the defenders often become the attackers. At this point in the game the defenders have to play far more perfectly and recklessly than the attackers to keep a solid line of defense while freshly respawned defenders hike up to reinforce them. This means that more often than not the attackers win.

In this sense a map such as Danzig (apartments) is better thought out because while it is a small map the defenders actually have a far shorter path to make to their last point and also have a rather short way to make to C. Effectively they can keep reinforcing D far faster than the attackers can attack it. This means that the attackers (who have no artillery from what I can tell, which is GOOD because it's a small map ) have to actually coordinate a good assault on D while also holding C. This is GOOD design because both the attackers and defenders have to put down EQUAL effort to win. Unfortunately the new maps lack this kind of finesse and simply fail.

The map sizes are unfortunately not all that's wrong with the game. It seems to me that the game isn't really sure what it wants to do and that unsureness transfers to me not being sure if I like it. The unlock system which gives the DDE assault squad members an impressive prototype STG-44 divides up the community into the haves and have nots. Let's not delude ourselves - as good as the mp-40 is having an alternative that fires sub-rifle rounds that go through walls is simply too good. The unlock system is a concept of the new gaming generation to add a type of rpg component to a fps gaming. The idea is to get small rewards for playing - ideally this would appeal to the addicts who would keep playing long after the game itself got dull. I played Call of Duty World at War for a while and while there were a few slightly favored weapons a person who was at level 1 had really no disadvantages against a level 65 player. The level 65 had more options but ultimately a level 1 thompson-bearing soldier could kill the 65 consistently quite easily (assuming similar skill) . The guns were ultimately balanced to taste. The fact that this game has a clear hiearchy of weapons means that the people who got the DDE version of the game are at a pretty strong advantage. The problem here is that RO2 has an identity issue - it wants to be like the slick COD series but , because it's realistic it models the fact that the assault rifle was a superior weapon by far . This simply means that this "unlock" isn't a sidegrade but a 200% upgrade which would be counterproductive to COD's system where the upgrades were advantageous in dilute amounts. With this pull in 2 directions RO2 ultimately just can't achieve a good balance, it's transitory in its state.

Another issue is of course that this game wants to be realistic while giving a large % of its players a very rare weapon. Due to the fact that its so damn good the German side simply has it far better in every way. You can argue who was better all day but it still wont make any difference because the gameplay is garbage. Playing as the Russians is no fun because you're handicapped, playing as the Germans is no fun because it's a boring turkey shoot. Sure -if- the Russians are better you might get whooped but as we know it's the average experience that counts and that's the average experience. We again have an issue of identity - an unrealistic truckload of rare weapons that are realistic, this state of the game means it's not really realistic nor is it a game which sacrificed realism for gameplay , it's simply some kind of strange amalgamation . This is unfortunately not uncommon for developers nowadays - Duke Nukem Forever ultimately flopped for the same reason - it tried to be old school and new school at once and combined those two elements in a very cacophonous way thus crippling it's ability to appeal to either audience. I suspect, sadly, that RO2 is in the exact same position just with realism vs casual play. TWI - all I can say is this: decide what you want to do and do it ,you can't have a 2 in 1, sorry but you can't. Better luck next time. I seriously mean it.
 
Last edited:
I disagree with much of what you are saying, and I have a feeling you are speculating rather than talking from repeated experience. Most maps have large cap zones, the only small ones tend to be inside buildings or in clusters of heavy concealment and cover. Spartanovka is one long push through map wide cap zones, Station starts off with a large cap zone followed by two parallel routes, one through a mess of train cars providing ample cover and another through a series of large rooms. I can not think of any point where you need to expose yourself to artillery in order to be on the cap itself.

I also see lots of riflemen around and I see them being very effective all the way down to knife fighting range. The most common ranged combat is at 50-100m and quick reaction times make rifles more reliable than SMG spam. The maps are certainly smaller than RO1 but certainly not to the detriment of bolt-action combat.

Defenders having to run a long way to get back to the cap they are defending is a very situational complaint. On some maps the point is very hard to protect once the defender starts losing men, but no map is lost after the first objective is taken. The maps are far more sophisticated and fluid than that. Spartanovka with moderately talented Germans can play as a one-sided steamrollering all the way up to the last Soviet position in the town hall, but this is typically where the defenders are able to stem the tide. Most maps are like that, you lose some objectives but you can still win as the defender. PavlovsHouse is a swirling wonderful mess och attacks and counter attacks, the objectives changes hands many times over before one side pushes the other out.

I detest the MKB being in this game, and I frown upon players who use it, but to be honest it is a pretty average gun that doesn't outperform neither rifles nor SMGs in their intended roles. While it's inclusion is abhorrent and incomprehensible, it isn't a game breaker. I am a Deluxe owner but I still use the MP40 for being a very efficient and controllable weapon. I also prefer playing allies. Soviet weapons are nothing remarkable but certainly no pushovers either. German weapons tend to be easier to handle but since this game is about who shoots first, it doesn't matter which gun you are using so long as a shot connects in the right place. The only thing the MKB has going for it is the ability to put automatic fire through certain walls but penetrating shots hardly ever kills anyone who isn't exposing themselves too much.

The unlockable upgrades is the weirdest design decision with this game. As someone put so eloquently the other day, it is like gluing macaroni on to the Mona Lisa. It is a needless component to the game that doesn't look very inspiring to me, it is just kind of lame and out of character for a hardcore unforgiving wargame. The heavy historical theme is a major selling point for players like myself, I always loved RO1 for not relying on half-hearted adaptations of mainstream conventions (regenerating health, pretentious player customisation, whack-a-mole-chest-high-wall-cover-shooter). RO2 having an unfocused character development component is like watching an old man putting on a baseball cap and turning it to the side trying to talk street to connect with today's kids. It is just embarrassing to see. It makes me uncomfortable that a team of such competent game designers can get this lazy and not foresee how it won't be well recieved.

I can't help but to think that they spent time on these unlockables that are in no way important to the game are implemented when there are so many annoying little flaws with the game that needed a longer development cycle to iron out before release. No, I'm not saying they would have had time to release a flawless game if they hadn't wasted time on the unlockables, I have no such insight into the development of the game. I'm just saying I don't think it was time well spent, that it is an uninspired and weird addition to the game that is recieving far more attention than it deserves.

The MKB spam was far less devastating than I first had feared and I just don't see it massively turning the game in favour of the axis. The gun obviously has sentimental value to WWII gamers, much like the Tiger tank, but just like the Tiger it is hardly deserving of it's reputation. The rest of the quirky odd unlockables are not likely going to have a great impact on the game, but it is an ugly stain
 
Upvote 0
I detest the MKB being in this game, and I frown upon players who use it, but to be honest it is a pretty average gun that doesn't outperform neither rifles nor SMGs in their intended roles.

I believe TWI's philosophy for RO is to avoid the gamey "balancing" of weapons whenever possible, and have they perform realistically in relation to one another. So I'd say the Mkb is clearly the superior weapon, as it is effective in a much more diverse set of ranges and tactics. Sure, from extreme ranges (FallenFighters), bolts will have a clear edge, and perhaps from extreme close range, SMGs can have an advantage with their ROF, but it's not like the MkB can't put up a (very good) fight in these ranges. And that's in addition to having good penetration and dominating mid-ranges (the range most of the game's engagements take place in).

I don't think they need to nerf it, have it behave realistically (it IS an assault rifle, the most successful weapon design of present day for god's sake), just limit it severely. It's a prototype, after all.


---
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I pretty much agree with everything the OP said. Maps are to small (or atleast distance to objective is). There is absolutely no reason to ever use an lmg in this game, its an innacurate piece of crap and because there are so many flanking options you cant cut off a street or anything like you could in RO1. Also supression from the lmgs really doesnt work at all.

Engagement distances are way to short, they basically took RO and made it more like cod. There is really no reason to take a rifle anymore, i am consistently getting kills of over 50m with the ppsh and the majority of engagements are probably shorter than that anyway.

And because fight distances are so close, it also means the time they last is very very short aswell. There are really no firefights. Everyone basically dies instantly, there is no laying down of supression fire like in real life, its essentially all down to who has the better reaction skills for wackamole windows.

And you know what, this really sucks becuase alot of the game is amazing. But the map design is utterly horrible. Give us bigger maps, longer engagement distances, more linear objectives (so there is a sort of frontline) and less hiding spots so its less camp and more work together as a team to win the map.
 
Upvote 0
In regards to the mkb42, I couldn't care less if it was in the game or not, as there is no real advantage with it that I can see. With the MP40, usually one good round takes someone out quickly, yet when I use the 42,I've noticed I have to put more rounds into my target.... almost as if the bullets were smaller or weaker.

As already mentioned, it doesn't matter what weapon you have in your hands, because it only takes one good round to kill someone. Hell I can't count how many people I've taken out with the pistol at medium & semi-long distance. I'm a DDE owner and yet I hardly ever use my unlocks unless I end up as a commander because nobody else picks it. Every other time, I'm either a Rifleman, MG or AT. And I know I'm not the only one who doesn't automatically jump to the popular classes to use the new weapons. I still use them from time to time, but not very often.

The map layouts are just fine and remind me a lot of what used to be in the mod. Smaller maps, smaller cap zones, more walking from spawn and heavier fighting (Warsaw, Berlin, Danzig, etc.)

I actually preferred more of the mod maps and the mod gameplay than most of the maps & gameplay in RO1.

Yes RO1 was more polished and had more features, but much of what made the mod so great was kind of lost when everybody decided to focus on huge maps that worked better for gameplay between more players than was available.

RO1 maps would work great for 64 players, far more than in RO1, but the design of the RO2 maps is just fine in my books. Defenders can hold out just fine when they actually work together, and attackers certianly don't have a cake walk. In all the maps I have played so far, they all can easily go either way.

The problems noted in the OP are not things I would consider as problems at all. If the maps seem too small, wait a while, cuz tons of maps to suit all tastes will be coming soon enough from not just the devs, but also the community.

Any one of us can design a map.
 
Upvote 0
I'm a DDE owner and yet I hardly ever use my unlocks unless I end up as a commander because nobody else picks it. Every other time, I'm either a Rifleman, MG or AT. And I know I'm not the only one who doesn't automatically jump to the popular classes to use the new weapons. I still use them from time to time, but not very often.

I'm with you. I tried out the MkB, had some fun, but was soon back to bolt and semi rifles. Everyone has a pref, it doesn't matter what gun is in the game.
 
Upvote 0
I see what most of you mean with these posts.

Too many MKbs: Agreed. MKb should be an Commander only weapon, theres your day one elite assault weapons, work your *** off to get hero as a squad leader then you can have it there too. Same goes for AVT-40 (you may think it sucks but it has the range of a rifle and can clear a room so yea).

Maps are smaller: I think they feel smaller because you move faster, but they do seem smaller in general as well

Features are Missing: This I agree with completely I need to take my bayonet off for it SHOULD somewhat unbalance my rifle and SHOULD make my shot slightly less accurate. Also it would make sense to leave the tank and RTB for a new one, you scuttle the tank yes, but not with a full or half crew in it. Also I kind of want to see what TW's tank leaving would be like;). Hopefully we'll get the older/alternative weapons they used ex. PPD-40, shortened rifles.

The unlock system: IMO the MP-40/II is fine with me, some who weren't issued with it could of liked the idea and tied their 4 mags into 2 double mags. A suggestion for the PPSH-41's stick mag is less recoil and more control and accuracy over the drum mag which is harder to hold onto. Also you should unlock the alternative SMGs ex. PPD-40, MP-41 (dont hate me on this I dont know much about the MP-41) or shortened rifles for closer combat Mosin Nagant had many shortened variants of the 91/30. Positives and NEGATIVES to all or most attributes.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.