About "RO2 Dying"

[Nikita]

In a less direct tone than my comrade above, I'd just like to say that I just left a session on Fallen Fighters playing as Russian Commander, where a German MG running into the Technical School repeatedly, massacring the team with hipfire, was complaining because I killed him with a PPSh.

/QUOTE: F*** you, anyone can get kills with a ppsh /QUOTE

The clear implication being that he thought his choice of gameplay took more skill, and that he felt he deserved to win over a ppsh in close quarters.

Never would have even tried to take on a PPSh in an open hallway with an MG34 in Ostfront, and if I had, and if I'd failed, I wouldn't have thought twice about the outcome.

I might add that I would have liked to have thrown more smoke, respawned more soldiers, given more orders, and called down more artillery, if it weren't for the fact that ever five minutes Mkb assault troopers were sneaking into the Technical School regardless of what was currently being capped by their/our team.

Yet another study in contrasts--a beautiful map, mournful music in the background, excellent weapon sounds, impressive enough graphics, juxtaposed with the dull frustration of having to deal with one Mkb, then another, while not getting sniped by a hull MG or zoomed-in rifleman, or blown up by artillery that can somehow fall inside the spawn courtyard of the Technical School...

The game has potential, and there are other circumstances surrounding the decline in player population, but while I am sticking with RO2, I see room for improvements that could draw a lot of players back.

You know, in RO1, I would never even have dared to think that a MGer could beat a PPSh in close quarters. And if I had tried, and failed, I would have shrugged it off as the natural state of affairs.

 

[Stahlhelmii]

I would also like to point out that no matter what we'll never be able to get the game exactly like everyone wants it. There are just too many differing opinions. So I would suggest that people play around with the tools we've provided to customize the gameplay to their liking. In our last update we added the ability to limit weapon and class perks, which allows those of you that don't like certain high end weapons to limit/prevent their use on your server. Additionally there is functionality to tweak a lot of gameplay parameters (damage, etc) as well. So on both ends of the spectrum you can easily make the game more/less hardcore. So start playing with those values and see if you come up with something that a lot of people like, then let the Devs know about it!

You ARE aware that 99.99% do NOT own and run servers, right? So, are you saying you're going to leave the realism and balance issues up to server admins and pigeon-hole us into a few servers?

Ain't doin' it for me. Honestly, I don't think that anyone here can deny that at least 75% of the game play/balance complaints have been in favor of more realism like Ostfront, fewer autos, ditched bandaging, etc. I have personally never seen a single post stating, "I want more autos!" "Give us all MP40's!" etc.

Isn't the end of your post, sir, just a "tad" disingenuous?

 

[SCandChives]

...ditched bandaging

Sorry to pick one thing out but ditched? I've certainly seen people saying slower bandaging and more after effects, like combining RO:O's system (which was more like regenerating health imo than the current system) with that of RO2. But I've neer seen anyone actually wanting the entire system dropped. It's implementation may not be very realistic, but the system itself is.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

Sorry to pick one thing out but ditched? I've certainly seen people saying slower bandaging and more after effects, like combining RO:O's system (which was more like regenerating health imo than the current system) with that of RO2. But I've neer seen anyone actually wanting the entire system dropped. It's implementation may not be very realistic, but the system itself is.

Yeah, I agree with you on that one. I'd be hard pressed to find the outcry to ditch bandaging. Slower delayed bleedout and slower bandaging, yeah... Just need to tweak the implementation.

 

[Grobut]

Sorry to pick one thing out but ditched? I've certainly seen people saying slower bandaging and more after effects, like combining RO:O's system (which was more like regenerating health imo than the current system) with that of RO2. But I've neer seen anyone actually wanting the entire system dropped. It's implementation may not be very realistic, but the system itself is.

If our choices were to leave it as is, or dropping it, i would see it dropped in a heartbeat, no question or doubt about that, not even for a second.

But ideally, i'd rather have them tweak it and make it good, because the system could be good with the right changes, that'd be the best solution.

 

[gasgas]

I don't know, so many times a rifle bullet in the back of an enemy doesn't kill him and he is able to run in cover and bandage, so I wonder why twi even put bandaging in, instead of a health bar ala call of duty.

 

[Vyllis]

Bandage is like autoregen. Press action key and you'r done. It's a classic on the market,actually.

 

[Zetsumei]

while bandaging ansich is not realistic.

personally I had hoped that used bandaging as a method to ensure more during punishment due to getting shot. As your wounds automatically healing in Ost after a few seconds was not realistic.

In its current form to me the implementation seems to be a bit of a waste. It is so instant that another button and function and development time could have been saved.

If bandaging takes more time, bleedout takes more time and the effects of getting shot last till you bandage yourself. Then there will actually be a tactical meaning behind bandaging.

 

[gasgas]

while bandaging ansich is not realistic.

personally I had hoped that used bandaging as a method to ensure more during punishment due to getting shot. As your wounds automatically healing in Ost after a few seconds was not realistic.

In its current form to me the implementation seems to be a bit of a waste. It is so instant that another button and function and development time could have been saved.

If bandaging takes more time, bleedout takes more time and the effects of getting shot last till you bandage yourself. Then there will actually be a tactical meaning behind bandaging.

From my experience in ROOST:

rifle bullet to head/torso/back = always instant death

rifle bullet to hands = losing weapon

rifle bullet to arms = instant death/losing weapon

rifle bullet to feet/legs = instant death/slowing down to 0 speed for 5-6 seconds or more

2 rifle bullets in different spots usually always scored a kill.

pistol bullet had less chance to kill in 1 hit, but 2 bullets in the same spot always killed.

In RO2:

rifle bullet to head: instant death

rifle bullet to torso: 50% instant death/slow death 50% bandage

rifle bullet to hands/arms: bandage

rifle bullet to legs/feet: bandage

pistol bullet to head: instant death

pistol bullet to torso: nothing/bandage/slow death

everything else is bandage or no effect,

also two bullets in the same spot don't kill, it's just another bandage.

considering being hit gives you 5-6 before you can die, and you have NO PENALTIES (and this is a shame tripwire, a shame) you can run, sprint, aim, as if nothing happened, I don't see what would be the difference between health bar or bandage system.

 

[GRIZZLY]

Yeah, I agree with you on that one. I'd be hard pressed to find the outcry to ditch bandaging. Slower delayed bleedout and slower bandaging, yeah... Just need to tweak the implementation.

DITCH BANDAGING!

I loathe the idea of longer bandaging... ctrl + wait...

Ro1's system was far superior. The post above me addresses 90% of it... but I must add that losing your weapon and scrambling to find a new one was fun! Shooting someone in the foot and seeing them limp to cover while you bolt your rifle was fun! The new system? Not so much fun.... Just a clumsy button

 

[GRIZZLY]

double post

 

[tixhal]

imho ro2 isn't a fail. player numbers are dropping, so what? i, as most gamers, don't play it exclusively. when it came out i played nothing else for weeks, after the initial euphoria wore off i continued playing other titles i like. as long as there are several full servers with a decent ping i don't care (i've been playing vietcong for a long period of time, so i know what i'm talking about). sure the game has its flaws, but most of them appear to me as unfinished features like the limb-damage system.
i mostly enjoy the gameplay as it is atm, after 100 hours of gameplay i also see opportunities for improvements.
i'm no rost vet so i don't really know the differences between it and hos, gameplay videos of the classic really look nice, huge maps, long distance firefights, etc. i could imagine this kind of maps quite suitable for hos aswell.

the changes i would appreciate most for hos would be:

1. crippled limbs having an ingame effect (arma2 did this quite well)

2. reduction of semi and auto guns per team. mostly it's 2/3 semi+ and 1/3 poor bolting bastards. i really love using bolt action rifles and i think there should be at least half of the team using bolts for better balance.

3. lockdown removed. imho the reinforcements and map time limit put enough pressure on the attacking team. it's extremely frustrating when the lockdown timer depletes while a point is almost captured. at least suspending the timer while points are being attacked would be a relief.

despite these flaws i find the game very enjoyable as it is and i put most of my available gaming time into it (some friends of mine i talked into buying it say it's one of the most promising shooters since years). i really hope the future will bring general improvements (i'm quite sure) and gameplay tweaks that will satisfy the atm disappointed vets (i sure hope so).
once it's patched up and a free weekend or some sort of steam christmas sale comes along, the playerbase is likely to grow.

keep up the good work twi!

 

[Bootspike]

You see it is a key difference in the strategy of Tripwire vs the EA's and the Activisions of the world.

Fight the power!

 

[Needles]

Still not learning. Still half auto, half bolty cannon fodder for the auto wielders. Either satisfy your base (bolt action based) or the COD MW crowd (auto). A game can't be BOTH an automatic arcade shooter and a realistic early WWII simulation, because you aren't making EITHER happy.

You can't use "marketing" by EA as a crutch; the people who left for BF3 would have returned by now if they thought RO2 was better. Many of us stopped playing simply because the game was not the realistic WWII game promised, and has huge performance issues. Don't fix those, I'm not coming back. I don't care WHO spends HOW much on "marketing." That's nothing but a convenient excuse for a bad game failing, IMO.

I'm also tired of cop out regarding GAME BREAKING bugs like the close range hit detection bug. If you would solve THAT issue, I'd leave BF3 and it's legions of aimbotters and return to RO2, even though it is hideously unrealistic, because at least it doesn't have flying alien robots and magic, laser-guided mortors. But, who wants to play a game in which you get REPEATEDLY killed by players you've just pumped half a clip of lead into???

Do you seriously believe anyone wants to hear that you can't fix it if you can't duplicate it on command? I have no clue what game you're playing, because it's done that for many of us since day one of the DDE beta. I'm sorry to be blunt, but for such a common issue to be such a mystery, something is wrong with either your code or your technical personnel. It certainly isn't my computer, which has no problem running BF3 at high settings with PERFECT performance.

Stop making excuses and fix the issues. You may have "learned" a lot, but apparently you STILL haven't learned not to piss off your base because you figure they won't go anywhere because there's no alternative. Sure there is. It's called "strategy" games. I'll play Civilzation or Total War or whatever before a "Stalingrad" fps with lmg Rambos, smg Rambos,, etc. and that doesn't "hit" a target you've clearly blown a massive hole into from 10 feet away.

Sorry if I sound like a Richard Cranium, but facts are facts, and TWI certainly had no qualms about breaking promises to us and then treating us like crap by either ignoring us or talking down to us (as the specific cases may be) when we dared complain about being deceived.

My $.02.

I make your words my words.

 

[LMAOser]

Coming up on the news at nine. Is RO2 dying? The developers say no but the server browser says yes.

 

[Temporary]

Coming up on the news at nine. Is RO2 dying? The developers say no but the server browser says yes.

They expect it to bounce back, get back from the grave, undead style.

The problem is, if there's not enough core-fans to keep the game alive, it could stay dead for good. Common people won't go back if there's less than 3 servers.

And with all the bugs, run'n'gun gameplay, "unrealistic" unlocks, it could be difficult for RO2 to effectively survive between the content updates imo.

---

edit:

They're all proudly saying "ho ho, we're not EA, we're not Activision, with all their millions !", but they forgot that the "bad release, continuous patching + free DLC over months" model only works with dedicated core-fans.

You can't hand over sprinting-Mkbs-with-scopes and expect the core-fans to pocket the affront like that, there is limits, especially with core-fans.

They've got good resistance for delays, bugs, bad graphisms, but they expect true gameplay, no wrong compromises to get a "broader audience", and of course, trust and integrity.

---

Right now, if I had to present RO2 to a friend or a colleague, I wouldn't recommend it (I did recommended RO1 for its effort in having a tactical realism gameplay, bought a second license so my brother could co-op with me online, and bought another license for a friend who wanted to try). ...I didn't even talked about RO2 with my IRL friends, why talking about a disappointment ?

I even regret buying a second RO2 pre-order for my brother, since I know we won't be enjoying it.

First he's going to buy a gaming laptop, so he won't get more than 30 fps and frequent 10 fps drops (even if he puts $1300/1000€ in the laptop). Of course, all settings to low.

(nb: I don't even think I'll ever be able to set it to medium with my "weak" Phenom II x4 840 @3.2GHz and GTX 460 768mo, even on 1680*1050 with no AA.)

Second the game's pace is much more fast, SMG are everywhere, you no longer need tactical thinking : what's the point in trying to play in co-op when it's all about run'n'gun ?

=> Why planning the building assault, if a guy will sprint around it, shoot both of us in 0.5 second while still running and sprint back inside, right in front of our teamates sprinting to the capzone ?

=> Or he'll be sprinting in the corridor, shooting both of us instantly while running (sprint->run weapon draw delay being close to nothing) when we meet him. There's no room for slow tactical co-op, it's all about sprinting around your enemies, outsprinting them.
​

In RO1, when one of us looted a SMG (or could get a SMG slot !!), we would work together : the rifleman was doing the long range shooting/cover, the SMG was for the pointman. In RO2 everyone and their dog can have a SMG.

Or one of us would spot enemies, while the other was playing the MG (prone and deployed). In RO2 the MG is much better undeployed, inside buildings, ramboing its way through the capzone.

 

[heath4n]

I don't understand how we can't have 100 hit points. When you get shot, you lose hit points based on what it is. If it is yellow, you lose x hit points per second, if it's red, you lose y hit points per second. If you bleed you hit points to 0 then you get that fade to black animation. If you get shot multiple times, you should have to bandage each wound.

 

[heath4n]

Bolts should do 105 hit points to the chest, bad arm and leg shots, 80. Their screen should pull based on where you hit them.

But most importantly, bolts and semis should be at an advantage at ranges of 100 meters.

 

[Solo4114]

But as others have stated repeatedly on these forums --- this game in it's current state is nothing like (in game play feel) CoD or the BF series. My proof is in the fact that I've guided a CoD background clan to this game (nearly all 30 of them bought it) and only about 8-10 of us play it with ANY regularity. But unlike the vets here, the reason they don't is because it feels clunky and overly complicated to them. Please don't deride them for this, it's just the truth as they've stated it. My point is that for the "CoD crowd" this game plays and feels nothing like CoD.

Heck, we run one of the few North American CD servers (everyone runs TE) so when we start it up each night we have a regular group of 20+ that join us. Your points above are so true that I eventually quit playing last night because we had several folks that took full advantage of several of the issues you addressed above*. I, for one, cannot wait for mods to make this game exactly what we hoped it would be for our (clan) community. Until then we'll attempt to keep our one CD server alive.

That pretty much gets at the point I was trying to make earlier re: striking the balance between RO:Ost and the COD/BF style of gameplay -- and failing to do so.

RO2 attempted to move towards a more "mainstream" approach to FPS games. But apparently, at least according to your example, it didn't go far enough in that direction to really lure the COD types into the game. The unlocks didn't do it, the stat improvements with ranks didn't do it (a.k.a. the "HAHASUCKITNOOB" features), the shift towards faster-firing weapons didn't do it, and the shift towards generally faster moving avatars didn't do it.

But at the same time, it moved just far enough away from RO:Ost that at least a portion of the RO:Ost veterans were turned off by the changes. It's got too many semis/autos, it's got these stupid unlocks and stat improvements, and it's got incredibly fast (by RO:Ost comparisons, anyway) avatars.

And the issue may not even be those things (Although I remain adamant on the unlocks and stat improvements: BAD IDEA in this game, and especially as implemented). It could be other issues like, I dunno, there's some slight shift in how all the weapons have a tighter MOA from RO:Ost which makes them more accurate at long range -- kinda like before they shrank the hitboxes in RO:Ost. It could be something more refined than just "you move faster and that sucks", like, sprinting has no apparent effect on your avatar, so you can sprint, go to iron sights quickly, and turn just as quickly as you would if you were standing still. Or how each individual weapon isn't QUITE differentiated enough for iron sights and movement speeds from the others. I don't know.

All I know is that, for me at least, the overall feel of this game is too far from a slower-paced, more tactical game like RO:Ost, and not close enough to a casual, arcadey game like BF3. It struck a balance between the two, but it's a balance that I think ends up pleasing neither the hard core old schoolers, nor the folks -- according to your tale -- who hew more towards the arcadey style. To me, that'd suggest you need to move more in one direction or the other.

 

[Srinidhalaya]

Im looking forward to post release content, such as new tanks and whatnot. I purchased RO2 keeping in mind that it will shine down the road much more than right off the bat, just like ROOST.

Current player count really means nothing to me.