Isn't it more fun if the teams have one hero each? Wouldn't that give the game more depth, and relate more to public gaming?
Upvote
0
What in HOS are you most worried about?
- Thread starter Forssen
- Start date
You have to row with what you've got, but limitations seriously hamper the possible performance of any staff. Good tools to ensure fair play are the basis for obtaining fair play.
Upvote
0
Good spectator system and demo recordings are also valuable for public play, as admins can more easily decide if they want to ban some one from their server or not.
Also, I don't think that is what wahoo4 meant with accepted by the competitive community btw. I think he meant as in RO being played more at for instance CB, TWL and/or ESL.
Also, I don't think that is what wahoo4 meant with accepted by the competitive community btw. I think he meant as in RO being played more at for instance CB, TWL and/or ESL.
Upvote
0
Well the reasons why CB, TWL and ESL dropped RO initially if anything it was because the Admins running the RO sections didn't even play RO themselves and didn't seem to share an interest in it. Resulting in CB, TWL and ESL being dead activity wise. Spraduke tried to get something going with CB later on, but that didn't work out all too well either.
I just hope that whoever starts a ladder gains a bit of an understanding for the game before creating the rule set. As a competitive community being separated over multiple websites is already bad, every time a ladder or league dies or gets cancelled some clans will die with it making things even worse.
I want the best with the community, and after looking at various competitive places like ESL, TWL and CB, in the end we decided to continue on and create ROL2 at ROLadder. As being autonomous allows us to really tune everything towards the community and give the community more power over how the game should be played.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Weird grenade physics.
Weapon availability limit/assignment system.
Insufficient AI.
Gameplay variety.
Sluggish movement of the player model and weapon handling.
Weapon availability limit/assignment system.
Insufficient AI.
Gameplay variety.
Sluggish movement of the player model and weapon handling.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I'm concerned that we won't get to play with the restricted weapon systems as often as we'd like.
Is the weapon limit and assignment system even needed? Players should be free to use whatever weapon they deem necessary. Sniper rifles being the only exception.
So...everything but the visuals...?
The soldier models in the early shots are too geriatric now that you mention it :troll:, but I suppose that's changed?
Upvote
0
the release date of the game
A to difficult game for a newbie like me i never played ostfront
To many people with micro destroying the atmosphere
A to difficult game for a newbie like me i never played ostfront
To many people with micro destroying the atmosphere
Upvote
0
@ Dynamix
Squads were generally equipped with certain weapons and loadouts. While it might be ideal for everyone in a city map to run around with smg's, that wasn't the case and having weapon classes tries to simulate that a bit, spread out the realistic loadout of weapons.
Players are always free to pickup discarded weapons off of dead players if they find themselves in a class that wasn't their first choice.
I for one would prefer it the way ROOST does it myself.
Squads were generally equipped with certain weapons and loadouts. While it might be ideal for everyone in a city map to run around with smg's, that wasn't the case and having weapon classes tries to simulate that a bit, spread out the realistic loadout of weapons.
Players are always free to pickup discarded weapons off of dead players if they find themselves in a class that wasn't their first choice.
I for one would prefer it the way ROOST does it myself.
Upvote
0
- performance issues (almost every game in the last few years have had problems where the game was almost unplayable at launch).
- lack of support for competitions/clan wars (need a /record, ready up, spectator mode, etc. TWI has been good about these in the past but lately a lot of companies have been dropping these in their games) I would feel better if they were confirmed by TWI that they will have them in.
Upvote
0
Class limits are a very important part of RO and it's gameplay...imo they're a very important part of any historical shooter - and if it were the way you'd like it, it would annoy the crap out of a lot of people.
Rahabib said:
Almost every game? You need to look at the games you're buying or the system you're running
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Two other things that I'm worried about besides unrealism, is that you might not be able to tank alone and that there might be silent grenades, leading to nadespam like in RO1.
The main reason I don't bother to play either Darkest Hour or RO1 is because of these two factors. RO1 is boring because 40-50% of the kills on urban maps are due to grenades, and in DH — which I mainly appreciate for its realistic tanking — I find it too annoying having to teamplay with unknown players in tanks.
It is simply to boring to play in the driver position all of the time, or as the gunner with an incompetent and overly aggressive driver. It is especially unbearable when you don't have a hull MG available for use; the Shermans lack a good crosshair, so you can't use it well over long ranges, and on many maps you have to share a tank between three crewmen, and sit out the fun as the driver while the gunner and hull machineguner do all of the killing.
The only way to have fun as the driver much of the time, is to drive the tank carelessly, and this is the very reason it becomes boring for the commander. Personally, I typically play nice and defensively, not making sudden movements to disturb the commander, but me and my gaming friends I play with are exceptions. Most players only think about themselves, and rather chose to attempt to run over a few enemies with the tracks and exposing the tank to AT weapons, than being considerate and allowing the commander to effectively blast away the enemy infantry with HE shells.
But from what I have understood, there will indeed be solo-tanking in RO2, which is a relief since tanking would actually be fun then, and not a frustrating experience 90% of the time when you can't team with a long-time gaming friend. That's the primary deciding factor on whether I will buy RO2 or not, so I will wait and see, asking gaming buddies whether the ability to tank alone is indeed there once the game is out, before I spend any money on the product to be on the safe side.
The main reason I don't bother to play either Darkest Hour or RO1 is because of these two factors. RO1 is boring because 40-50% of the kills on urban maps are due to grenades, and in DH — which I mainly appreciate for its realistic tanking — I find it too annoying having to teamplay with unknown players in tanks.
It is simply to boring to play in the driver position all of the time, or as the gunner with an incompetent and overly aggressive driver. It is especially unbearable when you don't have a hull MG available for use; the Shermans lack a good crosshair, so you can't use it well over long ranges, and on many maps you have to share a tank between three crewmen, and sit out the fun as the driver while the gunner and hull machineguner do all of the killing.
The only way to have fun as the driver much of the time, is to drive the tank carelessly, and this is the very reason it becomes boring for the commander. Personally, I typically play nice and defensively, not making sudden movements to disturb the commander, but me and my gaming friends I play with are exceptions. Most players only think about themselves, and rather chose to attempt to run over a few enemies with the tracks and exposing the tank to AT weapons, than being considerate and allowing the commander to effectively blast away the enemy infantry with HE shells.
But from what I have understood, there will indeed be solo-tanking in RO2, which is a relief since tanking would actually be fun then, and not a frustrating experience 90% of the time when you can't team with a long-time gaming friend. That's the primary deciding factor on whether I will buy RO2 or not, so I will wait and see, asking gaming buddies whether the ability to tank alone is indeed there once the game is out, before I spend any money on the product to be on the safe side.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I am probably most worried about the wound system. I'm hoping for bandaging, realistic wounding and things like that.
The rest of the game looks great .
And that there won't be any :IS2:.
The rest of the game looks great .
And that there won't be any :IS2:.
Upvote
0
The weapon/class restrictions are kind of RO's way of "weapon balance". For instance: long range, open map where the attackers have SMGs only, and the defenders have long rifles only. Sure, once or twice an SMGer could get close enough to do damage, but overall the defenders would have to suck to lose.
Also, look at BFBC2 and its Vietnam expansion. A team of snipers only has little chance to win without great coordination and communication, which you just don't get in a public environment. People nearly always blame the failure of their team on the amount of snipers they had.
Honestly, I feel TWI did a great job in RO:OST with the class restrictions. The Danzig map wouldn't have been very interesting if everyone had STG44s, PPSH41s, SVTs or G43s. The only downside to "forcing" people to use a class they don't particularly care for is that it forces a player to rethink their tactics, and tactics are something both lacking and strongly looked down upon in the modern FPS community (at least outside of the RO community). Seriously- who turned "ambushing" into "camping"?
Also, look at BFBC2 and its Vietnam expansion. A team of snipers only has little chance to win without great coordination and communication, which you just don't get in a public environment. People nearly always blame the failure of their team on the amount of snipers they had.
Honestly, I feel TWI did a great job in RO:OST with the class restrictions. The Danzig map wouldn't have been very interesting if everyone had STG44s, PPSH41s, SVTs or G43s. The only downside to "forcing" people to use a class they don't particularly care for is that it forces a player to rethink their tactics, and tactics are something both lacking and strongly looked down upon in the modern FPS community (at least outside of the RO community). Seriously- who turned "ambushing" into "camping"?
Upvote
0
Most players that i know , started with rifles in RO:Ost too learn how too shoot in this game , and most new players that we've picked up along the way have always been encouraged too start with the rifle , and to play RO its the most sensible way due too the weapon restriction's , there'll be the few COD player's who wont be able too accept this.....but would we want it any other way.
Upvote
0