Are persistent "rankups" realistic?

[Witzig]

Ruin? I beg to differ. If anything, it'll just change people's motives a bit. But actually ruin the game? I think not.

Well if one looks at other Games how they handle points/rank system and the previous per-round-allocation of Ostfront people shouldn't worry.

I take a current widly sold title as Comparison: Bad Company 2 (yeah Arcady i know).

If you play for yourself in BC2 and not help your Team with objectives you'll gain only points for "Frags". In addition you'd get points in relation to the amount of kills/kill streaks etc.

On the other hand playing in a squad and staying close to the Squad and going for objectives allows one to easily be on Top of the Scoreboard with zero kills. I achieved that once with flying one Blackhawk for a complete round, the only thing i did was dodging Rockets ^^. My Squad manned the Miniguns and "suppressed" the enemy.


In Ostfront its the same, even if the only thing you achieve is constantly resupply a MG Trooper, you'd have an easy time racking up points. And i guess the DEVs will take that concept further (as they said with following Orders from you Squad Leader).



So people who'd want to rank up fast, it will make sense to aid your Team and go cap the objectives. Which ain't a bad thing in my book. The incentive to get "a lota points" is increased with persistent stat tracking imho.

 

[Lucan946]

Check out the topic line. It refers to a generic concept. Look at the OP. It includes a specific quotation from Ramm Jaeger confirming the basic premises I need to draw the conclusion that it's unrealistic.

A) the progression system is persistent and will factor irrespective of the life of your avatar
B) your progress ends IRL when you die
C) ergo the progression system is unrealistic

This isn't rocket science.

And if A is not the case, so what? It's an internal critique based on a conditional premise, i.e. if A, then C follows. We can still talk in the abstract and make a legitimate point. Why is it that on these forums I'm only allowed to chase a specter? People make recommendations all the time, this is an idea and suggestions forum.

Yes, if Ramm is saying that progression is based on a single avatar and continues regardless of his death, that's unrealistic.

 

[-[SiN]-bswearer]

Ruin? I beg to differ. If anything, it'll just change people's motives a bit. But actually ruin the game? I think not.

ah, but you must recognize the fact that motives more often than not end up affecting gameplay......lets take KF as an example:

people's motives are to grind their way to getting the highest ranks, the best perk bonuses, the best everything. because of that they do things like creating leveling maps, using/abusing map exploits to "powerlevel", and find/use console cheats to get instant ranks, all just to get their high ranks. that in turn DOES affect gameplay because of the bonuses/rewards they unlock. it rewards players who never actually progressed through the system but cheated their way through. that results in unbalanced gameplay as some will not have the actual "experience/skill" that others will, but because the "system" says they do, the game awards them bonuses that give them an unfair advantage such as recoil reduction, less weapon sway, faster reloads etc......

once that gameplay experience is ruined, then the game is ruined. it has happened to Killing Floor and I for one hope that it will not happen to ROHOS.

 

[Lucan946]

In Killing Floor, differences between ranks is much, much more noticeable. In Heroes of Stalingrad, however, if Ramm-Jaeger is to be believed, differences in experience level (of the avatar, not the player) will not make a whole lot of difference.

 

[Extension7]

I think the rank ups should be quite noticeable not just with uniform and little tid-bits. I mean, it's a game and people want to do, look, and be better than the 'noobs'. I'm not saying having callsigns and unlockable weapons and all that hoohah CoD puts on. But make it realistic YET appealing and fresh to new players. IMO I think player customization would be pretty neat :3

I'm just gonna quickly type down what I think it should sorta be like off the top of my head...

'X' = noob, X kills a couple billion people and performs some hot *** teamwork moves and gets promoted to 'Q'. 'Q' gets some nifty dimple marks on his face and earns the ability to be said class! After 'Q' performs even more strategic hot *** squad moves he gets 900 more dimples on his face and unlocks the class to be a IS2.

Of course, dimple could = Hero Weapon, Rolled sleeves, Dirty face etc.

And IS2 could just mean the commander >_<

 

[Lucan946]

Ramm-Jaeger did already mention that they are going for only a slight advantage with veteran players over new players.

 

[Xendance]

ah, but you must recognize the fact that motives more often than not end up affecting gameplay......lets take KF as an example:

people's motives are to grind their way to getting the highest ranks, the best perk bonuses, the best everything. because of that they do things like creating leveling maps, using/abusing map exploits to "powerlevel", and find/use console cheats to get instant ranks, all just to get their high ranks. that in turn DOES affect gameplay because of the bonuses/rewards they unlock. it rewards players who never actually progressed through the system but cheated their way through. that results in unbalanced gameplay as some will not have the actual "experience/skill" that others will, but because the "system" says they do, the game awards them bonuses that give them an unfair advantage such as recoil reduction, less weapon sway, faster reloads etc......

once that gameplay experience is ruined, then the game is ruined. it has happened to Killing Floor and I for one hope that it will not happen to ROHOS.

But what if the only way to powerlevel would be to capture objectives (or defend them)? It wouldn't be too bad then.

 

[213]

everyone should start out as privates with bots in the leadship positions, then once some of these privates rank up, they are allowed to choose leadership slots and gain access to the appropriate equipment. it means never having to worry that some guy with 1 hour play time is taking up the valuable nco positions...and lets face it, bots are smarter than human players 95 percent of the time.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

Some of you are way too hung up on inexperienced players in leadership positions, in some cases (NOT ALL) almost snobish about it. Sure experience helps, but it doesn't mean the end of the fun and it certainly doesn't mean that other players aren't able to step up and help the team achieve victory.

 

[-[SiN]-bswearer]

But what if the only way to powerlevel would be to capture objectives (or defend them)? It wouldn't be too bad then.

what if you're constantly playing in solo mode against the easiest level of bots? what if you team up with buddies who intentionally allow you to cap back and forth in order for each player to boost their ranks?

just posing situations like that as possibilities in order to explore the types of features/restrictions we all hope will be present to prevent any for of powerleveling to happen. for example something like say, a limit as to how much you can progress by playing a lower difficulty etc....it's all stuff we won't know about until more details are released regarding how the progression system will work, but that's exactly why people speculate about them.....not really a bad or negative thing, just curiousity

 

[SheepDip]

I don't think solo offline play will count. Or at least I hope it won't.

 

[-[SiN]-bswearer]

I don't think solo offline play will count. Or at least I hope it won't.

it's already been confirmed that completing the single player "tank training course" will count towards progression.....i think it's safe to say the "offline challenges" that is mentioned will count towards progression as an easier way to help train new players. the real question is how much will they work towards progression?

 

[Reise]

It doesn't matter to me, on or offline.

At this point the system is sounding like something that more or less keeps track of how long you've played, and shows other players that with rank and appearance changes.

That's all I really wanted out of it. Something mostly harmless that helps give experienced players a shot at using better roles while looking different at the same time.

 

[slavek]

Guys . . . you guys are turning into heretics, shame on you all .

Its TWI we are talking about here, everything so far they have shown us has just been amazing and considering their past in making great games and starting as a company whose focuses started on a balance of realism/gameplay, I don't believe they would f**k us over and turn RO2 into an arcade deathmatch like COD.

Why don't we wait until more intel gets out about the perk system before jumping all over the issue like hungry dogs?

 

[Floyd]

it's already been confirmed that completing the single player "tank training course" will count towards progression.....i think it's safe to say the "offline challenges" that is mentioned will count towards progression as an easier way to help train new players. ....

This!
Giving the new players an incentive to learn the mechanics of the game can't be anything but a good thing. And from what I understand, many of the progression features will be mainly cosmetic. I know I'd be somewhat embarrassed to be running around getting killed while sporting freshly ironed and creased uniforms, shiney helmet, and various and assundry other giveaways that I'm a NOOB and haven't even bothered to learn how things work....

 

[-[SiN]-bswearer]

It doesn't matter to me, on or offline.

At this point the system is sounding like something that more or less keeps track of how long you've played, and shows other players that with rank and appearance changes.

That's all I really wanted out of it. Something mostly harmless that helps give experienced players a shot at using better roles while looking different at the same time.

yeah that's what i'm thinking as well. the only concern i would have about offline play is making sure it won't be easy for players to "powerlevel" their ranks like they could in Killinig Floor......i think KF's progression system was a good learning experience of what NOT to do in ROHOS. it works ok with KF because it's a co-op game and there's no competitive play whereas something like that would be bad for HOS which is focused on competition. like i said, i think TWI knows there's a big difference and like Alan explained to me "this will not have a 'KF' style progression system"