BF3 has intrinsically better teamwork than RO2

[Wavefunction]

I'm not saying that BF3 is more realistic in an objective sense nor am I saying that RO2 is unrealistic. What I'm saying is that in my time spent with BF3, the game actually feels more realistic in how players interact with each other ingame.

I often find myself pushed into cover with other players in BF3. I also often find myself moving with large groups of players in order to suppress the enemy or flank them. Suppression and so forth seems to have a much greater effect as well.

In RO2, it feels like every one-man-island has their own objective and players only incidentally travel together before breaking off into lonewolves again. The original RO didn't feel this way because of how the maps were designed (every map had chokepoints or areas that required teamwork to overtake). RO2's maps, despite being really well designed, are much more open-ended in this respect as there are more spawn areas, fewer chokepoints and more nooks and crannies that actually seem to flavour lonewolfism over teamwork and suppression.

When RO2 was first announced, I was hoping that the teamwork factor would be stronger than that of the original RO. I also hoped that it would implement some new/cooler teamwork features, such as positional/directional voice chat and other things. Instead, no one seems to talk beyond trash talking in text chat.

As of now, I just feel that if I want teamwork, I'm better off playing BF3 than RO2. There seem to be no benefits to sticking together in public servers on RO2 at all.

Don't flame me--I love RO2, just pointing something out...

 

[Destraex]

Does that mean RO2 funnels people in levels into the same positions?
I know BC2 was like that.

Personally I would hate if RO2 maps did not allow "sandbox" play.

I know what you are trying to say though. All I can say to that is we need a better team to work better as a team. Its not the map its the people in RO2.

In BF3 I have noticed its the map funneling the people. Yes I own it and don't hate it. My rig will not keep up with it under load though. So I cannot enjoy it just now.

Even if I did have a better rig RO2 is my staple and will be for some time to come.

 

[Wavefunction]

Does that mean RO2 funnels people in levels into the same positions?
I know BC2 was like that.

Personally I would hate if RO2 maps did not allow "sandbox" play.

I know what you are trying to say though. All I can say to that is we need a better team to work better as a team. Its not the map its the people in RO2.

In BF3 I have noticed its the map funneling the people. Yes I own it and don't hate it. My rig will not keep up with it under load though. So I cannot enjoy it just now.

Even if I did have a better rig RO2 is my staple and will be for some time to come.

I'm not exactly sure if that's it too. I felt like the original RO maps did a better job at both funnelling players into chokepoints or just forcing players to cooperate in order to take objectives.

BF3 is designed for teamwork from the ground up. Most classes have a function directly related to helping teammates and these functions in turn give you a lot of points and rewards. RO2 doesn't have any such thing, nor are the maps really conducive to teamwork nor is there really any real incentive to being around other players except using them as human shields...

As for BF3 and system requirements though... it wouldn't play well for me until I upgraded to 8GB of RAM! Anything less than that and the game performs poorly.

 

[Faneca]

In RO2, it feels like every one-man-island has their own objective and players only incidentally travel together before breaking off into lonewolves again.

Thats what happens when there is no proper chain of command setup.
I allways have a firm grip on my squad and order them to do specific things in order to make the whole team advance.
You need decent Squad Leaders and a good Commander to make your team win, otherwise it is just a matter of time until your team runs out of reinforcements and loses.

 

[LHeureux]

I completely agree with you. Remember in Konisplatz how all player moved together, flag by flag, all together, giving ammo, shooting the same people and not getting killed so fast.

Imagine that same map in RO2, russians would never do it to the siegesaule.

 

[palco]

In my view, game is game.

Look at ARMA.
with its enourmous open map, it's crazy hard to establish coordinated attack.

W/o good team leader, which btw crazy hard to find in public servers, every players wander around crazy, it's almost impossible to enjoy the game if it doesn't have COD or crysis 2 equivalent player skill based game mechanics.

it might do much more good to have more focused, artificially "deviced" type of map than open world type map for games like ro to have easier fun.

I can't write all the minute details here but RO OST was far more impressive and full of thrill to play and ro2 experience is like kind of garbage to be polite. k

 

[amdr]

BF3 better teamwork?
Hahahahahahahahahahahah

Probably because their awesome VOIP system right? :')

 

[Verluste]

BF3 encourages teamwork alot more from without game mechanics than RO2 does.

BF3 > RO2 in teamplay atm. Even with the non-functional VOIP thing.

 

[palco]

BF3 has a lot to offer minus the broken comm system.
Even without teamplay elements, that means even if I go solo, bf3 guarantees good amount of undeniable good fun.

yet ro2 doesn't have much under its sleeves with its jaxxed up gameplay mechanic/ piss poor sound design worse than its own predecessor.


We should all cheer for TWI deceiving and robbing 40 bucks from customers to stay afloat.

 

[Coolicus]

I actually agree with this regardless of various unrealistic aspects I get much more enjoyment playing BF3 on my PC with friends than RO:HOS communicating with teamspeak (seriously who uses public VOIP if they are seriously playing a game?) and operating in a squad usually with 2 assaults (1 with medic packs and 1 with the grenade launcher) and an engineer + support and we all have a way in which we compliment the others.

 

[Schmidt Fritz]

When RO2 was first announced, I was hoping that the teamwork factor would be stronger than that of the original RO. I also hoped that it would implement some new/cooler teamwork features, such as positional/directional voice chat and other things. Instead, no one seems to talk beyond trash talking in text chat.

I was also amazed by how poor the communication interface in ro2 is. There are games 10 years old having better multi player comms system.

Can't really imagine a viable situations 10 people all around the map talking to the guy next to you in single voip. Actually, I know this for a fact from some other MMOs; if there are more than 3 people talking, its not going to work for your benefit. Not to mention you have to do that really quick since RO2 is quite a fast paced game.

What you can do, is to give general idea of tactics using voip/text chat to players, who might or might not catch it and follow some generic idea of how to accomplish that objective. When it comes down to the actual combat, every man is an island, since there is just no way to communicate efficiently to the random guy next to you.

Of course, at some point, the random guy next to you might get it what you are trying to do, when youre firing random shots at a window opening and tossing a few grenades to hole in front of you. But so far, I'm not very optimistic about the random guys abilities to read the game on the field.

After all, the maps are pretty open and you can do almost anything. Who knows, it might be the random guy next to you is just lost and does not have a clue what's going on. Or he might have a devious plan to use you as a bait and is just waiting you to move, so he can find out the position of the enemy.

 

[DAT]

Comm system in RO2 poor? how much worse can a mic be? This whole thread is odd in my opinion. BF3 is a typical frame by frame shooter funneling you and not allowing you deviate. Had some great matches last night and yes most everyone had microphones.

 

[Zetsumei]

sadly the entire squad and communication system in HOS simply does not aim for teamwork. Add individual achievements on top and people their goal during a game is to gain a higher level rather than winning the map.

A voice system that simply makes you talk towards people you are look at or something would make it a lot easier to communicate on the go. And quickly form a sort of squad with people in your direct vicinity.

The squad system as it is now it could just as well not be there. You pretty much never know with whom you are in a squad with and generally do not care about it either. And your entire squad spawns all over the map. Any form of squad cohesion like that is simply lost.

If you could make your own squad with some people that you like and could somehow always spawn roughly at the same side of the battle it could be a lot easier to coordinate play.

But in general I think the main thing needed in squad tactics isn't so much the command structure, people will generally not listen anyway. But simply making it easy to communicate with people around you, like quickly saying watch out there is an enemy behind the corner. Or asking can you cover that window while I try to run to that door.

Small events like the above are what make me feel there can be real teamwork in a game. If there is no way to easily point out something and talk about it to the people you want to share it with you simply don't get teamwork you get clutter.

 

[DAT]

on mostly public servers you are going to get that with any game. One thing I did like about Darkest hour was when some one was talking on a microphone a small mic symbol popped up above their head. That enabled you to identify who was talking. I have seen plenty of matches on RO and DH have horrible teamwork as well. In fact a lot of those larger maps if you did not have teamwork the map either stalled or was over in minutes. More maps are coming for RO2 and hopefully most of the moriarity negative wave types on this forum will be long gone so we can enjoy the new content.

 

[hockeywarrior]

I'm not saying that BF3 is more realistic in an objective sense nor am I saying that RO2 is unrealistic. What I'm saying is that in my time spent with BF3, the game actually feels more realistic in how players interact with each other ingame.

I often find myself pushed into cover with other players in BF3. I also often find myself moving with large groups of players in order to suppress the enemy or flank them. Suppression and so forth seems to have a much greater effect as well.

In RO2, it feels like every one-man-island has their own objective and players only incidentally travel together before breaking off into lonewolves again. The original RO didn't feel this way because of how the maps were designed (every map had chokepoints or areas that required teamwork to overtake). RO2's maps, despite being really well designed, are much more open-ended in this respect as there are more spawn areas, fewer chokepoints and more nooks and crannies that actually seem to flavour lonewolfism over teamwork and suppression.

When RO2 was first announced, I was hoping that the teamwork factor would be stronger than that of the original RO. I also hoped that it would implement some new/cooler teamwork features, such as positional/directional voice chat and other things. Instead, no one seems to talk beyond trash talking in text chat.

As of now, I just feel that if I want teamwork, I'm better off playing BF3 than RO2. There seem to be no benefits to sticking together in public servers on RO2 at all.

Don't flame me--I love RO2, just pointing something out...

I have to agree with you on the point that in RO2 I always feel like I'm alone out there and that no one is really working WITH me on the battlefield. It is indeed a strange thing, because I totally felt that sense of "team presence" in RO1. I've often commented to many of my friends that many times RO2 feels like "TDM with optional objectives" where as soon as the match starts, everyone runs off on their own to seek out their own fortunes in kills, and might snag some objective points on the side if they feel so inclined.

My experience with BF3 is limited to the beta, but I do understand what you're talking about. The map I enjoyed playing (Caspian Border -- not that Metro crap) had a great ebb and flow of battle, and I felt like I was on a team, charging the next objective with all my teammates. Is BF3 more realistic than RO2? I wouldn't say so, but it certainly did give me that sense of "team presence" that RO2 doesn't for some reason.

Of course, there are always exceptions. Very very rarely there are people actively communicating via VOIP on an RO2 server, and things improve quite noticeably. That said, we're comparing basic public play behavior between the two games -- so we can assume that in any game where people communicate, the experience improves.

Good post. Have a fire extinguisher ready tho ... your rep's gonna need it after this thread lol.

 

[DasFist]

sadly the entire squad and communication system in HOS simply does not aim for teamwork. Add individual achievements on top and people their goal during a game is to gain a higher level rather than winning the map.

this is the main killer of teamwork imo, give people personal achievements/stats/unlocks etc. and it will just remove the whole idea of teamplay for some people.

 

[Nazarov]

Of course, there are always exceptions. Very very rarely there are people actively communicating via VOIP on an RO2 server, and things improve quite noticeably. That said, we're comparing basic public play behavior between the two games -- so we can assume that in any game where people communicate, the experience improves.

Psh. My experience with the VOIP commanders was horrendous.
The guy was constantly squawking on the VOIP with no real directions.
One guy reiterating that we should all 'push push push; can't sit around' was not helpful. In fact, it was more irritating than helpful.
Then recently, I join a server and the same guy was picking a fight with some dude playing as a SL.

 

[zeep]

Agreed RO2 lacks support for squadplay and teamplay.
RO2 is also lacking maps that encourage squad/teamplay.
Sadly, in it's current state this game is boring and offers very little excitement unless you like lonewolfing.

Somebody mod this game already.

 

[Rak]

In RO2, it feels like every one-man-island has their own objective and players only incidentally travel together before breaking off into lonewolves again. The original RO didn't feel this way . . .

To be honest, if you put away the nostalgia of the "good old times", public games were never about teamwork in RO. It was always everybody for himself, there was little communication and the game never really encouraged people to team-up or act together.

VOIP users were mostly frowned upon as "annoying smartass guys" and were promptly muted. Chat messages were ignored or missed because of the always-present Voice Command spam. Nobody really listened to the Squad Leader, only valuable thing about that role was the smoke grenades. Classes didn't really interact with each other.

And it was fine. It's one of the things in the "RO recipe". It didn't force you to coordinate, and you could do great by yourself(if you were skilled enough). If you teamed up, you could do better for a while, but could not really dominate because death was quick, spawn times long, and then teammates were far away. The better team in RO was always comprimised of better individual players, not best teamworkers(I'm strictly talking about public games, and vanilla RO).

Actually, I think RO2 has better teamwork potential than RO just because there is spawning on squad leaders. Which also makes the game more "casual friendly", for people who just want to play together with friends. Also screen overlays, enemy spotting all increase teamwork incentives(aside from their half-assed implementation).

I think the problem here is that you are looking for actual teamwork in RO2. RO wasn't really designed for it, what made it great was that it made you feel like a regular soldier all alone in the battlefield(compared to RO2's rambo feeling). Battlefield on the other hand is designed from the ground up for teamwork, people in squads sticking and working together, classes working together and interacting with each other (revive, ammo, medkit, repair, spotting, different target types etc).

Now, clan match gameplay was completely different and depended heavily on player skill firstly and tactics/positioning secondly.

Just my view on the issue as a very long time player.

 

[Poerisija]

BF3 encourages teamwork alot more from without game mechanics than RO2 does.

BF3 > RO2 in teamplay atm. Even with the non-functional VOIP thing.

By arbitrary "toss ammo here for score". If it didn't give score, no-one would toss the ammo or heal anyone else except themselves.

Also, because of the spawning system it gives the illusion of teamwork, because everyone is clustered together. You can see how much people like teamwork after the latest patch when no-one ever joins squads because now you don't do it automatically LOL.