My rant on RO2, a game which I still love an play regularly
- Thread starter Ragnarök
- Start date
The way to counterbalance this could be by giving Soviets more MG slots. I am more in favor of making gameplay-wise changes, like it was done with squad leaders in Classic: you have bolt-action rifles instead of automatic weapons but they have pistols for CQC, so class is taken by more experienced people who know importance of smoke and artillery support.
the better question is, will you play un-ranked servers that have the new stuff? cause whether TWI supports the stuff or not, it's going to end up in the game we play.
i don't care one way or another if a server is ranked. as long as it has the gameplay i want.
without the damn progression system, this discussion would be moot. bad idea on the progression TWI.
It's still sad to see, that Tripwire doesn't seem to be interested into adding even small features like camo helmet covers and more uniform variation skins, which wouldn't require much work to be done and which many if not most community members support. There have been threads even before release of RO2, where the community addressed that they wish historically correct uniform variation, but nothing has been done.
Well, afaik in Rising Storm the two different factions also don't have exactly the same equipment and it still works game balance-wise. I'd say, make an elite Mg-gunner class, give the MG-42 to Axis players and the Soviets f.e. Maxim guns, which could be carried around, too. In my opinion weapons for the different factions can be asymmetrical, after all that's what Rising Storm demonstrates.
That's something, that annoys me, too; a lot of Soviet players run around with mkbs and mg-34s.
Because silly players will always go for the best equipment or that one, which gives them the most benefits, instead of enjoying historically accurate gameplay.
Last edited:
I think teams with asymmetrical weaponry are a lot more fun gameplay-wise, because then factions have a real different feeling. Adding the MG-42 wouldn't destroy game balance. There is an ongoing discussion in the "ideas and suggestions" section, with good arguments provided by Twrecks and Riccardo. Maybe you wanna take a look.
i don't really see any reason to call players who prefer better weapons silly. just because you want "historical" doesn't make someone who couldn't care less "silly". we all want, what we want. nothing silly in having a preference as to how we play. the important thing is that we play!
i will agree that it was more fun when we didn't have the enemies weapons. it was a treat to kill a guy and use his weapon for a while.
i will agree that it was more fun when we didn't have the enemies weapons. it was a treat to kill a guy and use his weapon for a while.
Last edited:
Asymmetrical or historical weaponry is one thing, gameplay is another. I am more content with ahistorical loadout where squad leaders are armed with bolt-action rifles and pistols rather than automatic weapons, because it serves the gameplay better as more experienced and team-dedicated players happen to take that role.
