the progression system IMO was probably the worst idea TWI ever had for RO2, well that and lockdown. it would be best if it was just scraped.
No amount of bug fixing can fix the progression system.
- Thread starter Scarf Ace
- Start date
This is one of the reasons I have stopped playing, I hate games where everybody is not on equal footing, it simply is not fair if player x is 30% better than player y just cos he has played for longer; It takes the skill away.
I really cannot be bothered to spend time levelling up my stats so I am 30% better than the next unfortunate guy who just bought the game, also it is less satisfying killing people with my 30% better character. A game like this should be my skill as a rifleman vs your skill as a rifleman, my aim vs your aim, not my 30% better aim vs you 0% aim.
And the less I play the less chance I ever will due to the reasons above.
I really cannot be bothered to spend time levelling up my stats so I am 30% better than the next unfortunate guy who just bought the game, also it is less satisfying killing people with my 30% better character. A game like this should be my skill as a rifleman vs your skill as a rifleman, my aim vs your aim, not my 30% better aim vs you 0% aim.
And the less I play the less chance I ever will due to the reasons above.
Perhaps there will be a mod that completely disables unlocks and character progression? I predict this will be the most played mod for a while. 
I totally agree With Scarf Ace. This game has got to be one of the worst games I have ever bought. Will install it again in 12 months time and see if there is any improvement.
If they offered me a refund I would take it straight away.
Maybe it's just me but I was expecting so much more.
If they offered me a refund I would take it straight away.
Maybe it's just me but I was expecting so much more.
AT least we have a temporary fix with the most recent changelog that we can now have servers limited to particular levels. I'm going to look for a server with limits set to 0 across the board ( cept papasha ). Hopefully the 7cav or 2fgr server admins will be so inclined....
Dont let the door hit you on the as$ on your way out.
Cept for the bolties, even if its a bit too much. I like the nice recoil because it makes the weapon feel that much more powerfull
I could agree with that.
AT least we have a temporary fix with the most recent changelog that we can now have servers limited to particular levels. I'm going to look for a server with limits set to 0 across the board ( cept papasha ). Hopefully the 7cav or 2fgr server admins will be so inclined....
Except that it will cause the server to become un-ranked. Which will limit the number of people who want to play on that server. On a side note we (the 169th) will be discussing doing this in the coming days.
Except that it will cause the server to become un-ranked. Which will limit the number of people who want to play on that server. On a side note we (the 169th) will be discussing doing this in the coming days.
AT least we have a temporary fix with the most recent changelog that we can now have servers limited to particular levels. I'm going to look for a server with limits set to 0 across the board ( cept papasha ). Hopefully the 7cav or 2fgr server admins will be so inclined....
Except that it will cause the server to become un-ranked. Which will limit the number of people who want to play on that server. On a side note we (the 169th) will be discussing doing this in the coming days.
I'd love it if you would, and yes I was contemplating stating that it should still be ranked. Nothing should limit somone from still gaining rank in a limited server that is only harder then it would normally be.
However if the limitation changes also allow server admins to specify the floor ( minimum ) values for each set then server admins can tweak their servers so that all ppsh's have drums, and all MP40's are single mag, etc.
Oh the irony. People want to get rid of that there unlock system....except for the upgrades they want.
I've been seeing so many people with their titties in a twist over bot farming servers.
It's just players finding a way around a grindy system to get the upgrades in the most efficient manner.
It's just players finding a way around a grindy system to get the upgrades in the most efficient manner.
Except the ones that you shouldn't need to unlock in the first place because they were probably more common than food in Stalingrad.
Anyway, it looks like the first step in the right direction has been taken with the recent patch.
Last edited:
Meanwhile, the rest of us that aren't staring at our gun counting the rivets......
Not you again. I won't bother acting kind.
Are you dense?
If you think magazine capacity, or the presence of a bayonet is as minor as "the right number of rivets" then you are officially just downright moronic.
There are major balance and realism related factors that heavily impact both the historical accuracy and gameplay of RO2. If you honestly for example think that not wanting MP-40/IIs to be available, but select-fire, drum mag PPShs to be available to all is merely being overly selective, then you have no idea about history.
Last edited:
History is pretty much dead in RO2, by the admission of most of the people that care about it. I've never held the fact RO2 wanted to have game features against it, be it an unlock system, "unrealistic" weapons or stick mags.
You guys are almost close to being able to set exactly what you do and don't want. So the entitlement to what RO2 "should be" you're carrying around is pretty much a dead horse at this point. Wait for the last of the server config tweaks to be patched, but it'd be nice if you quit sticking your nose up in the air at the people that like RO2 for what it is.
Because let's be honest. Have you played another game besides maybe ARMA that has bent over backwards to accommodate people's options like RO2 has? I've looked at the server side options. There's an obscene amount of them and they just added more. And yet people continue to throw their hissy fit patch, after patch.
You guys are almost close to being able to set exactly what you do and don't want. So the entitlement to what RO2 "should be" you're carrying around is pretty much a dead horse at this point. Wait for the last of the server config tweaks to be patched, but it'd be nice if you quit sticking your nose up in the air at the people that like RO2 for what it is.
Because let's be honest. Have you played another game besides maybe ARMA that has bent over backwards to accommodate people's options like RO2 has? I've looked at the server side options. There's an obscene amount of them and they just added more. And yet people continue to throw their hissy fit patch, after patch.
Last edited:
The demand for historical accuracy isn't dead until TWI gives us an official announcement saying people who value it should **** off.
Nobody wants the complete removal of the unlock system. However, it's not too much to ask from TWI to give us the ability to take the content RO2 provides, and give admins full control over who gets what, be it class limits, unlocks (not just restricting, but also making them fully available), or other things. After all, that would fully be in spirit of PC gaming, right?
Regarding realism and historical accuracy, we can't forget that RO started as a game all about historical accuracy, and by looking themselves at what can be done realism wise, TWI could make a properly realistic and historically accurate mode that is unaffected by some of the design choices made for the sake of relaxed realism and the progression system. TWI making a proper realistic mode would have many advantages, especially when you consider standardisation on servers. You wouldn't want every single server playing by its own rules, after all.
TWI has never officially announced that RO2 is not intended to be realistic, and the countless new features that enhance realism that RO2 has really do point out that realism is still something that should be expected from RO2.
Last edited:
Oh sweet. We're going to have an actual conversation.
They're giving people the option to at least play the game the way they want, and I don't think they get nearly enough credit for it. Today's patch is already a big step toward satisfying A LOT of people who didn't like what they were seeing.
The idea that they can still make a one-mode-fits-all-for-realism is blindly hopeful, I think. I'm not saying they shouldn't try....but I think trying to fight the proliferation of game modes and server types by adding another game mode isn't going to solve anything. They're doing right by their players by allowing them custom servers so the game can be played differently. Their line in the sand is: either you're playing the game they intended or you're not playing on ranked servers. I think that's fair, because they have a right to say "this is what RO2 is", more than we do.
I think the demand that they do something about "right now" is dead, and here's why. They've said they won't ever gut the unlock system as a primary game mode. They've said they won't take things like lockdown out of the game. Their idea of realism is clearly at odds with what a lot of realism and historical accuracy fans want.
They're giving people the option to at least play the game the way they want, and I don't think they get nearly enough credit for it. Today's patch is already a big step toward satisfying A LOT of people who didn't like what they were seeing.
For one, class limits by and large are dictated by the map, not the server admins. Two, they're working on it, obviously, and today shows it's not a "six months from now" kind of thing. And three, as I said above, RO2 already has an absurd amount of things that can be tweaked. Be honest, have you set up an RO2 server? Because I have, and there's more **** to tweak than you can shake a stick at. If it's not full control for you yet, it's still an amazing amount of configuration and is just getting better. I sense a lack of appreciation for that from you.
Your own posts point out that what people's definition of "realism" is varies. TWI certainly didn't get it "right." Some people will **** a brick if they ever get shot with an MKB. That's part and parcel of the whole unlock system. Whose version of realism is right?
The idea that they can still make a one-mode-fits-all-for-realism is blindly hopeful, I think. I'm not saying they shouldn't try....but I think trying to fight the proliferation of game modes and server types by adding another game mode isn't going to solve anything. They're doing right by their players by allowing them custom servers so the game can be played differently. Their line in the sand is: either you're playing the game they intended or you're not playing on ranked servers. I think that's fair, because they have a right to say "this is what RO2 is", more than we do.
Last edited:
I think it's not so much a view what's realistic as it is deliberately making some things unrealistic. It's because of the whole "wider audience" thing (and I still don't think it has worked)
And yes, what has been added certainly is a step in the right direction. However, it's not enough yet.
Sure it's good, but you can't deny that there is still room for improvement. They could for example allow admins to override the class limits on whatever maps they choose, and allow specific unlocks to be commonly available. Also, unlock limiting shouldn't be just for classes, but also different for both sides. Yes to drums, no to MP-40/IIs, etc.
I think TWI is fully capable of thinking up a good, properly historical mode. Getting class limits right, getting the equipment right etc. really isn't rocket science. That stuff easily could be decided on without disappointing people.
Sure, there are other issues like movement and sway, but that really isn't related to this topic. But I think that as professional game developers, they should be able to be reasonable enough about it.
RO2 is what the community wants it to be. I personally think TWI was just flat out wrong with many of their decisions.
They definitely made some false promises before release that made lots of people buy the game - I think that it means they kinda "owe" us some more realism.
I'm sure that those who don't want the progression system don't really care about whether the server they're playing on is ranked or not. What they want is to enjoy RO2 without unlocks and with proper historical accuracy.
Man, I was knackered when I wrote this. I've fixed and clarified some bits now.
Last edited: