Smoke is more important than the 1.5 multiplyer. You can get more men in the cap zone with a couple of smoke grenades.
Upvote
0
Rewarding death
- Thread starter Letum
- Start date
I think what is complicated is the way I explained it, not really the idea. I assumed this feature would be employed mainly by new spawns moving up to resupply the front line (since most ammo caches are between the spawn area and whatever the front line is) rather than members of the front line moving back and returning (it is ridiculous to ask someone to go back for you--get it your own damn self!).
On the other hand, as it applies to squad leaders and smoke, not to mention explosive grenades, the more I think about it I am not sure I like this idea so much myself. Too much smoke is a bad thing, imo, and so is nade spamming (it's not too hard as it is, but at least it isn't bad), and the thought of an even easier way to keep the supply of grenades refreshed makes me shudder.
Upvote
0
It is the maps not the game that reward death.
Take for instance narva, a infantry death leads to a long walk, or a Tiger Tank death leads to only 3 left.
The issue is not the mechanics but this typical urban drivel of respawns being close for a quick combat, fast action and lots of deaths.
A map like narva and perhaps even the original version of Tula, and perhaps even Tripwires Rakowice and Bondarevo. Death is a penalty not a easy thing to do.
I just love how we have people that say they want closer spawns cause the running is tedious on one hand and the next they want to say death to mean something.
You guys can't have it both ways, if you want maps that give you a feeling of fear or even a little bit of frustration at dying then play the maps that its a pain in the arse being killed.
Otherwise just play the respawning urban close combat speedfeast. Where death is an advantage.
Take for instance narva, a infantry death leads to a long walk, or a Tiger Tank death leads to only 3 left.
The issue is not the mechanics but this typical urban drivel of respawns being close for a quick combat, fast action and lots of deaths.
A map like narva and perhaps even the original version of Tula, and perhaps even Tripwires Rakowice and Bondarevo. Death is a penalty not a easy thing to do.
I just love how we have people that say they want closer spawns cause the running is tedious on one hand and the next they want to say death to mean something.
You guys can't have it both ways, if you want maps that give you a feeling of fear or even a little bit of frustration at dying then play the maps that its a pain in the arse being killed.
Otherwise just play the respawning urban close combat speedfeast. Where death is an advantage.
Upvote
0
Everyone, even squad leaders can only resupply once. Smoke is a vital piece of a team attack or defense on a lot of maps, and a good squad leader can lay out 2 smokes, resupply and lay out 2 more for a very long line of cover for the infantry to use, or to block the enemy view. Nade spam isnt really a problem, thats what they are made for, and other than finding more on the ground, live players can only supply themselves once for those too I believe.
Just remember, where you see a nade volley (volley not spam hehe), those throwing them are the same throwing range for you to throw your nades back at them.
Upvote
0
A commander who keeps dieing is no use in any cap zone, attacking or defending.
Enjoy throwing your smoke grenades.
Upvote
0
what if you're on the defensive position?
Sometimes your team needs smokes realy bad(basovka as german) and you threw them somwhere else like a minute ago, no ammo caches near you, so the best way should be to run to the enemies yelling "shoot me!!". I find that unrealisticly, I don't think IRL commanders would run to the enemy with no backup hoping to die so his team can get a new commander.
IRL, getting killed in war is bad because an experienced soldier would be replaced by a rookie. In RO, you don't get experience (not ingame at least) and dying means you just go back to start with fully loaded weapons and nades.
I say you get a limited amount of nades, satchels and panzerfausts
Sometimes your team needs smokes realy bad(basovka as german) and you threw them somwhere else like a minute ago, no ammo caches near you, so the best way should be to run to the enemies yelling "shoot me!!". I find that unrealisticly, I don't think IRL commanders would run to the enemy with no backup hoping to die so his team can get a new commander.
IRL, getting killed in war is bad because an experienced soldier would be replaced by a rookie. In RO, you don't get experience (not ingame at least) and dying means you just go back to start with fully loaded weapons and nades.
I say you get a limited amount of nades, satchels and panzerfausts
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Okay, so on the issue of reinforcements: Instead of setting a reinforcement total for a team, how about deciding the issue with INDIVIDUAL spawn limits?
So the Soviets are outnumbering the German on a particular map- so, or instance, give each Soviet 4 or 5 'lives' and each German 3 'lives'...voila! Solves the problem of a few nOObs (or simply wasteful players) eating up reinforcements for the entire team and gives players an extra incentive to stay alive; if you 'die' for the last time, you're in limbo until the next round starts. As in Real Life (tm), good soldiers keep going, and FNG's get wasted. When a player gets better, he'll know it because he'll see he's able to stick around longer and kill the enemy more effectively.
This gives players somewhat of a choice- do they spend a 'life' charging that tank with their last satchel charge, or do they notify others down the road and wait until the beast passes before breaking cover? As it stands now, there is no 'personal' stake in staying alive; as long as the team has reinforcements they can waste as many 'lives' as they want with no personal repercussions, and they can come back in a few seconds 'no questions asked'. If you were only halfway through a battle and had used up three of your four 'lives' might you not be a little more careful with that last one and, if you have to, sell it dearly?
Of course, I have no idea if the RO system can do this sort of thing, but it did occur to me that there are alternate ways of player 'deaths' being handled, perhaps making the game more 'personal'.
So the Soviets are outnumbering the German on a particular map- so, or instance, give each Soviet 4 or 5 'lives' and each German 3 'lives'...voila! Solves the problem of a few nOObs (or simply wasteful players) eating up reinforcements for the entire team and gives players an extra incentive to stay alive; if you 'die' for the last time, you're in limbo until the next round starts. As in Real Life (tm), good soldiers keep going, and FNG's get wasted. When a player gets better, he'll know it because he'll see he's able to stick around longer and kill the enemy more effectively.
This gives players somewhat of a choice- do they spend a 'life' charging that tank with their last satchel charge, or do they notify others down the road and wait until the beast passes before breaking cover? As it stands now, there is no 'personal' stake in staying alive; as long as the team has reinforcements they can waste as many 'lives' as they want with no personal repercussions, and they can come back in a few seconds 'no questions asked'. If you were only halfway through a battle and had used up three of your four 'lives' might you not be a little more careful with that last one and, if you have to, sell it dearly?
Of course, I have no idea if the RO system can do this sort of thing, but it did occur to me that there are alternate ways of player 'deaths' being handled, perhaps making the game more 'personal'.
Upvote
0
Two things on this point.
1.) This is EXACTLY why this is a bad idea for the longevity of the game. The game's got a tough enough learning curve as it is. It doesn't need to be made any harder on the newbies. Imagine joining RO your first day or two and spending 80% of your time sitting on your ass watching other people play the game. Think you'd buy it after a free weekend of this? Those that didn't die instantly, would simply hunker down and plink away with rifles the same way they do now, only moreso. Try to imagine an attack/defend map played with this system. No one would advance.
2.) Sometimes skill's got nothing to do with it. What if you get TKed? Either intentionally or unintentionally? What if you round a corner into someone's grenade? How's that a lack of skill exactly? Lack of skill in being psychic or seeing through walls? What about the commander who is frantically tossing smoke, trying to rally his troops to push ahead for chrissakes, only to be picked off in the process? How is that a lack of skill? Because he can't take on an enemy squad all by his lonesome while his timid teammates hang back? Plus, this would only make some classes even MORE sought after -- IE: the sniper role, given that they'd be able to operate from relative safety. SMGs would be barely used, so who'd be assaulting positions exactly?
I'm not in favor of tweaking any of this. This boils down -- once again -- to the same issue that constantly comes up when people try to invent harsher penalties for dying, or other similar systems that are basically designed to make other people play how they want them to.
Any of you guys ever study psychology? Ever heard of B.F. Skinner? No, not the guy on the Simpsons. Basically, you want to reinforce good behavior (IE: points, other players saying "nice job!"). Punishing people (IE: you must wait out the rest of the round because you died early) will discourage ALL behavior associated with it, possibly to the point where you make people not want to play the game in the first place.
It's easy for folks who are veterans to sit back and say "What? It wouldn't be that bad." But try to think back to when you were a newbie and were CONSTANTLY dying. Now try to imagine you're trying to learn the game and just have some fun and blow off a little steam after work, but you keep getting punished for not knowing how to play. You don't know the map and take a path with less cover. WRONG!! YOU SIT OUT THE ROUND NOW!! DO IT BETTER NEXT TIME!! You rush a position just as a teammate tosses a grenade in. WRONG!!! SIT OUT THE ROUND AND THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU DID, YOUNG MAN!! You accidentally shoot a friendly because you still can't tell the difference between the two sides' models at long range. "ZOMG!! YOU F-ING N00b!! WTF???? GOD, GO GET OFF THE SERVER AND SHOOT YOURSELF IN TEH HED!!! YOO SUX!!"
None of this is conducive to getting people to like your game and stick with it. Just leave the respawn/reinforcement setup as it is now. It's not a problem. It works fine. The players who screw around DO get punished, albeit not directly. The players who suicide just to get to the front take a calculated (I hope) risk of running out team reinforcements in the interests of speed. It's gamey, but it's like democracy in broad terms -- it's a lousy system in an ideal world, but the best system we've got here on planet earth.
Upvote
0
Um whoever says that a single SL in a cap, is better than his smoke giving cover for say 5 of his squaddies to enter said capzone is a total nOOb. Smoke is more important than the SL's SMG.
The Russians on Danzig will always lose, if the SL is incompetent, and does not use his smoke properly.
The Russians on Danzig will always lose, if the SL is incompetent, and does not use his smoke properly.
Upvote
0
BuddyLee said:
I disagree on this one - only cause it really depends on the team you have whether or not you're going to win... especially on Danzig (regardless of smoke usage).
I play a truckload of Danzig and even with pubbies we often win without the use of smokes (thank god for bayos).
Upvote
0
@ViViD 100% agree
if you die to get new smoke nades, you have to walk to your old position. thank you, i think that explains everything.
hm, i had whine today in the leaning-resting-thread and whining in this one.
/irony
what do you think about sweaty hands? isn't it unrealistic that you're never scared in this game?
i suggest a random chance that you accidently drop your gun and your satchels and your faust, but not your bayonet because it's fixed at your belt, when you run a long time (sweaty hands) or an enemy soldier pops up suddenly (scared).
oh, and i noticed that i am sometimes able to shoot the sniper-rifle like an mg42
i think we should remove this gun from the game, cause it's bugggggggggedddddddddddddd
/irony
oh, and i noticed too that it has become trendy to qualify every single "difficult" aspect in the game as a new bug - horrrrrray
if you die to get new smoke nades, you have to walk to your old position. thank you, i think that explains everything.
hm, i had whine today in the leaning-resting-thread and whining in this one.
/irony
what do you think about sweaty hands? isn't it unrealistic that you're never scared in this game?
i suggest a random chance that you accidently drop your gun and your satchels and your faust, but not your bayonet because it's fixed at your belt, when you run a long time (sweaty hands) or an enemy soldier pops up suddenly (scared).
oh, and i noticed that i am sometimes able to shoot the sniper-rifle like an mg42
i think we should remove this gun from the game, cause it's bugggggggggedddddddddddddd
/irony
oh, and i noticed too that it has become trendy to qualify every single "difficult" aspect in the game as a new bug - horrrrrray
Upvote
0
Cracks me up; most of you twats want 'realism' and all that ****...when some smoke fills the air; its the end of the ****ing world, what the ****.
Upvote
0
Perhaps you're right on this, Solo- I wasn't looking at it from that point of view, only from that of (dangerously) assuming that even New Guys (tm) are tuned in to how to act on a cyber-battlefield with regard to cover and movement and such.
I think the EFO campaign rules are even more strict, giving you only ONE life per round; it's certainly even more 'realistic' but I can see where it wouldn't work on a mass basis- certainly not in Noob City.
All in all, it's probably best not to tinker with RO itself- an already excellent product- but perhaps the 'individual life limit' thing could be the subject of a particular mod for use in certain campaigns or on selected servers.
Good on ya for keeping it real.
I think the EFO campaign rules are even more strict, giving you only ONE life per round; it's certainly even more 'realistic' but I can see where it wouldn't work on a mass basis- certainly not in Noob City.
All in all, it's probably best not to tinker with RO itself- an already excellent product- but perhaps the 'individual life limit' thing could be the subject of a particular mod for use in certain campaigns or on selected servers.
Good on ya for keeping it real.
Upvote
0
Yeah, I definitely think it'd be a neat mutator to add to servers (IE: you have a slider that lets you set limited lives for each class or globally), but it's not something that should be in the base game.
That, however, is the true beauty of this game being on the Unreal Engine -- one of if not THE most mod-friendly engines out there. Don't like something about the game? Change it! You can always make a mutator and if it takes off in popularity, great! If not, no biggie.
I could easily see ultra-realism servers with one life per round, or with limited officer corps or whathaveyou. Something like that could work FANTASTICALLY in a realism campaign where you're depicting actual battles -- you could even figure out how many platoons fought in a given battle and set the reinforcements to that number -- including individual classes (which you'd be able to figure out based on average company composition, number of officers, etc.).
I just think that a lot of the suggestions people have aren't really good for the BASE game, but might make cool mods, especially with things like the "fear of death" issue. RO's base game should retain its underlying character while still being appealing to the uninitiated, and not being SO difficult that the folks who'd otherwise become gung-ho realism fans will throw their hands up in the air and say "Look, I like realism, but this just ****s. I never get to PLAY the game because I'm always dead." Or something to that effect.
But mutators? Man, I'd love to see RO grow a much more vibrant mutator community. I think it'd be cool to see people try to put some of these ideas into action and see how they play. That way there'd be options for everyone, and folks could really play in the custom-tailored environment they want.
That, however, is the true beauty of this game being on the Unreal Engine -- one of if not THE most mod-friendly engines out there. Don't like something about the game? Change it!
You can always make a mutator and if it takes off in popularity, great! If not, no biggie.I could easily see ultra-realism servers with one life per round, or with limited officer corps or whathaveyou. Something like that could work FANTASTICALLY in a realism campaign where you're depicting actual battles -- you could even figure out how many platoons fought in a given battle and set the reinforcements to that number -- including individual classes (which you'd be able to figure out based on average company composition, number of officers, etc.).
I just think that a lot of the suggestions people have aren't really good for the BASE game, but might make cool mods, especially with things like the "fear of death" issue. RO's base game should retain its underlying character while still being appealing to the uninitiated, and not being SO difficult that the folks who'd otherwise become gung-ho realism fans will throw their hands up in the air and say "Look, I like realism, but this just ****s. I never get to PLAY the game because I'm always dead." Or something to that effect.
But mutators? Man, I'd love to see RO grow a much more vibrant mutator community. I think it'd be cool to see people try to put some of these ideas into action and see how they play. That way there'd be options for everyone, and folks could really play in the custom-tailored environment they want.
Upvote
0