We need search and destroy gameplay Tripwire!

  • Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

10-78 BusterKing

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 26, 2006
468
108
0
Ontario, Canada
www.10-78.com
Many of you are so negative. Learn to open your minds.

It is always good to have more choices if the choices are made properly. I'm sure that Tripwire would be quite capable of making a very enjoyable search and destroy gameplay. If you don't like it, then don't join those servers. Very simple, isn't it?
 

Deathsai

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 24, 2005
845
0
0
10-78 BusterKing said:
Many of you are so negative. Learn to open your minds.

It is always good to have more choices if the choices are made properly. I'm sure that Tripwire would be quite capable of making a very enjoyable search and destroy gameplay. If you don't like it, then don't join those servers. Very simple, isn't it?

Just like the people who wanted "arcade" servers with things like crosshairs enabled?
 

Oldih

Glorious IS-2 Comrade
Nov 22, 2005
3,414
412
0
Finland
Many of you are so negative. Learn to open your minds.

It is always good to have more choices if the choices are made properly. I'm sure that Tripwire would be quite capable of making a very enjoyable search and destroy gameplay. If you don't like it, then don't join those servers. Very simple, isn't it?

Yes, it is not hard to open your mind, but how about thinking this: (no offense)

1. RO is based on WWII battles, smaller-or-larger scaled, from battalion stuff into regimental stuff (simulation).

2. IMHO, S&D, the way you want it, would work only in some small maps. It is not bad idea but considering RO
 

BoltActionJackson

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 20, 2006
173
0
0
10-78 BusterKing said:
Many of you are so negative. Learn to open your minds.

It is always good to have more choices if the choices are made properly. I'm sure that Tripwire would be quite capable of making a very enjoyable search and destroy gameplay. If you don't like it, then don't join those servers. Very simple, isn't it?
So because people think that a no respawn system for RO is a bad idea, they are negative and close minded? Give me a break. I don't think anyone has a problem with S&D gameplay. It's more your suggestion of a no respawn being more realistic, which it is not. Also, speaking for myself, I have no problem with servers having that type of game setup if that's their preference. What I am saying is that is something for the modders out there to do. TW can spend their time improving the core of RO and adding new content. Some that new content may even be S&D maps with multiple targets and respawning.:D
 

10-78 BusterKing

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 26, 2006
468
108
0
Ontario, Canada
www.10-78.com
I've been gaming for many years and I am pretty good at evaluating games.

All I am saying is this game as a lot of potential. But if it sticks to only this type of gameplay it is doomed to only attrack a few. If Tripwire is happy with this, then fine. If they want more people to buy their product now and in the future then they must expand in some areas and search and destroy would be one of them.

I know that for myself, I am already getting tired of all that respawning. I like it when I have ONE life per round, it then means something to me to be able to survive the round and accomplish the mission.

It's up to TW to decide what direction they want to take. This is no longer just a mod, it is a stand alone game which should include more options in my opinion.
 

Deathsai

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 24, 2005
845
0
0
10-78 BusterKing said:
I've been gaming for many years and I am pretty good at evaluating games.

All I am saying is this game as a lot of potential. But if it sticks to only this type of gameplay it is doomed to only attrack a few. If Tripwire is happy with this, then fine. If they want more people to buy their product now and in the future then they must expand in some areas and search and destroy would be one of them.

I know that for myself, I am already getting tired of all that respawning. I like it when I have ONE life per round, it then means something to me to be able to survive the round and accomplish the mission.

It's up to TW to decide what direction they want to take. This is no longer just a mod, it is a stand alone game which should include more options in my opinion.

Like optional crosshairs and equally unrealistic features! :rolleyes:

Tripwire has forever said that they don't make a game for the many.
 

Ghad

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
1,057
6
0
Bergen, Norway
www.battlefield.no
Im going to give you some proof that RO doesnt NEED S&D gamemodes:

BF1942
Forgotten Hope
Desert Combat
Battlefield Vietnam
Point of Existence
Battlefield 2
Day of Defeat

It isnt like S&D is the only gamemode that has a large crowd you know. Huge amounts of people dont like sitting around looking at some campers.

S&D is squad-level combat, respawning is platoon-size upwards to company-size combat.
 

Buzz_Litebeer

FNG / Fresh Meat
Dec 15, 2005
76
0
0
Why dont people just use common sense here.

You have all the elements that would allow you to make search and destroy.

You could have it than when the map comes up, that there would be 3 rounds, best 2 out of 3 win.

Ok? Sounds good right?

Well, then you take the current code and you give the game some ability to halt respawning. After the first spawn (could even have 2 or 3 spawns) and do this by just altering the amount of re-enforcements.

Then, have objectives to destroy on the map (similar to rackowice) and if your team dies 3 spawns in a row or so (dpeending on players and reinforcements) then you cant defend and the other team can take the objectives or all your teammates die doing the same thing. Then give a point, but dont award a round. just reset the objectives, set the counter back higher, and start over.

At the end of the 15 minutes of a regular RO round, the game would stop, and give a point to whoever won the most rounds.

there you go, and all done with respawn and within current gametype restrictions.
 

Deathsai

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 24, 2005
845
0
0
10-78 BusterKing said:
That's the second time you mentioned crosshairs? I don't recall ever asking for that so stop making comments that don't relate to the subject.

:rolleyes:

I wasn't mentioning crosshairs, I was mentioning your use of the word "optional."


Buzz_Litebeer said:
Why dont people just use common sense here.

You have all the elements that would allow you to make search and destroy.

You could have it than when the map comes up, that there would be 3 rounds, best 2 out of 3 win.

Ok? Sounds good right?

Well, then you take the current code and you give the game some ability to halt respawning. After the first spawn (could even have 2 or 3 spawns) and do this by just altering the amount of re-enforcements.

Then, have objectives to destroy on the map (similar to rackowice) and if your team dies 3 spawns in a row or so (dpeending on players and reinforcements) then you cant defend and the other team can take the objectives or all your teammates die doing the same thing. Then give a point, but dont award a round. just reset the objectives, set the counter back higher, and start over.

At the end of the 15 minutes of a regular RO round, the game would stop, and give a point to whoever won the most rounds.

there you go, and all done with respawn and within current gametype restrictions.
Go make a mutator when the SDK is released, then. I don't think it is worth Tripwire wasting their time on.
 

Rrralphster

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 4, 2006
1,411
106
0
49
Nederland
That's not proof at all (Post #27 by Ghad). A lot of people I know don't play those games because there is no roundbased play. Respawning, as it is in most of those games, invites people to play run 'n gun style play. Roundbased tries to slow things down a bit because you can only die once per round. Makes you play a more tactical game instead of "I'm Respawning Rambo who doesn't give a flying **** if I die". In respawning games the party that kills someone doesn't have an advantage because of the kill or rather a quick respawn. In roundbased you do, one enemy less to kill.

Roundbased games are also a lot more personal and social. You have time to chat. Have a laugh. Reflect on what went wrong (or right). Discuss tactics for the next round. After you die you can get a drink, go to the toilet etc.
Most
respawning games, like the BF:series are just too frantic for the people who like roundbased.

Roundbased and S&D fans that play RO are attracted to the realism features. They just feel that just respawning/conquest type gameplay can get boring, just like the people who like respawning/conquest games might think roundbased can get boring. Well... with more options you get more to choose from.

I also read someones post about the developers know how to create a larger fanbase. There is a kind of logic I don't see. I don't see thousands of players, not even after the availlabilty of the mod for such a long time.
More gametypes, extra features (no I don't mean a change in features like altering ballistics, adding a crosshair, or unlimited snipers, just extra/more gameplay) will definately pull more people to this game.
And its the people who refuse to see the strength of that are indeed close minded or maybe the word conservative rings a bell...
 

Ghad

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
1,057
6
0
Bergen, Norway
www.battlefield.no
Have you tried playing clanwars in RO?

The nature of the gametype means that a kill can ruin a whole attack for your team an put you at a serious disadvantage, so the game slows down considerably.

If RO is your idea of run and gun, i dont know what you would say about dod:s or cod2
 

10-78 BusterKing

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 26, 2006
468
108
0
Ontario, Canada
www.10-78.com
Rrralphster said:
That's not proof at all (Post #27 by Ghad). A lot of people I know don't play those games because there is no roundbased play. Respawning, as it is in most of those games, invites people to play run 'n gun style play. Roundbased tries to slow things down a bit because you can only die once per round. Makes you play a more tactical game instead of "I'm Respawning Rambo who doesn't give a flying **** if I die". In respawning games the party that kills someone doesn't have an advantage because of the kill or rather a quick respawn. In roundbased you do, one enemy less to kill.

Roundbased games are also a lot more personal and social. You have time to chat. Have a laugh. Reflect on what went wrong (or right). Discuss tactics for the next round. After you die you can get a drink, go to the toilet etc.
Most
respawning games, like the BF:series are just too frantic for the people who like roundbased.

Roundbased and S&D fans that play RO are attracted to the realism features. They just feel that just respawning/conquest type gameplay can get boring, just like the people who like respawning/conquest games might think roundbased can get boring. Well... with more options you get more to choose from.

I also read someones post about the developers know how to create a larger fanbase. There is a kind of logic I don't see. I don't see thousands of players, not even after the availlabilty of the mod for such a long time.
More gametypes, extra features (no I don't mean a change in features like altering ballistics, adding a crosshair, or unlimited snipers, just extra/more gameplay) will definately pull more people to this game.
And its the people who refuse to see the strength of that are indeed close minded or maybe the word conservative rings a bell...


Very well said and explained.

It's exactly how I feel.
 

Rrralphster

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 4, 2006
1,411
106
0
49
Nederland
Ghad said:
Have you tried playing clanwars in RO?

The nature of the gametype means that a kill can ruin a whole attack for your team an put you at a serious disadvantage, so the game slows down considerably.

If RO is your idea of run and gun, i dont know what you would say about dod:s or cod2

I was comparing with the games from your list, those are run 'n gun. Saying RO is r un 'n gun is rediculous because of all the realism features.
But respawning invites people to be careless and invites to play run 'n gun in the sense that you don't care about getting killed.
 

Ghad

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
1,057
6
0
Bergen, Norway
www.battlefield.no
Forgotten Hope is not at all a run and gun game, its kind of similar to ro really, im fan of both games (and of bf1942, but i like it for its arcade values, completely different ball park)

Anyway, i dont really think Tripwire needs to do anything else than release the SDK.

It is just minor modding / mutating along with custom mapping that is needed for S&D, so the part of the community that wants it should feel free. Please take a look at the thread about gametypes in RO, i dont think that many people have read it:
http://www.redorchestragame.com/forum/showthread.php?t=616

(A moderator should merge this thread with that one, btw)

After all, there was a competition mod in use for BF1942, so why not make one for ro?
 

UK-SUBS

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 14, 2006
31
0
0
www.b-v-a.co.uk
There would be nothing wrong with adding more gametypes,whether S&D or something new.Keeps long term interest and attracts more people.

You don't lose realism just because of differnt gametypes.As someone said this game is commercial,limiting itself too much isn't that good for buisness.

Some posts here just come across as "angry kids,cause someone else is playing "their" game".

______________
 

BoltActionJackson

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 20, 2006
173
0
0
^^^(Rrralphster and Busterking) Yeah, and I could explain the exact opposite. I have introduced many people to CS, DOD, and ET. Most of those people still love to play DOD and ET but are turned off by CS because they don't feel like watching other people play for minutes at a time. So, it goes both ways. As far as using common sense, how about this; If you want a short round based game with no respawns go play CS. If you want a game that is not meant to be played that way to have these options wait for a mod! Seems pretty damn simple to me. Again, these types of things may be added in the future but I'm sure it is no priority. Get over it.
 

10-78 BusterKing

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 26, 2006
468
108
0
Ontario, Canada
www.10-78.com
I don't agree that we have to rely on mods for search and destroy.

I want it done by the game makers themselves and done right. The idea of just turning off the reinforcement will NOT work.

We need objectives on maps, bombs that can be planted with timers and be able to diffuse them.

Like I have said before, TW has great devs and they can make this work properly and beat any other games out there that has it.

I hope that TW seriously considers my request.
 

Rrralphster

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 4, 2006
1,411
106
0
49
Nederland
BoltActionJackson said:
^^^(Rrralphster and Busterking) Yeah, and I could explain the exact opposite. I have introduced many people to CS, DOD, and ET. Most of those people still love to play DOD and ET but are turned off by CS because they don't feel like watching other people play for minutes at a time. So, it goes both ways. As far as using common sense, how about this; If you want a short round based game with no respawns go play CS. If you want a game that is not meant to be played that way to have these options wait for a mod! Seems pretty damn simple to me. Again, these types of things may be added in the future but I'm sure it is no priority. Get over it.

Not another "Go play CS"... if I wanted to play CS I would but I never will... Common sense would be to say play RO, wait for maps designed for roundbased/S&D or any other ADDITION.
Some people are just blind, they don't see the words "EXTRA and MORE or OPTIONS and CHOICE".
 

BoltActionJackson

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 20, 2006
173
0
0
UK-SUBS said:
Some posts here just come across as "angry kids,cause someone else is playing "their" game".

Maybe you should read the entire thread. It seems to me that there are "angry kids" who are upset because they don't have a CS mode in a game that isn't meant to be that way. It wasn't made out to be a maybe in the future issue either. The OP says the game is already boring to him the way it is and says he won't be playing much longer with out it? Well, a logical grown man would realize maybe this game isn't for him. An angry kid would come one and threaten to stop playing and allude that RO will be a failure, or not attract enough players without it! What some of us are doing is being logical. It seems to me that most of those who bought RO for what it is are very happy with it. Those people, I'm pretty sure, would like for TW to focus on fixing the technical issues some are having and fixing bugs before worrying about modifying the gameplay. How that makes them angry kids I have no idea. Also, I can bet most people will eventually want new game types and would rather see something fresh and new than just a WWII CS rip off. Of course I'm sure you think the 3-4 posters in this thread speak for the majority of RO players?