What would you want to do with the one givin the idea about a rank up system?
- Thread starter Nordlander
- Start date
I think it's one of the dumbest ideas I've seen in this game.
First, it artificially increases the skill-gap. Not only is the PLAYER better at the game by virtue of knowing the maps and being familiar with the game interface, but the AVATAR is a "better" soldier. Reloading faster, sprinting farther, going to iron sights faster, etc., etc. The game is difficult enough as it is for newbies, but to include THAT only makes it more difficult for them.
Moreover, it fundamentally undermines what was, for me at least, one of the best things about RO:Ost -- the fact that the game does not "get in the way" of player skill. In RO:Ost if someone beat you, it was because they had better positioning, better reflexes, better knowledge of the map, or better luck. Minus the last one, all that can be lumped together as "player skill." Good players were good because THEY played the game well.
In RO:Ost, your bullet went where the barrel pointed. You didn't have artificial "crosshair spread" or any of the kind of stuff you saw back in the Battlefield series or whathaveyou. To me, that's the game removing layers of abstraction to make player input the key determining factor in success. There was weapon sway and recoil, yes, but the PLAYER had to account for that and, if the player could do so, the player was rewarded with success. Your successes and failures were your own, not the game's (usually, anyway).
By imposing this goofy "skillpoint" system, the game ADDS layers of abstraction and reduces the impact of player skill. Now, if you kill someone, maybe it's because you're a legitimately better player....but maybe it's because you have an artificially improved speed-to-iron-sights factor working in your favor. And no, the fact that you maxed out your stats is NOT indicative of your skill. As we've seen, that can be done with bots. Moreover, you might actually be a WORSE player than the player you beat to the draw, but because you've got that extra advantage that the GAME imposed, your skill deficiency is masked and the other player's greater skill is upended.
That's flat-out unacceptable.
Some here will argue that a 20% decrease in recoil or a 20% increase in iron-sight speed or a 20% increase in sprint speed or whatever isn't "that big a deal."
Bulls**t.
Try wiping your profile, go back to playing as a "newb" and try telling me it doesn't make a difference. And then I'll say "Bulls**t" again AND rightly call you a liar.
For those who still remain unconvinced, I'm gonna bet you weren't around for RO:Ost when the old hitbox change took effect. I don't know about anyone else, but back when I first got into RO:Ost, I thought I was a boltie GOD. Nothing could stop me, and I could pick guys off with ease. My favorite was to find a position on the fort walls in Kaukasus and plink away at silly assault troopers as they desperately ran to cover. They stood no chance and fell before my wrath....until the hitboxes shrank. And you know, they may only have shrank about, oh, 20% or so, but BOY did it make a difference. As soon as that changed, my "Boltie God" status pretty much went in the can. I improved my OWN skill over time, but it made it clear to me that what was giving me the edge was an artificial game mechanic and NOT my own skill. The same holds true with this poorly conceived skillpoint system.
Go ahead and have levels and ranks. Go ahead and let people unlock new skins and doofy "equipment" like a "trigger guard" that doesn't do a damn thing. If folks want to treadmill their way through the game, that's fine. Me, I used to play for the love of playing. But that love is strongly diminished when my own ability can be trumped by someone else's game-awarded skill-crutch.
First, it artificially increases the skill-gap. Not only is the PLAYER better at the game by virtue of knowing the maps and being familiar with the game interface, but the AVATAR is a "better" soldier. Reloading faster, sprinting farther, going to iron sights faster, etc., etc. The game is difficult enough as it is for newbies, but to include THAT only makes it more difficult for them.
Moreover, it fundamentally undermines what was, for me at least, one of the best things about RO:Ost -- the fact that the game does not "get in the way" of player skill. In RO:Ost if someone beat you, it was because they had better positioning, better reflexes, better knowledge of the map, or better luck. Minus the last one, all that can be lumped together as "player skill." Good players were good because THEY played the game well.
In RO:Ost, your bullet went where the barrel pointed. You didn't have artificial "crosshair spread" or any of the kind of stuff you saw back in the Battlefield series or whathaveyou. To me, that's the game removing layers of abstraction to make player input the key determining factor in success. There was weapon sway and recoil, yes, but the PLAYER had to account for that and, if the player could do so, the player was rewarded with success. Your successes and failures were your own, not the game's (usually, anyway).
By imposing this goofy "skillpoint" system, the game ADDS layers of abstraction and reduces the impact of player skill. Now, if you kill someone, maybe it's because you're a legitimately better player....but maybe it's because you have an artificially improved speed-to-iron-sights factor working in your favor. And no, the fact that you maxed out your stats is NOT indicative of your skill. As we've seen, that can be done with bots. Moreover, you might actually be a WORSE player than the player you beat to the draw, but because you've got that extra advantage that the GAME imposed, your skill deficiency is masked and the other player's greater skill is upended.
That's flat-out unacceptable.
Some here will argue that a 20% decrease in recoil or a 20% increase in iron-sight speed or a 20% increase in sprint speed or whatever isn't "that big a deal."
Bulls**t.
Try wiping your profile, go back to playing as a "newb" and try telling me it doesn't make a difference. And then I'll say "Bulls**t" again AND rightly call you a liar.
For those who still remain unconvinced, I'm gonna bet you weren't around for RO:Ost when the old hitbox change took effect. I don't know about anyone else, but back when I first got into RO:Ost, I thought I was a boltie GOD. Nothing could stop me, and I could pick guys off with ease. My favorite was to find a position on the fort walls in Kaukasus and plink away at silly assault troopers as they desperately ran to cover. They stood no chance and fell before my wrath....until the hitboxes shrank. And you know, they may only have shrank about, oh, 20% or so, but BOY did it make a difference. As soon as that changed, my "Boltie God" status pretty much went in the can. I improved my OWN skill over time, but it made it clear to me that what was giving me the edge was an artificial game mechanic and NOT my own skill. The same holds true with this poorly conceived skillpoint system.
Go ahead and have levels and ranks. Go ahead and let people unlock new skins and doofy "equipment" like a "trigger guard" that doesn't do a damn thing. If folks want to treadmill their way through the game, that's fine. Me, I used to play for the love of playing. But that love is strongly diminished when my own ability can be trumped by someone else's game-awarded skill-crutch.
Leveling up and unlocks have no place in a realistic fps. Everyone should have access to the same weapons and equipment.
I put slaughter, but my only reasoning is that it has a significant advantage in being a higher level as opposed to a new one. Especially since you can't interrupt a reload in say, bolt actions, and have to sit through the entire animation it is eased by being a higher level which makes it go faster. Where as a new player gets to sit for a much longer time.
If it was meerly visually based, and there was no benefit to being a higher level other then looking different would be fantastic and level it based on skill and knowledge of the game as opposed to being higher level.
Personally and this is just my thinking, everyone should have the exact same stats (buff the base level up to say 75% of the current system, so make everyone a level 5 Highly Decorated off the bat with level 40 weapons) and have the unlocks make your character look different if you so choose, as I like having my character look clean and trim but meh that's just me.
One thing I do want gone... is this talking system. Ya it adds immersion when your guy asks the man next to him if he is ok, or if he is wounded, but they serve to give you away when you are trying to be stealthy, like when your guy screams out "He is wounded!" when you are trying to sneak up on someone, and since it doesn't happen the same time on the enemies end you have no idea if your guy just screamed and gave you away or not.
Maybe make it tooglable... like say in the mutators... same with lockdown timer being removed in mutators... PLEASE.
If it was meerly visually based, and there was no benefit to being a higher level other then looking different would be fantastic and level it based on skill and knowledge of the game as opposed to being higher level.
Personally and this is just my thinking, everyone should have the exact same stats (buff the base level up to say 75% of the current system, so make everyone a level 5 Highly Decorated off the bat with level 40 weapons) and have the unlocks make your character look different if you so choose, as I like having my character look clean and trim but meh that's just me.
One thing I do want gone... is this talking system. Ya it adds immersion when your guy asks the man next to him if he is ok, or if he is wounded, but they serve to give you away when you are trying to be stealthy, like when your guy screams out "He is wounded!" when you are trying to sneak up on someone, and since it doesn't happen the same time on the enemies end you have no idea if your guy just screamed and gave you away or not.
Maybe make it tooglable... like say in the mutators... same with lockdown timer being removed in mutators... PLEASE.
The ranking system itself may be a good idea since you can see the diffrence between experienced players and new players. Unfortunately, high rank doesnt neccessary mean higher skills. It only means that this particular player have played the game quite a lot. A issue with the fact that the players get older is that everyone will soon or enough be a Hero.
What I do not like in any sense, however, is the weaponunlocks you gain along with the skillpoints and perks. That bullpoo imo.
What I do not like in any sense, however, is the weaponunlocks you gain along with the skillpoints and perks. That bullpoo imo.
I am in two minds about this, I have always hated levelling systems in games, it can make it very difficult for new players to get into an established game,you only have to look at the battlefield series for evidence of this, if you enter that game after it has been out for around 6 months you don't have any chance what so ever.
Now I see here people saying the levelling system is not realistic, where as in actual fact for the most part it is, I am an ex soldier, and I know from experience in real life, that the longer you use a weapon the more proficient you become with it, you are able to reload faster, use it better, you zero it in, you effectively learn the weapon, so over time and usage you will become better than it.
A soldier does gain experience in combat, he does become better or he becomes dead, it is that straight forward, when new recruits are shipped to the front line as reinforcements they go up against battle hardened troops
And lets face it, it is not exactly hard to increase your stats in this game, even a new player will get kills and score cap points, yes they are disadvantaged at the start, but it is not that major, and hey don't run and gun and you will get through.
Some of the unlocks are rather pointless, but some are useful and reflect how a soldier would act, for example a rifleman in real life is not issued a pistol/sidearm, but a soldier will pillage one from a dead enemy or comrade and keep hold of it, so getting a pistol say at veteran would reflect the normal actions of an experienced soldier.
Other unlocks are somewhat haphazard, and made worse by not being detachable, like the bayonet, in real life you are issued a bayonet with your weapon, it is detachable because it decreases your accuracy when firing, mainly due to the weight of the bayonet making it harder to hold the tip of your barrel completely still when firing, you would only attach the bayonet when you were about to charge in and end up in close quarter combat, for normal combat you wouldn't use it at all.
It seems to me that the actual progression with a weapon does in some ways reflect the reality of combat and the experience gained by those that survive it, where as other parts were thrown in to help match games like CoD, battlefield etc.
personally I would like changes to the system, not the total removal of them, he weapon unlocks should be made available to everyone, so that all have the same opportunity in the game, where as the progression and improvement of weapon handling should remain as this reflects real life progression. What I think would make it far more interesting though, would be that you progressed as normal in the game (minus the unlocks for weapons) but if during a round you are killed and respawned, you only respawn as a level 1 rifleman or assault to reflect you are a raw recruit reinforcement, if you are a SL or commander that role gets passed on to the highest ranking survivor on the battlefield, again it reflects real life, if an officer dies then the next senior rank takes over, you don't magically get a new CO dropped in during a battle
This would help balance the game for new players, and also make people much more wary of dying and losing their equipment, it also stops the build up of too many over powered weapons, there will only be for example a couple of MKB's per round, rather than their ending up loads from people dying and others picking them up, then a player being respanwned with a new one
Now I see here people saying the levelling system is not realistic, where as in actual fact for the most part it is, I am an ex soldier, and I know from experience in real life, that the longer you use a weapon the more proficient you become with it, you are able to reload faster, use it better, you zero it in, you effectively learn the weapon, so over time and usage you will become better than it.
A soldier does gain experience in combat, he does become better or he becomes dead, it is that straight forward, when new recruits are shipped to the front line as reinforcements they go up against battle hardened troops
And lets face it, it is not exactly hard to increase your stats in this game, even a new player will get kills and score cap points, yes they are disadvantaged at the start, but it is not that major, and hey don't run and gun and you will get through.
Some of the unlocks are rather pointless, but some are useful and reflect how a soldier would act, for example a rifleman in real life is not issued a pistol/sidearm, but a soldier will pillage one from a dead enemy or comrade and keep hold of it, so getting a pistol say at veteran would reflect the normal actions of an experienced soldier.
Other unlocks are somewhat haphazard, and made worse by not being detachable, like the bayonet, in real life you are issued a bayonet with your weapon, it is detachable because it decreases your accuracy when firing, mainly due to the weight of the bayonet making it harder to hold the tip of your barrel completely still when firing, you would only attach the bayonet when you were about to charge in and end up in close quarter combat, for normal combat you wouldn't use it at all.
It seems to me that the actual progression with a weapon does in some ways reflect the reality of combat and the experience gained by those that survive it, where as other parts were thrown in to help match games like CoD, battlefield etc.
personally I would like changes to the system, not the total removal of them, he weapon unlocks should be made available to everyone, so that all have the same opportunity in the game, where as the progression and improvement of weapon handling should remain as this reflects real life progression. What I think would make it far more interesting though, would be that you progressed as normal in the game (minus the unlocks for weapons) but if during a round you are killed and respawned, you only respawn as a level 1 rifleman or assault to reflect you are a raw recruit reinforcement, if you are a SL or commander that role gets passed on to the highest ranking survivor on the battlefield, again it reflects real life, if an officer dies then the next senior rank takes over, you don't magically get a new CO dropped in during a battle
This would help balance the game for new players, and also make people much more wary of dying and losing their equipment, it also stops the build up of too many over powered weapons, there will only be for example a couple of MKB's per round, rather than their ending up loads from people dying and others picking them up, then a player being respanwned with a new one
An nm, you did in the other levelling thread. I was interested in hearing people with such radically different opnion.
Aw man, this argument again. Your experience is gone once you have been shot in the face.
Last edited:
I am sorry to rain on your parade, but no. Sprint breaks the animation. No need to thank me.
True - a soldier does gain experience in combat and he do improve his ability. Unfortunately, perks doesnt exist in real life. It's just an aid many arcade games use in order to help the player.
Skillpoints, perks.. has nothing to do with skills at all. It's an aid the game gives you for simply playing it and It's not realistic in any sense no matter if you claim that you've been in the military or not. Skills should be gained from real-life experience by playing the game itself and not by artificial aids the game awards you with for simply playing it.
I appreciate the well-written post, and the perspective of one who has actually "played" this "game" for real. That said, I think you may be missing a few key points.
Your arguments would make perfect sense if this were, say, an RPG that we're playing, with far more abstracted interaction with the game world.
By "abstracted interaction," I mean, for example, that you THE PLAYER do not directly interact with the game world, but rather your avatar does. So, for example, you'd move your mouse to click on the "attack" button, and your avatar would begin attacking a target. The avatar's actual moment-to-moment aim wouldn't be up to you. It'd be up to the avatar. As your avatar/character gains experience, his aim improves.
Note: HIS aim. Not yours. YOUR aim is irrelevant in such a game, because you have no direct control over the game.
However, what we have here is a first person shooter. With the exception of perhaps a sim, FPS games offer the most direct interaction of any of the genres out there. Some games do blend RPG and FPS qualities, such as the Mass Effect series, or Fallout 3 and such. In those games, you do have first person control, but there's a layer of in-game abstraction to represent the "ability" of your avatar to affect the game world. YOU may be a good shot, but if your avatar isn't, you will have a harder time aiming.
That, however, is not what RO2 is supposed to be. If it is, then it was advertised.....poorly. To say the least. Deceptively would be a better word, actually.
Other FPS games don't even go as far as RO2 does with its abstraction. The Battlefield series does provide you with unlocks, but only in very rare circumstances are those unlocks things that make the avatar itself perform all that much better. you don't, for example, get faster reloads, faster iron-sight time, etc. You might get additional ammo as an optional perk, but you select those perks. One thing that absolutely DOES NOT HAPPEN, though, is any improvement to your aim.
All of that is a matter for the PLAYER to control. This is why the abstraction of "gaining skill" in the game makes no sense to me. In one sense -- the RPG sense -- it's logical that your "character" would become more experienced and improve.
But in a first person shooter, the entity improving is YOU, the player. You learn to pick targets out faster and more reliably. You learn the layout of the maps. You learn which weapons suit you style of play best, and how to draw a bead on a target faster. All of that is YOU and YOUR skill improving. NOT your avatar.
RO, prior to RO2, was all about the PLAYER'S ability. It was hard, yes, but it was rewarding because by playing longer YOU improved your own abilities to play the game. Your avatar was just the tool you used to manipulate the world, and everyone was given the same set of tools. Thus, what separated players was the skill of the PLAYERS, not the skill of their avatars.
That is why the skillpoint system has no place in this game. Also, with respect to unlocks, while it would "sort of" make sense that a veteran soldier would pick up a weapon in the field.....you can already do this in the game. When someone gets shot, you can pick up their pistol, their rifle, whatever. So, in that sense, I think the "realistic" element of this is a wash. Same is true of the other unlockable weapons. They really ought not be included. Let them just be stock weapons based on the map design. Eg., there are X number of riflemen, Y number of assaults, and assaults can pick an MP-40 or a StG-44. Whatever. But there are only Y slots available.
Now, the simplest solution to all of these issues would be to make these matters a server-side option. Want the unlocks in the game? Great! Play on a server that uses 'em. Hate the unlocks and skillpoints? No problem! There's a mutator for that. I still think unlocks are idiotic and poorly executed in the game, but there's no reason that people can't have the OPTION to include them. What I object to is the fact that, right now, there is no option. I'd prefer that they be gone altogether, so I don't have to chance it that people overwhelmingly love their unlocks and skillpoints, but it's a better scenario than what we have now. And I suppose that if an RO3 is ever made, I can always just do a little research and find out if another such unlock/skillpoint system is added -- and make my purchasing decision accordingly.
Still hate it always will, and to Kant's point, I will blow your mind, since if you do interrupt the reload for any reason it takes away any ammo you actually loaded, so if you are reloading a sniper rifle and sprint to take cover, you get to sit there through the entire reload once more.
And as I also said, it is eased greatly when you are much higher level, a new players has to sit through, what 6 seconds of reloading, I hit reload and my character single loads all 5 rounds in a second. This is terrible game balance, again give us the mutator tools so we can fix this ourselves.
And as I also said, it is eased greatly when you are much higher level, a new players has to sit through, what 6 seconds of reloading, I hit reload and my character single loads all 5 rounds in a second. This is terrible game balance, again give us the mutator tools so we can fix this ourselves.
