Because I like tactical games ,but there aren't any good ones.
Will this game be more tactical or run n gun
19 Feb
I m with memeotis. The game will feel run'n'gun with a deep tactical layer coming from the numerous amount of possibility regarding fitting (gun\armor\vehicle) and the sovereignty\planet owning stuff.
It will create a lot of different tactical approach on wich battle you ll choose and how you ll prepare for them.
Then in game, it will be more about knowing how to fight your ennemy and using your resources well than walking carefully, crouching etc..
Wooah, writing in a foreign language while exausted is a pain in the ass O_o took me 5 minutes to wrote that messy answer lol
19 Feb
Hopefully they will reach that "inbetween" point. I like playing tactically, been doing it in Battlefield for years. However I understand that if they want to attract players they're going to need at least some elements of that "run n gun" style that a lot of shooter players are going to be used to. There are plenty of good examples of games that have achieved that so im sure CCP copied a page out of that book :)
19 Feb
we just need to see more footage of up close combat. in all of the videos so far all the players are getting engaged at medium to long rang. also I'm curios to see how that war room in the '09 vid actually functions. a screenshot of some mcc game-play would be nice too.
i don't think ccp put all these interesting methods to enact warfare for it ever to be considered a "run and gun" game. i assume it(player) has the potential to run and gun if they really gear their dropsuit that way, which can blow their minds if they're not ready.
19 Feb
Yeah, CrazyHomelessGuy is right on. A game can be tactical in many different ways. BF3 for instance has tried to achieve this by making players relatively slow at maneuvering (avoiding twitch gameplay) and giving them very low health. This, I think, has made the gameplay a little too cautious and infantry combat kinda boring. Other games like MAG and Brink has tried to achieve this by allowing players different level of health/armor, which is much more tactical, in the sense that players will have to take into account the trade-offs they have because of their size/speed choice.
20 Feb
It would be more run n gun.
you would not act more cautiously than the norm.
As you would(should) be bringing in shiny stuff because you can afford to lose it
Not because you can use it.
20 Feb
lol
highly unlikely = game releases and some of the players who know how, will play it tactically. the ones who don't will learn and start to play better as teams. game is the first PFPS that is clan based. epic win!
unlikely = some play run and done, er gun style, while others play tactically. everyone gets along with their own style. what fun yayyy!!
game is a massive chaotic melange of different styles.
most probably=
game releases. some clans play tactically. most players play it codboi style. the run and gunners, ie the casuals, get crushed. the tactical teams move further and further ahead. thus, high sec becomes kiddy pool, low sec becomes casuals who have 1 ball outta 2 and nul sec becomes clan mode. casuals will try to play in null sec for the bonus of it, get mauled and scream for changes that never come.
but of course this can't happen so
most likely=
clans and teams play it tactically, the casuals and han solos get crushed, the forums become an apocalypse of whining and low and behold... here comes the first nerf! the first of endless nerfs!
that's what i was griping about in the pulse clip video:
if that is how THEY play it, sad for them because in a game like this, teams will ALWAYS outdo the run and gunners, mouse or no mouse.
it all depends on how they design the maps=
if the maps are just face to face codboi garbage, then really, what the devs are trying to do is get players to spend money on gear, log in and go crashing into each other forcing everyone to spend again...
and again... and again.
if the devs design the game to ALLOW for tactical, then it will be played tactically. if they design it so it CAN'T be played tactically, then none of this matters cuz the game is fail already.
peace
B
20 Feb
what the devs are trying to do is get players to spend money on gear, log in and go crashing into each other forcing everyone to spend again...
and again... and again.
That's going to be the cornerstone of the game
Because that fuels the market and keeps the economy from dying a horrible horrible death.
If players don't die a lot Inflation will kick in and that will kill the game dead.
also can I ask what is "playing tactically?"
Total serious question because we have Tactical doctrines in EVE (wolfpack,Zerg, Blob,Swarm, Turtling Outrider, Alpha Rush, Guerrilla Warfare Hit and Run and so on and so on.)
20 Feb
yes but there is a BIG difference in the game play depending on how they design the maps.
if it's sposed to be an "mmo" which they have been sorta promoting, then the maps need to be open, kinda like a planet would be = big open, highs and lows, terrain that mimics real world conditions. this dictates the TEMPO/PACE of the game. devs can design maps to conform to a predetermined MATCH LENGTH and in doing so, that pretty much dictates how the game CAN be played. so within that paradigm, knowing what we know, if the game is just a simple "mag style map" which is basically not open world, but a series of funnels, then we know the devs are MORE interested in sucking as much money out of the game as possible and not the QUALITY of the game and the gameplay itself. If the pacing is designed to be fast simply because both sides are say a football field apart at the beginning of the match, then the entire thing is just a ploy to do as i said: get the players to smash up their gear as fast as possible to reinvest more money to continue to play. that would be bad. like very bad. i've been watching this very same issue in the jagged alliance online beta which is a pretty similar system= gear degrades, levelling, etc. what im seeing right now is that most players are hitting a deadlock, where they have lost too many matches, degraded all their gear and killed their mercs and can't play any more. it's a beta so it's not set in stone, but i think the issue could be almost exactly the same for dust, only hundreds of times worse. the margin of error for a casual solo gamer could be fatally thin and may take a long time to tune correctly during the betas. if not done properly, expect a long howl of agony from the casuals post retail.
if the maps are designed as open world maps, then that ALLOWS for but does not dictate a more tactical gameplay style then run and gun. this is what is missing in all console games. the maps are designed so that matches cannot be played tactically (if you do try to play em that way, the devs will patch em) and most matches end in about 20 minutes or so and it's on to the next. in short, those are arcade maps and if dust is going for arcade gameplay then i really don't know how you would tie a game like eve to an ARCADE pfps like dust. that could be a huge disaster once the pc players get a load of the randoms on the console looooooool. especially when the casuals start to ignore everything but their kd.
"tactical" described here will just cause problems. the closest analogy i can give is basically follow the rules of engagement that most modern day armies use, find people that "know their role and fulfill it" and figure out how to use force multipliers the right way... and go from there. anything more in depth is a ps3 chat room discussion cuz it takes way too much time to type.
peace
B
21 Feb
i dont get how ppl think run an gun cant be tactical
for me run an gun just means the speed of the game not just mindlessly runnin about only shooting aimlessly.
all games can be tactical, and regardless of how fast the dust footage is its gonna be tactical
tactical gameplay doesnt mean it has to be slow
23 Feb
i would be inclined to agree with you except for 2 main factors:
1. we have never seen a game that allows for what im talking about, at least not on console. all the games on the market are designed to be arcade style gameplay. none of em are combat simulators. any game you can name me is designed with small maps (yes i consider mag, mw, cod and bf maps to be small) and doesn't allow for the type of coordination im thinking about. if the dust maps are designed along the same lines then there won't be any difference in game play then what we have going on right now simple because there won't be the option for it.
2. as an example, lets look at battlefield: if every match you play requires you to either buy a new gun or repair your old gun at cost as well as purchasing your own ammo and explosives including heavy support assets or vehicles, which also degrade and need to be replaced... well, let's just say that the first few weeks of the game would be VERY slow paced in comparison to other games on the market. once you factor in the added cost of playing in terms of wear and tear and ammo, i think you'll agree that THAT aspect alone will make most players play more cautiously then they would in other games where there is no consequence for action. i actually look forward to seeing that part play out.
so i guess we gotta wait and see what the fanfest footage looks like next month to see which direction the game is going to go.
peace
B
26 Feb
the current cost in the game WILL make players play more cautiously i can see that and already made mention many times on various places that DUST will probably be very campy for cowardly corps.
Me on the other hand from the moment i saw the speed of the gameplay i smiled because i prefer an aggressive style over turtling, i prefer to have the enemy have as little time to react or organise rather than inch my way up the battlefield altho we can do that if we want and are good at both styles im just glad the movement itself doesnt FORCE u into one style to be successful
example: SOCAMP 4, rushing and fast aggressive tactics were really a high risk and 90% of the teams we played even on offense would sit in bushes when they had to go defuse bombs inching their way up the field and based on many of socamp 4's bushy maps we even found ourselves forced to turtle as well as there was so many bushes for scrubs to just sit and hide in.
PS: why are u obsessed with this repairing ur weapon thing? i really hope they dont add that in the game.....just seems dumb having to repair ur gun. Buy ammo and vehicles and parts is good enough. I get u like complicated games, i do too but it seems ur trying to overcomplicate the outside part of the game and not the actual gameplay....repairing ur weapon is just time consuming and not really adding anything imho u already got a cost for clones, weapons, ammo, vehicles and modules for ur suits and vehicles why add something trivial like weapon repairing to further ramp up costs?
26 Feb
I get where he is going with "repairing" the weapon but it is not really a true combat factor. Sure preventive maintanence is real but repair? Pretty sure I never had to repair my M4 or 60mm Mortar the entire time I was in Afghanistan ;).
Instead, having to replace lost weapons from possibly ditching yours to pick-up a fallen player's seems more realistic. Repairs...not so much.
