Why I think lights with 2 weapon slots are more interesting than lights with 3!

im not bitching about anything you friggin idiot. open your fuckin eyes*. all im saying is that with two weapons you tieing people down to a specific task. how do you not see this? Its a given everyone will take the spinfuson, its perfect for duel and an easy weapon to kill with. that leaves just one other gun...now according to you a person can still do multiple roles...im sayin its too restricting. Theres no way to snipe and rape if you cant take a laser rifle and plasma in addition to the disk launcher. You say "well then go med armor" kinda hard to go med armor with a laser rifle. An i never said only having 2 guns limits what weapons you choose in your loadout. im saying your loadout goes hand in hand with the multiple roles. since you can pick whatever guns you want you can choose whatever roll combo you want. quit sayin im the one whos bitching when you cant understand a simple concept.



*--im guessing you ride the short bus to school

how do you know medium won't get the sniper rifle in T:V. Truth is, we don't know shit, so shut up.

I still hate non-unique names though :\
did they mention that there won't be a registration type of system like in t2?
haven't heard much about it..

One thing I noticed that Ixterra posted is that a capper only needs a disc/chain, when in reality, I run wiht a disc/gren/laser for capping purely because grenades are 10x more useful on most maps for clearing than a disc is. Laser obviously for those at home last minute saves on a cap (if gives away your caproute, but at the cost of saving a cap, I dunno)

Limiting it to two weapons would seriously hinder that versatility in the field. I for one might run with a disc/gren and then your capper would be come useless before his cap route window, or visa/versa on the way.

Both points are valid, and I think play testing would definitely need to be the deciding factor. Is the more constricted 2 weapon loadout benifitial to the fun of the game? Or does it hurt the player more but not giving him as many things to do in the field.

Another thing people keep mentioning, and was the reason for my first post is that Mediums are NOT useless. Stop thinking in a T1 mindset and start thinking for the future. Obviously they won't be useless in T:V (one would hope) and how to keep them from being useless think of them as they are in T2 with some slight modifications.

The idea of restricting the T:V super light to 2 weapon slots does not pidgeonhole people into classes, it only makes them think ahead to what there goals are, much like people were forced to do with the old medium and heavy armors. In T1 and T2, you didn't have to think which armor to get, you already knew which one you HAD to get most of the time, light. They were good for everything, and consequently, the medium saw very little playtime because of it. If you restrict weapon slots to 2, you are not phasing out the light's versatility, you are simply making a stronger case to use a medium. You can now choose to be a fragile, uber agile (super light), or become a more rounded and balanced medium (T1 and T2 light). I see no problem with 2 weapon slots, and in fact I think its a great idea.

All three classes get pretty even use in T2:Classic. Forcing a class to be LESS useful to make people use a specific class seems like the wrong approach. We should allow people the flexibility to use either or. Not require them to use one, in the name of simply making that class used more.

The blaster wasn't a bad spawn weapon, cause if you spawned and NEEDED to use it, typically it was because your base was full of heavies. The blaster was great for bouncing around corners to avoid being mortared and it is quite effective against a heavy close up/with sheilds.. For the role of SURFACING from 10 heavies, the blaster was well suited for spawn gear. Cause that's about the only time you'd REALLY need it. :)

The entire point of the restriction is to force lights to make a decision. You aren't "worthless" with a disc/gl prior to capping. I'm somewhat surprised you argue against 2 weapons by stating the player will be "worthless" without three. I just don't see it, I really don't.

If you want to argue against it, say you LIKE extreme versatility and therefore you like three weapon loadouts.

Nothing more has to be said. It is all implied. You prefer lower unique loadout types in exchange for more generic ones. There is nothing wrong with this; it is after all, one of the hidden assumptions of our first two Tribes games.

I only argue for this because I know the T:V medium will be useful, and therefore can take up the mantle of versatility, while the light can be changed into a super-agile specific role style armor. The only thing necessary to create this change is switching its loadout to a maximum two weapons.

If you don't want the change, say so. Appeals to tradition, appeals to history, and appeals to hyperbole such as "This player will be useless!" are horribly unconvincing. You're right, it does restrict light versatility; fortunately for proponents of 2 weapon loadouts, that's intended!

But I don't think it'll make anyone useless. Anyways, if you want insane maneuverability, I think being fragile isn't enough of a downfall. I think forcing them to make key decisions in equipment choice is a fine repayment for the best speed and flight capabilities in the game.

All three classes get pretty even use in T2:Classic.

No they don't. I've never seen a pub with as many mediums as any other armor type, excluding a few specific indoor centric maps.

And light is ALWAYS the armor class which dominates in numbers. And the same three loadouts are always used with the light.

Your assertion is absurd. Yes, all three are used, but the idea they are used in even numbers or that T2 Classic is a balance utopia where all classes and equipment see even play is simply not true.

Forcing a class to be LESS useful to make people use a specific class seems like the wrong approach. We should allow people the flexibility to use either or. Not require them to use one, in the name of simply making that class used more.

You haven't said why it was a wrong approach. You merely assert that you prefer versatility. This is a fine argument on its own, and I don't see why you embellish it with all this flim-flam about restriction. We're not forcing everone, merely requiring people who want to take the superbly agile superlight to pay for their excess capabilities.

The blaster wasn't a bad spawn weapon, cause if you spawned and NEEDED to use it, typically it was because your base was full of heavies. The blaster was great for bouncing around corners to avoid being mortared and it is quite effective against a heavy close up/with sheilds.. For the role of SURFACING from 10 heavies, the blaster was well suited for spawn gear. Cause that's about the only time you'd REALLY need it. :)

Sufficient game design says, "Everything has a use every once in a while."

Great game design says, "Most things are useful all of the time."

The blaster would be better suited as a weapon useful in all scenarios, instead of in rare spawn scenarios. It should be useful everywhere, instead of becoming a band-aid for a heavy offense balance problem.

The entire point of the restriction is to force lights to make a decision. You aren't "worthless" with a disc/gl prior to capping. I'm somewhat surprised you argue against 2 weapons by stating the player will be "worthless" without three. I just don't see it, I really don't.

If you want to argue against it, say you LIKE extreme versatility and therefore you like three weapon loadouts.

Nothing more has to be said. It is all implied. You prefer lower unique loadout types in exchange for more generic ones. There is nothing wrong with this; it is after all, one of the hidden assumptions of our first two Tribes games.

I only argue for this because I know the T:V medium will be useful, and therefore can take up the mantle of versatility, while the light can be changed into a super-agile specific role style armor. The only thing necessary to create this change is switching its loadout to a maximum two weapons.

If you don't want the change, say so. Appeals to tradition, appeals to history, and appeals to hyperbole such as "This player will be useless!" are horribly unconvincing. You're right, it does restrict light versatility; fortunately for proponents of 2 weapon loadouts, that's intended!

But I don't think it'll make anyone useless. Anyways, if you want insane maneuverability, I think being fragile isn't enough of a downfall. I think forcing them to make key decisions in equipment choice is a fine repayment for the best speed and flight capabilities in the game.

Excellent post.

i see no reason to reinvent the wheel

i don't give a shit if the medium isn't useful, and i'd rather that it remain useless than you go around f'ing with the fun "do anything" gameplay i'm used to.

Tribes is the anti class based game, and I would hate to see that changed. Don't pigeon hole a triber into a particular role, a lot of the fun of tribes was that I could be chasing one minute, capping the next, and might have to do something else right after that. A capper could cap the flag and then become a chaser immediately, for example.

I see 2 weapon slots as overly restrictive, and I just don't like it. There will be too much scavenging for weapons, too much specialization, and i really don't like the idea of turning tribes into a class based shooter.



exactly. too bad debig3 cant grasp this concept.

No they don't. I've never seen a pub with as many mediums as any other armor type, excluding a few specific indoor centric maps.

And light is ALWAYS the armor class which dominates in numbers. And the same three loadouts are always used with the light.



I guess, it depends on the player, I was thinking more in terms of all the roles in a typical Tribes map/match. I think of the roles in T2:C, each class can be used evenly. And I know I certainly switch between all armors pretty evenly. Maybe not EXACTLY, but like I said, it's not a numbers thing, I was thinking in terms of role distribution. And light, med and heavy are pretty balanced in that respect. If not balanced, certainly not drastically ill proportionate. (If that makes sense) :)


You haven't said why it was a wrong approach. You merely assert that you prefer versatility. This is a fine argument on its own, and I don't see why you embellish it with all this flim-flam about restriction. We're not forcing everone, merely requiring people who want to take the superbly agile superlight to pay for their excess capabilities.


I personally like flim-flam.


Sufficient game design says, "Everything has a use every once in a while."

Great game design says, "Most things are useful all of the time."


Some day that'll happen..


The blaster would be better suited as a weapon useful in all scenarios, instead of in rare spawn scenarios. It should be useful everywhere, instead of becoming a band-aid for a heavy offense balance problem.


Of all the weapons, yes the blaster is probably the most useless.. but it's ONE weapon.. so it certainly fits your MOST things useful MOST of the time Great Game Design message.

:)

That might be my FIRST multiquote post.. :o

exactly. too bad debig3 cant grasp this concept.
since you cant seem to figure this out yourself.. dont think of it as light, medium, heavy. instead, super-light, light, heavy. maybe this way you can stop bitching about the light getting screwed.. i really just cant believe how dense you are..

dont think of it as light, medium, heavy. instead, super-light, light, heavy...


did i not just say that 2 friggin pages ago? pay attention.

I'm torn. 2 slots makes good sense.


But then I think of how much I like to have the freedom to do anything as a light, and I remember that, even though the medium was useless in t1....no one every complained.

You never hear "oh wah this game sucked, mediums were worthless" at some level, I am perfectly willing to accept 2 dominant classes + a deploying class.

i dont like this idea. forcing people into specific roles sounds too much like planetside. why should we "force" people to choose a role by limiting his weapons. The thing that makes tribes better than other games like planetside and battefield and games like that is that Tribes doesnt force you to choose specific roles every time you spawn. You wanna be a capper/sniper/ld capper/raper/sniper ect ect, you can, if you wanna force people into specific roles so bad why dont you just have specifoc classes like "sniper class" "capper class" "LD class". I think the option to take whatever 3 weapons you want whenever you want is one of the main reasons the Tribes series is so fun. It doesnt try and tie you down to specific roles. You wanna try and inprove the medium class? great....find something else that makes it unique...dont try to make more people use it by screwing over the light armor. thats just not cool.


your thinking alittle too deeply into it, they arent FORCING them to be a specific role, they are just forcing them to have only the equipment they need instead of what they need/want and back up. When you buy your armor you generally have a idea of what you want to do in mind so in this case you pick what weapons suit your current job best, therefore not necassarilly FORCING you into a role because you would have done it anyway just without the excessive weapons, and as clearly stated it makes the medium a better choice basically "if you dont like it , tough get medium"

Well consider the problem that you aren't getting a nade launcher when you spawn, you're getting a blaster. So often times, you are basically using only 2 weapons anyway. And certain maps (SH obviously) once gens go down, nobody gives a shit.

We don't even know what the roles are yet, so don't complain about being forced into one.

This is pretty shitty logic.

"you don't know if it is going to suck yet, so don't complain that it might"

Look, who really cares if the medium or "heavier light" is useful? There was a role fo rthe medium in both tribes games, it just wasn't pervasive, AND THAT IS FINE. Tinkering with this shit will not lead to better gameplay. Tribes is the ultimate freedom FPS afaic, and restrictions upon my ability to be a battlefield warrior are negative. The point is, i don't want to be "just a capper" if i happen to be making flag runs, I want to be fully equipped to do whatever i need to do at any time. THAT was part of the beauty of Tribes 1, and what sets it apart from other FPS games. Lets say one of these new weapons they introduce becomes a great weapon for a capper to have, maybe it shoots a fucking cloud of smoke or something, and you're a capper, you're stuck with that weapon now, even if you have to change roles midfield. HOw many times does a capper break off the start of his route if the flag has been grabbed?

Look, you're trying to concoct change for the sake of change. Leave the armors as they were, they hav ealways been one of the best parts of this game. Increasing specialization will lead to nothing but strife, disdain, and arguments within th ecommunity. Leaving it at 3 will keep the gameplay we know intact. Tribes has always been a skill based freedom shooter, meaning most of the time you were going to meet someone with the same weapons as you, the same abilities as you, and it was going to be a man to man fight of who is actually better. Now you might ahve a few differences, and that usually was in the third weapon, which allowed the variation and the specialized skill to com ethrough. Restriction will lead to more unbalanced fights where one guy is just not equipped for the fight he is in, or a player is discouraged from venturing into battle because he won't be well equipped to be in the middle of a melee

The entire point of the restriction is to force lights to make a decision. You aren't "worthless" with a disc/gl prior to capping. I'm somewhat surprised you argue against 2 weapons by stating the player will be "worthless" without three. I just don't see it, I really don't.

Okay first off I never said the player would be worthless without three, neither did I argue that point that I never stated. So don't put words in my mouth. Secondly, I stated the player would be useless at certain intervals in the game. HUGE difference from saying the player is worthless without three weapons. What I'm trying to say, and maybe I wasn't clear enough, is that in order for people to play this game, we want them to be occupied or have something to do during (if not the whole map) as much as the map as possible. Limiting a player to two weapons makes their role extremely specific and doesn't allow them to say "duel" on the way to a sniper spot (poor example, but hopefully you're getting my point).

If you want to argue against it, say you LIKE extreme versatility and therefore you like three weapon loadouts.

Again, I never said this. Don't put words in my mouth, neither was I implying it. What I am TRYING to say is we want people to play our game. We want more people in this community and making the light class (the most popular class) a more specific role might seem easier at first glance, be more boring in the long run. I also stated that there's no real way to test this until beta, so the only point I'm trying to make is to not be hasty about a decision or to not keep the book closed.

I only argue for this because I know the T:V medium will be useful, and therefore can take up the mantle of versatility, while the light can be changed into a super-agile specific role style armor. The only thing necessary to create this change is switching its loadout to a maximum two weapons.

Like I said before, I agree that this would define the classes more, and I think it would be very interesting to test out. I also think it has a high probability of succeeding at what you describe. I am hesitant to make the light class that specialized due to the sheer frustration/boredom that could ensue from not having the versatility. I'm basing this hesitation off my experience playing BF1942 and other more "strict" class oriented games. I normally found myself bored waiting for someone to come into my sniper range (because the sniper wasn't worth a shit in close combat) or laying my charge out on the ground and waiting for some bastard to come by and blow them up (but bored out of my skull in the mean time).

This could very well be the result of to much tribes playing. I like being able to accomplish the majority of the goals associated with an armor class with one loadout and never be bored or frustrated to the point where I log off and play something else. That feeling that I get when I play BF1942 and the other strict class games is the feeling I DON'T want new players to tribes to have. That is what I want to prevent. Whether it is accomplished with or without 2 or 3 weapons I could care less. I'm only trying to provide some more insight into the situation. Please take it with a grain of salt.

This is pretty shitty logic.
It is? Remember Twisty, they're not making T1 or T2, they're making T:V. Whether or not you want it to be, mediums may become cappers. Things will be different. You're argument, like most people who want T1 remade, is "it worked before so don't fuck with it." Well the armor classes are already different, so roles are going to change.

Tinkering with this shit will not lead to better gameplay.
It's already been tinkered with, so are you gonna cry to mama?

And yada yada yada same stuff repeated in different words.

This is pretty shitty logic.
It is? Remember Twisty, they're not making T1 or T2, they're making T:V. Whether or not you want it to be, mediums may become cappers. Things will be different. You're argument, like most people who want T1 remade, is "it worked before so don't fuck with it." Well the armor classes are already different, so roles are going to change.

Tinkering with this shit will not lead to better gameplay.
It's already been tinkered with, so are you gonna cry to mama?

And yada yada yada same stuff repeated in different words...

This is pretty shitty logic.
It is? Remember Twisty, they're not making T1 or T2, they're making T:V. Whether or not you want it to be, mediums may become cappers. Things will be different. You're argument, like most people who want T1 remade, is "it worked before so don't fuck with it." Well the armor classes are already different, so roles are going to change.

Tinkering with this shit will not lead to better gameplay.
It's already been tinkered with, so are you gonna cry to mama?

And yada yada yada same stuff repeated in different words...

This is pretty shitty logic.
It is? Remember Twisty, they're not making T1 or T2, they're making T:V. Whether or not you want it to be, mediums may become cappers. Things will be different. You're argument, like most people who want T1 remade, is "it worked before so don't fuck with it." Well the armor classes are already different, so roles are going to change.

Tinkering with this shit will not lead to better gameplay.
It's already been tinkered with, so are you gonna cry to mama?

And yada yada yada same stuff repeated in different words.