Thrax speaks in VUGames T:V forum

Status
Not open for further replies.
pyrot3chnic said:
By forcing people into medium, only to go light "when it's necessary," you're doing to the light what t1 did to the medium. It should be your choice which armor you want to use. As it's already been said, limiting weapons is not a good way to try balancing anything.
Click to expand...

By the logic of the "it's your choice which armor you want to use" line, and the way it seems you are using it, then the light armor should've had 5 weapons so it could match the weapon versatility of the heavy, and the armor balancing would've been speed -> health ratios. Not saying thats how you meant it, just how it came across to me when I read it.

Dropping the light down to 2 weapons won't kill it. Just like giving the medium 4 weapons didn't give it life in Tribes 1 aside from as a farmer.

People will still use the light on defense (for sniping and chasing using CTF as an example) and for capping the flag on O.

In ball, it'll be used for offense as well, and I'm sure you'll see some people using them on D to try for interceptions.

It might not see as much use in T:V as it did in T1 and T2, but at the same time both the heavy and the light will be taking hits in play time for the medium to be able to become the "bread and butter" armor that the Devs seem to be going for with it.

I may be reading too much into it, but I think they're even trying to stress that with the armor designs. I really don't see that many people going into battle with a bodysuit, shoulder pads, and a jetpack.
 
Last edited:
:x

I just hope the games is nearly as addictive as t1 was. If it isn't, they've failed, END OF STORY!!!
 
There are two issues that I see could arise from limiting weapon setups (but if one occurs, then the other won't). Firstly, if we assume that some weapons are generally more useful than others (which is almost always the case), then you will see some weapons being almost never used. In T1, nobody ever picks the blaster for their loadout, and the ELF is very seldom used. The plasma gun is also fairly uncommon except in indoor maps. However, it seems the designers are trying to make all the weapons useful in some situation. If all the weapons ARE useful enough to be used, then with weapon # restrictions MORE people are required to cover the specific roles. For example, if a heavy can only carry 3 weapons, a heavy defense player may not be equipped to handle different types of attackers. You may in fact need two heavy defense to cover all the bases, say with one carrying a rocket pod and another carrying a burner. Thus, "heavy defense" could essentially be forced to split up into two different roles, "anti-vehicle defense" and "indoor defense". Its possible a heavy that could carry 4 weapons could cover both of these roles just fine. This isn't necessarily a problem, except for the fact that Thrax said that T:V would probably be best suited for smaller teams of 7-9. Limiting the number of weapons that you can carry increases the number of specialized roles that are required, especially since there are actually MORE useful weapons (it seems) in this game than previous games. The larger number of specialized roles required, the larger the teams will have to be.
 
Undisciplined said:
There are two issues that I see could arise from limiting weapon setups (but if one occurs, then the other won't). Firstly, if we assume that some weapons are generally more useful than others (which is almost always the case), then you will see some weapons being almost never used. In T1, nobody ever picks the blaster for their loadout, and the ELF is very seldom used. The plasma gun is also fairly uncommon except in indoor maps. However, it seems the designers are trying to make all the weapons useful in some situation. If all the weapons ARE useful enough to be used, then with weapon # restrictions MORE people are required to cover the specific roles. For example, if a heavy can only carry 3 weapons, a heavy defense player may not be equipped to handle different types of attackers. You may in fact need two heavy defense to cover all the bases, say with one carrying a rocket pod and another carrying a burner. Thus, "heavy defense" could essentially be forced to split up into two different roles, "anti-vehicle defense" and "indoor defense". Its possible a heavy that could carry 4 weapons could cover both of these roles just fine. This isn't necessarily a problem, except for the fact that Thrax said that T:V would probably be best suited for smaller teams of 7-9. Limiting the number of weapons that you can carry increases the number of specialized roles that are required, especially since there are actually MORE useful weapons (it seems) in this game than previous games. The larger number of specialized roles required, the larger the teams will have to be.
Click to expand...

Good point.
 
KillerONE said:
It's not that three weapons are confusing.. it's that different number of weapons for each armor are.

3 weapons per armor keeps it consistent/simple (lesss confusing).
Click to expand...


No I don't think thats what he means. The amount of weapons each armor has is IMMEDIATLY OBVIOUS because there are little pictures on the bottom corner.

I think KP is implying having too many weapons borders on cumbersome - seeing as most people switch weapons with a single key that cycles through them.
 
-Striker- said:
No I don't think thats what he means. The amount of weapons each armor has is IMMEDIATLY OBVIOUS because there are little pictures on the bottom corner.

I think KP is implying having too many weapons borders on cumbersome - seeing as most people switch weapons with a single key that cycles through them.
Click to expand...

Key difference. Battlefield 1942: You have a main weapon, a backup weapon (I believe), maybe a grenade, and maybe a melee weapon. Then you have to keep track of people moving in 2 dimensions, and your own movement.

In Tribes (not Vengeance, as I dunno some of the facts for it) you have to keep track of what armor you have, which gives you at LEAST 3 weapons, sometimes 4, sometimes 5. Plus you have to keep track of people moving VERY fast in THREE dimensions, your own movement, a jetpack, grenades, mines, beacons, automated defenses, etc, etc.

A lot more to keep track of in Tribes. I think thats what KP was saying. Even with giving less weapons, just the added dimension of movement makes it a lot more. Especially when you also think of just how fast everyone is moving when you are trying to shoot them.
 
And we already know that people are apt to just dismiss the game if it is more work to play than they are willing to put in.
 
enDless_Delirium said:
By the logic of the "it's your choice which armor you want to use" line, and the way it seems you are using it, then the light armor should've had 5 weapons so it could match the weapon versatility of the heavy, and the armor balancing would've been speed -> health ratios. Not saying thats how you meant it, just how it came across to me when I read it.

Dropping the light down to 2 weapons won't kill it. Just like giving the medium 4 weapons didn't give it life in Tribes 1 aside from as a farmer.

People will still use the light on defense (for sniping and chasing using CTF as an example) and for capping the flag on O.

In ball, it'll be used for offense as well, and I'm sure you'll see some people using them on D to try for interceptions.

It might not see as much use in T:V as it did in T1 and T2, but at the same time both the heavy and the light will be taking hits in play time for the medium to be able to become the "bread and butter" armor that the Devs seem to be going for with it.

I may be reading too much into it, but I think they're even trying to stress that with the armor designs. I really don't see that many people going into battle with a bodysuit, shoulder pads, and a jetpack.
Click to expand...
That wasn't my point. By decreasing the light load-out, you only frustrate the player. If you had a disc launcher and grenade launcher as your load-out, what would you do if your opponent took flight? Rely on a low percentage MA from the disc, or even lower from the gren launcher? I think not. I was going off of the point Zooloo made early in the thread. You have 4 types of combat at 3 different ranges.
  1. ground-ground, air-ground, ground-air, air-air.
  2. short, medium, long range.
With the weapons available right now, two wouldn't allow you to cover all those. Take the disc and grenade launcher as an example again. With the disc, you'll probably be most effective fighting ground-ground and air-ground at short to medium distances. With the grenade launcher, you can cover ground-ground and air-ground at pretty much all distances. Now what's missing from both...? I guess you can count MAs as air-air/ground-air, but not everyone is skilled at it, and not everyone has sub-100 ping. Even then, it doesn't reamain effective beyond short-range.

You're taking away the player's ability to fight fairly and properly, while also taking away their armor. At this point, the light will have no chance of survival in confrontations with a medium or heavy. The only use I can see for it are sniper for D and capper for O. There's no need to do that. The main advantage/disadvantage among the 3 classes should be quickness and toughness; along with the addition of unique weapons for each.

By your logic, it would be "stay in medium unless you have to cap or snipe." You're generalizing the medium, while specifying the light. It's no good when you tip the scale like that.
 
enDless_Delirium said:
Key difference. Battlefield 1942: You have a main weapon, a backup weapon (I believe), maybe a grenade, and maybe a melee weapon. Then you have to keep track of people moving in 2 dimensions, and your own movement.
Click to expand...
It's 3 dimensions in bf42. There are airplanes. :roller:
 
I'm happy the medium is becoming the defualt armor. It makes more sense for the medium to be the main armor. It should be the all-around "bread n' butter" armor, its MEDIUM after all. I'm sure lights will still get lots of use for thier speed and sniping ability and heavies of course for thier armor and mortar. I'm waiting to see the meds special weapon.
 
I dont know that KP means that its actually mentally "confusing" with more than 3 weapons (KP can clarify if I am wrong). For example I sometimes load up with only 2 or 3 weapons as a heavy (depending on map) when I know I will have to cycle through them alot. I never was good at hitting the number key for a specific weapon (and with 5 weapons you have to learn which weapon is which number key for each loadout - hence confusing). Cycling through more than 3 (for me at least) is a pain especially when trying to manage multiple targets or in a variety of environments where rapid weapon switching is called for.

So perhaps this is how he defines "confusing". Certainly that applies for my part.
 
After skimming through these 11 (sheesh) pages of replies, reading KP's posts, as well as a well written piece by colossus on the 3-3-3 weapon limit, I've come to like the 3 weapon limit for all armors, at least for now, until I have the game on my HD. I, personally, have probably played in a Heavy Armor less than 5% (probably much less) of my entire Tribes career. Granted, I've been playing Tribes for 5 years now, so that still adds up..but the point is this: While playing in a Heavy Armor, thinking back, I realize that very rarely would I ever use all the weapons. VERY rarely. Were I infiltrating an enemy base, mortar, disc, and nades were all I used, followed by plasma as my other ammo's waned. CG, which I always carried, was only used if I were MA'ed enroute, and therefore probably dead anyway. Many times I would not live long enough (if the other team was decent) to use my plasma or nade launcher (depending on which I used first). Therefore, without playing the beta, I believe that having a 3 weapon limit for heavies will work, and work well.

On another note, I believe that keeping 3-3-3, and not pushing the light armor (though not default) to 2 weapons, is a good idea, because in 2 weapons I see an armor that is TOO specialized...something very rarely used, and used only by a certain group of people, which is the exact opposite of what we are trying to do here. This would basically make the 'new' light armor the 'nerfed' armor, instead of the t1 and t2 medium armor.

Just my .02
 
Hellsfury said:
The original Laser Rifle (being the most heavily restricted weapon in the game) could only be equipt by itself. You were not allowed to carry any other weapon besides a Blaster.
Click to expand...
Not true.
 
Thrax Panda said:
Not true.
Click to expand...



?

Not True how? You were not allowed to buy another weapon if you mounted a Laser Rifle (as I remember), you could scavage another weapon which I took as an oversight, but you couldn't buy one. Or perhaps it wasn't the most restricted weapon? There was another?

Or C) All of the above.
 
Hellsfury said:
...roll out Tribes 1 and someone fire up a Mod that impliments the Slot changes, lets play Tribes!.
Click to expand...
This is a great idea. It should be easy for someone to make a T1 or T2 mod that restricts weapons to 2/3/4 or 3/3/3 or 3/3/4 (and has you spawn in medium) for some quick testing to see what happens. I'd love to see feedback from you guys based on this.

Of course the weapons are different, but it would still be valuable. If for instance it was "pretty good, but the heavy felt just a bit weak" we could add health, or ammo, or make the mortar more deadly to even it out. If it totally makes heavies useless then maybe it's just a bad idea.
 
DwarfVader said:
As much as I dislike bringing this to the table, Suicide Taxi was probably one of the better HoF's I've seen in the game for his inate ability to peg cappers as they were leaving with his flag with Mortars.... He didn't have to get direct shots, just glaring ones because he'd already chained the fudge out of them on their way in and out.
Click to expand...

hahahahha

3 years into the game he was still mortaring the flag on SB
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top