Urban Terror Forums: Equipment system & scopes for Resurgence - Urban Terror Forums

Jump to content

 Login | Register 
Advertisement
  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Equipment system & scopes for Resurgence

Some thoughts/suggestions. Even includes ironsights xD

#1 User is offline   Iye Icon

  •   head moderator   
    Co-Chief Community Moderator
  • Account: iye
  • Country:
  • Joined: 07-June 11
  • Posts: 1,054

Posted 25 February 2017 - 02:08 AM

So yeah, i wanted to do this post for quite some while, and now i got time.

As the title suggests this is about ideas for how equipment could work or be "rebalanced" for HD (2 lazy to write Resurgence all the time...)

Just to get this out of the way right at the beginning: I want the system to mostly stay, with players being able to change their loadout on every spawn, with everything being available to them (besides server restrictions).

Let me first sum up what we got in 4.3. The system basically has "equipment points", which you can use freely to equip items and weapons. We get up to four of them right now. Enough for 2 weapons and 2 items, or an item and a grenade.
Additionally, there is a "meta" established: roughly speaking it is:
  • ALWAYS have a helmet
  • Primaries are basically down to LR/M4/SR8, with the other popping up sometimes. Some are entirely "useless", which is actually fine.
  • Most people use a Vest
  • Most people with an auto primary will use no secondary, and possibly grenades


I like the system we already have, but i would also like to expand it.

Increase the number of equipment points "drastically": I would vote for roughly tripling them actually. This would go hand in hand with the next points:

Change how much each item "costs": Right now, all items take one equipment point, regardless of their use. I would suggest roughly doubling that:
  • 3 points for a primary level weapon
  • 2 points for a secondary level weapon (regardless of it being used in a primary or secondary slot)
  • 1 per grenade, possibly allowing a combo of 1/1 grenades (or more)
  • For the items:
    • 3 points for the kevlar, which basically is though as a "buff" towards other items: If you dont have a kevlar, you can move faster, but you also have a disadvantage in combat.
    • 1 for extra ammo, since its basically "useless" (with an auto you are bound to get a kill before you would need it, alternatively you die before doing so)
    • 1 per scope (see next point)
    • 2 for most other items


Add items:
There have been quite some suggestions over time, such as consumables: stamina boosts, one time self heals, flashs and flash guards (which may very quickly take over the meta xD), "molotovs" in a CS:GO style, to deny enemy movement,...
Additionally, more weapon customization could be allowed, such as foregrips (increasing stability), double mags (for a quick reload), bigger mags (maybe not for MGs/shotguns) aaaaaannnnddd:

Add scopes: And yes, here they come, ironsights. now hear me out on this. Right now scopes are fixed to any weapon, which is somewhat fine i guess. However, when adding more weapon customization, they come back into consideration.

Lets first off establish a basis for how scopes may work. Lets do this for a basic example: scoping should have an advantage, so either we nerf not scoping, or we buff scoping. I see no reason to nerf not scoping (besides the outrage this may cause), so scoping should give an advantage of some sort. However, i also wouldnt want to "force" players into scoping, so the advantage should balance itself, preferably via a movement "debuff":

  • Ironsights: No movement penalty while scoped, but a narrowed FoV and a slight zoom. No accuracy or stability bonus (accuracy would mean how quickly the spread pattern widens, stability would be how slowly the recoil kicks your crosshair upwards)
  • Red dot/holosights: The same as above, but slows you down, while giving an accuracy bonus.
  • Scopes:(g36 style) Nice black cutout circle obscuring your vision, a stability buff on top of the above.
  • Sniper scopes: could come in varying levels, and varying steady times. For example a scope with only a x2 and x4 zoom could steady faster than one with a x4 x8 x12.


Im currently debating with myself if a scope should be required, and personally, i think it should not be.

Sidearms: Currently you can not spawn without one, and i actually think this is good. A weapon should be required. A bit more actual variety would be nice. Sure right now all the pistols have their niece, but i would love something like a double barrel sawn-off, basically a pistol spas, with long reload times. Maybe even a CS:GO style taster (zeus), that 1shots, but only has few charges, very limited range, and maybe only two shots.



I guess this wraps it up. More or less. I also have some ideas towards round based modes and balance..... :)
Sorry for my bad spelling - I am still asleep. :)

|=| Iye's UrT Addon |=| Firefox Personas |=| Maps |=|
http://www.mediafire...vk3a602hcfg.jpg

#2 User is offline   Vortex2 Icon

  • Account: vortex2
  • Country:
  • Joined: 06-January 17
  • Posts: 104

Posted 25 February 2017 - 03:40 AM

I like your ideas regarding the use of 'points'. I was a little confused at first, but now that I understand I believe in it.

Re: Movement Penalty:
I think anything other than the Kevlar influencing movement is a little silly... if the scopes or sights were to influence movement I would assume it would be a very minute/subtle difference compared to the effect a Kevlar has (which, come to think of it does seem to be quite severe...).

Meta-Building:
I think that the more creativity and versatility we allow for, the better, as we will see a greater need to incorporate the idea of 'builds' which could further motivate players to develop increasingly complex role-based strategies which may be fitting for certain maps (to use against opponents who may also be doing so) resulting in a more complex and fun to watch game in competitive play. For anyone who is interested, it is possible to change equipment set-ups in a cycle or by binding a particular setup to a certain key (with text-message to confirm chosen weapons and items). c@m first showed me this.

Re: Use of Grips, Sights:
To further increase the need for choosing different items, I would argue for an increase in recoil for all guns. Not a significant increase, but one enough that a skilled player wouldn't feel pressured to use an additional item (remaining potentially faster and as accurate on smaller maps such as Turnpike), with sights and grips making a difference which would feel similar to LR with laser in current versions.

The only time I can imagine a skilled player using iron sights or holo sights or a scope on the LR/M4 would be on a map like Cambridge where it's difficult to land that crucial 3rd/4th bullet, or on Casa in a specific scenario to counter a sniper or to match another player who is making use of distance with a scope/sight.

The danger of added features lies in possibly taking away from what the game is and causing frustration and a reputation for imbalance, potentially due to lack of understanding... Although, it would likely lead to less wtf moments for newer players as in FFA/TDM when you see someone rolling with a wacky build and all you can do is sigh or lol and say "...Alright, then...".

Bottom line: as a UrT fundamentalist, I'm hesitatant to become an iron/holosigh enthusiast, but I can see the advantage and I imagine this might be useful to somebody on basically every map (at all skill-levels)... and as someone who enjoys and is comfortable with quick-scoping using the SR8, I recognize that this could potentially improve my accuracy with automatic weapons (at as little as next to no cost) and raise the ceiling in terms of mastering the technique of aiming by adding an extra step or two and changing players' reaction by adding precious fractions of a second in using the button to scope (situationally, as fast as possible) while simultaneously having to anticipate ahead of time in order to compensate. I imagine that it would make duels at pillars on turnpike even more interesting, while in closer-situations it would mean those players who choose to play without grip and/or sight and/or scope iteams would then be tested in having to prove that they are, in fact, skilled and quick enough to justify playing without one. I'm picturing situations as close-range as peeking office on turnpike.

Also, because there would be 'roles' (probably), there would be more interesting confrontations on the map due to being able to figure out strategies in real-time by seeing and sensing what the opposing team is doing resulting in less of a man-hunt situation, and a more methodical play experience which develops and evolves over the course of 1-3 maps.

Re: Nades:
An increase in the use of grenades could make things very interesting, especially given that we can choose to be more/less affected by smokes and HEs by anticipating and choosing when to push through... whereas in CS:GO, smokes and molotovs basically prevent movement.

Pre-nades can be devastating and often can compensate for a lack of ability... quickly resulting in a sense of being cheated in a game which is primarily about reaction and ability to read a situation (there isn't much to read when each round begins with multiple nade throws, leaving the survivors on either team to duke it out...). Also, using nades to clear a smaller area is kind of lame, especially beacuse players can get around so fast. But, of course, they can be very useful in clearing out a larger area and when a team-rush is well-co-ordinated I imagine this could look very, very cool (and also discourage campy strats). All in all, I'm undecided when it comes to use of nades. Personally, I don't use them but I could very easily incorporate them into my play style (especially if they were less costly)... but, then again, I don't want to see much of an increase in grenades in gameplay... so I wouldn't want them to be inexpensive enough that everyone would use them... and if an entire team were to opt for nades, would there be a sufficient deficiency in another area to justify their availability?

I haven't mentioned flashbangs for a reason. No. I don't want to see them unless there is some kind of objective as in bomb, and even then the game is too fast for them to not be overpowered. Reducing the blind/deaf time to a place where they are not op would probably make them either not worth using or at best a cheeky nuisance (if they could be used 'properly'). Personally, if I was paying defense in CTF and someone got away with the flag because I was flashed by his buddy because I had no choice but to be facing him, I would be rather resentful and feel a liiitle bit cheated. Then again, maybe in that situation I could anticipate the flash bang and have another teammate kill the flasher before he has the chance. I wonder if this is a feature which has been tested by the development team and/or imagined extensively by each player who reflexively dismisses them when the topic is brought up. I'm still a hard "pls, no", but I'm sure I could be persuaded to accept them (somehow).

Note: Learning to fire at a spot where the enemy will most likely be while blinded could become a skill.

Re: Sidarms
LOL :laugh:

This post has been edited by Vortex2: 25 February 2017 - 05:10 AM


#3 User is offline   Iye Icon

  •   head moderator   
    Co-Chief Community Moderator
  • Account: iye
  • Country:
  • Joined: 07-June 11
  • Posts: 1,054

Posted 25 February 2017 - 12:59 PM

View PostVortex2, on 25 February 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

Re: Movement Penalty:
I would assume it would be a very minute/subtle difference compared to the effect a Kevlar has

Ye, i was thinking along the lines of maybe just disallowing sprinting/sliding/... in that order. E.g. with the "lowest" scope you could still slide, if you started it before scoping, with the next higher one your slide would be slowed down. Also keep in mind that i want this effect only to take place while actually scoped, with no effects on being not scoped. so nothing like a stamina change when scoping or something silly like that.

View PostVortex2, on 25 February 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

Re: Use of Grips, Sights:
To further increase the need for choosing different items, I would argue for an increase in recoil for all guns.

While i see what you are going for here, i'm not sure if i like it. As i said, I dont want the "classic way" (so 4.x style) to be affected in any way. Thus, i dont want to "force" players into using certain items (even though with the increased points they surely could do so without drawback). I find the ac

View PostVortex2, on 25 February 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

The only time I can imagine a skilled player using iron sights or holo sights or a scope on the LR/M4 would be on a map like Cambridge where it's difficult to land that crucial 3rd/4th bullet, or on Casa in a specific scenario to counter a sniper or to match another player who is making use of distance with a scope/sight.


View PostVortex2, on 25 February 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

The danger of added features lies in possibly taking away from what the game is and causing frustration and a reputation for imbalance, potentially due to lack of understanding... Although, it would likely lead to less wtf moments for newer players as in FFA/TDM when you see someone rolling with a wacky build and all you can do is sigh or lol and say "...Alright, then...".

This is why i want the current playstyle to stay viable and as unchanged as possible. In regards to scopes that would mean they basically get added for new players, while every (then) old-school player could just tap away with the perfect 1st bullet accuracy guns have anways. Sure more items are bound to develop a seemingly even more narrow meta, but look at things like the silencer. Nobody would call it OP, even though it literally has no drawbacks (except for you maybe not realizing how much you spray....). Yet its not nearly as used as a Kevlar. And virtually everybody has a helmet.


View PostVortex2, on 25 February 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

Bottom line: as a UrT fundamentalist, [..]

This paragraph sums it up rather nicely.

View PostVortex2, on 25 February 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

Also, because there would be 'roles' (probably), there would be more interesting confrontations on the map due to being able to figure out strategies in real-time by seeing and sensing what the opposing team is doing resulting in less of a man-hunt situation, and a more methodical play experience which develops and evolves over the course of 1-3 maps.

We kind of have roles already, there are medkits. Yet i doubt this would develop to such a level where you would "call over the sniper". Calling for a medic should still be a thing though. i actually dont want everybody to run around with a medkit (even though that would be pretty usefull). Your choices should have a meaning, instead of just being the "go to" loadout.

View PostVortex2, on 25 February 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

Re: Nades:
An increase in the use of grenades could make things very interesting, especially given that we can choose to be more/less affected by smokes and HEs by anticipating and choosing when to push through... whereas in CS:GO, smokes and molotovs basically prevent movement.

Lets be fair: a smoke will never be a wall in UrT. In CS:GO this works since players are so much slower. If you run through a smoke, you get heard and then prefired/aimed. If you walk through it, the defender has enough time to look left and right to cover other angles.
For incendiaries i would vote that players should actually be able to cross them in one walljump. They would end up being an area denial tool to flush people out of cover. Which pretty much is what nades do already, with the difference that nades will basically 1shot you.

View PostVortex2, on 25 February 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

[.. grenade avilibilty and the problem of nade spam ..]

This is a concern. Grenades could end up so cheap that you could just overwhelm a defending team with utility. I guess something like an increasing cost per grenade could be an idea? So 1 for the 1st, 2 for the 2nd, .... ?

View PostVortex2, on 25 February 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

[.. flashbangs ..]

The biggest problem with the flash in 4.x (even though they are technically disabled...) is how fast UrT is. Not only players, but also the grenades. In two ways actually. First off, they travels quicker. Secondly, you can time grenades in UrT (at least HEs and flashes). This means that whats "easy" in CS:GO, to dodge flashes by looking away at the right moment, is basically impossibly in UrT. Hence i see flashguards as a requirement, even more so if stupid things like tac-goggles stay. (maybe make those more vulnerable to getting blinded?). Both items should obviously lock eachother out. Alternatively/additionally i guess a system where you cant cook flashes would be worth a thought.

Sidenote: i fear our posts end up way to long for anybody else to read..... :S
Sorry for my bad spelling - I am still asleep. :)

|=| Iye's UrT Addon |=| Firefox Personas |=| Maps |=|
http://www.mediafire...vk3a602hcfg.jpg

#4 User is offline   Vortex2 Icon

  • Account: vortex2
  • Country:
  • Joined: 06-January 17
  • Posts: 104

Posted 25 February 2017 - 05:49 PM

Quote

Ye, i was thinking along the lines of maybe just disallowing sprinting/sliding/... in that order. E.g. with the "lowest" scope you could still slide, if you started it before scoping, with the next higher one your slide would be slowed down. Also keep in mind that i want this effect only to take place while actually scoped, with no effects on being not scoped. so nothing like a stamina change when scoping or something silly like that.


Something just occurred to me. Do you think we could handle the concept of added weapon-weight if it was applied appropriately and in a way in which players could still bunnyhop with the SR8... just not as fast? In all seriousness, it's not overly difficult to switch between weapons and to practice holding only a knife to jump and to switch to a scope before peaking pillars for instance... but then again, it would kind of neuter SR8 battles... and, well, basically the entire game. :unsure:

Maybe we should leave movement be. I think we've forgotten the initial difficulty faced by each player in learning to accept the physics of the game in the first place. Let us not disregard that transitioning from a popular game is bound top resent a big change. Idk if I'm just dumb, but I think it can be very overwhelming for the first few plays... Especially when the person realizes most if not all of the traditional aspects of FPS are still in-tact and that using the physics of the game is probably a good idea. Which means learning to appreciate the game itself. By making this process overly complicated, I have my doubts that newer players will take the time to learn and eventually give up and move onto the next big studio game... whereas, if we make the physics 'accessible' and well, simple (by our measure), each player who understands the concept of bunnyhopping and who sees someone wall-running will be like :mellow:. ... :ohmy: ... :laugh: before feeling compelled to try it (dedicating time to practicing it).

Quote

While i see what you are going for here, i'm not sure if i like it. As i said, I dont want the "classic way" (so 4.x style) to be affected in any way. Thus, i dont want to "force" players into using certain items (even though with the increased points they surely could do so without drawback). I find the ac


Yeah, honestly... I think I hate games that incorporate the illusion of choice to rope people into learning the meta (while enticing them with flashy bullshit graphics and fake achievements). The game industry is apparently 'full' of seemingly skilled people who are able and willing to employ subversive mind-control tactics which target and go to work on our very nature... so, a game can be really attractive for young kids (who come to recognize yet another similar reoccurring pattern of button-pushing to recieve pleasure without having to think very hard) and unsuspecting parents who work and want their kids to be successful and happy... while meanwhile, we see a grotesque image of materialistic thinking and apathetic exploitation.

The last thing I want is to associate Urban Terror with ^... so for some reason, by default, it almost seems like a good idea to leave the game just as it is both in artful silent protest by providing contrast and well, beacuse it offers us everything we need every round allowing us to focus on what the game is really about... (there's no emoticon for the combination of regret, melancholy, understanding disappointment and unconditional acceptance with knowledge of having found the greatest FPS experience while trying to look modest without influencing anyone but secretly wanting to give the game to everybody you meet and realizing that you're not being realistic which you imagine takes a toll on your emotional sensibility over time but you're sticking it out because you know there is no other option and Resurgence is coming soon.)

Quote

This is why i want the current playstyle to stay viable and as unchanged as possible. In regards to scopes that would mean they basically get added for new players, while every (then) old-school player could just tap away with the perfect 1st bullet accuracy guns have anways. Sure more items are bound to develop a seemingly even more narrow meta, but look at things like the silencer. Nobody would call it OP, even though it literally has no drawbacks (except for you maybe not realizing how much you spray....). Yet its not nearly as used as a Kevlar. And virtually everybody has a helmet.


Perhaps I'm stating the obvious, but this would only just be funny and provide comedic relief for anyone who is aware of games at all. Although, lots of people use lasers... Idk.

It occurred to me after I posted and went back to watching basketball that I had disregarded the silencer. Initially, I thought it would be funny to pretend I'd done so on purpose, but upon revisit I think I'll be honest with you and say I forgot about it.

Sidenote: Silencer is the door to the Assassin meta-class :ph34r:

Quote

This paragraph sums it up rather nicely.

Thanks! I thought it would be too much, but then I realized that reading the paragraph was paralleling the actual situation and thus playing into the imagining of it so I was like haha... screw revisional editing in this case.

Quote

We kind of have roles already, there are medkits. Yet i doubt this would develop to such a level where you would "call over the sniper". Calling for a medic should still be a thing though. i actually dont want everybody to run around with a medkit (even though that would be pretty usefull). Your choices should have a meaning, instead of just being the "go to" loadout.

Yes, team-comms could get very interesting, as could the game itself...but only if we incorporate the idea of loose classes (as in support, entry, etc.) into 'marketing' (communication surrounding the game) such that it would be adapted by most players who are interested in competitive play and featured in media.

Sidenote: The Sniper is an interesting role indeed, because this player must often make quick decisions in difficult situations such as "I made my pick, now what? Team?" Or "I missed my pick... Do I fall back and rotate somewhere? Team?"

Sidenote: be honest, how many assassins do you see? :ph34r:

Quote

Lets be fair: a smoke will never be a wall in UrT. In CS:GO this works since players are so much slower. If you run through a smoke, you get heard and then prefired/aimed. If you walk through it, the defender has enough time to look left and right to cover other angles.
For incendiaries i would vote that players should actually be able to cross them in one walljump. They would end up being an area denial tool to flush people out of cover. Which pretty much is what nades do already, with the difference that nades will basically 1shot you.

I hated smokes when they dropped my 70FPS to like 30... so, of course, they ended up being like basically flasbangs for players with older computers. Funny, but not funny.

If we can reduce the area of the smoke, and also allow for the option of lowering the quality of it without providing an exploit, I think the use of smokes would be permissible in Urban Terror.

Incendiaries would basically either defeat the purpose of playing spots like Window on Turnpike or Balcony on Casa or make the game whole lot more interesting. I'm thinking maybe a player could sneak around and molotov balcony to initate a team-rush while the sniper is disabled (this, while cross-cover is provided by teammates at narrow and/or mid plus your sniper rushing timbers after clearing it or whatever...)

Sidenote: What about CTF? Defensive incendiary to protect flag?

Quote

This is a concern. Grenades could end up so cheap that you could just overwhelm a defending team with utility. I guess something like an increasing cost per grenade could be an idea? So 1 for the 1st, 2 for the 2nd, .... ?

Edit: I'm not sure what to make of this. Upon revisiting this topic, I think that allowing 2 HE grenades at the cost of equivalence to a medkit or laser (or body armor) is balanced and seems fair enough... though, if we look closely and use context, it may lean in the direction of being a little liberal in allowing two grenades per round each round... by lending greater significance to each grenade I think they seem both more appealing and balanced, however I wonder how we might do this.

I now have the benefit of having reading Frankie's post and I think that load-out selection based on weight may just be the answer we're looking for.

Quote

The biggest problem with the flash in 4.x (even though they are technically disabled...) is how fast UrT is. Not only players, but also the grenades. In two ways actually. First off, they travels quicker. Secondly, you can time grenades in UrT (at least HEs and flashes). This means that whats "easy" in CS:GO, to dodge flashes by looking away at the right moment, is basically impossibly in UrT. Hence i see flashguards as a requirement, even more so if stupid things like tac-goggles stay. (maybe make those more vulnerable to getting blinded?). Both items should obviously lock eachother out. Alternatively/additionally i guess a system where you cant cook flashes would be worth a thought.

Again, I worry that this is too much change too soon. I can't see flash-guards as being overly controversial and while they would be fun, I don't think they should be enabling flashbangs... then again, I'm not sure... but tbh I can't see a situation in which I would be flashed and say "oh, yeah, no that was legit. He got me; well-played sir, well-played." in Urban Terror.

Sidenote: Could identifying players who don't use flash-guards and targeting them using team-comm be entertaining to watch by adding another dynamic or would it just be annoying? Also, if everyone used flags-guards... iunno, what would a flashbang look like? How would this affect meta?

Sidenote: Because cooking nades and throwing them requires skill and practice, it is acceptable to me to die to a grenade every so often. I just want to avoid a nuking of the map every round.

Quote

Sidenote: i fear our posts end up way to long for anybody else to read..... :S

Part of the fate of accepting our role as long-distance writers is incorporating our appreciation for the people who are having to read our writing into the way we write. I think we're both doing a good thing here.

Conclusion: I imagine that most of the 'countering' would take place very early on and in specific situations during scrim/matchplay before returning to a familiar perfect balance... if we could incorporate additional items in a well-planned manner with specific costs and benefits in an overall balanced way (I'm thinking this would be very difficult) I'm all for it... but only if things aren't too complicated.

This post has been edited by Vortex2: 26 February 2017 - 07:24 AM



bullet_loaderAdvertisement

#6 User is offline   Vortex2 Icon

  • Account: vortex2
  • Country:
  • Joined: 06-January 17
  • Posts: 104

Posted 26 February 2017 - 01:56 AM

Would this mean that each player would move faster if he/she opted to use less equipment than is permissible? (If so, this would result in personalized load-outs which is essentially the same thing as having 'classes' except it wouldn't be so pronounced and would add to in-game character as each player could have a signature set-up :D)

I recall reading an earlier discussion about this. I'll cool my jets and be patient now :P

This post has been edited by Vortex2: 26 February 2017 - 01:58 AM


#7 User is offline   Magister Icon

  • Account: magister
  • Joined: 14-May 10
  • Posts: 110

Posted 26 February 2017 - 06:07 AM

View PostFrankie V, on 26 February 2017 - 01:18 AM, said:

Overall though the question is should we up the level of complexity or keep things simple as they are now?


This is really an essential question and my opinion is that, at first, Resurgence should really be anchored by the spirit and feel of legacy UrT. There are going to be major complaints, with valid reasons, if the new game is released and people don't feel like this is still Urban Terror.

There's room for changes of course, but personally I'd like them to be focused primarily on making a magnification of the Urban Terror that already exists.

#8 User is offline   YAY5637 Icon

  • Account: yay5637
  • Main tag: <PWC>
  • Country:
  • Joined: 28-February 10
  • Posts: 633

Posted 26 February 2017 - 12:18 PM

Compared to the movementsystem and fast gameplay i think the loadoutselection could be changed to a degree without interfering with my perception of what UrT should be.
Diversifiying loadouts could be fun, but i think its very hard to have these options balanced.

Counterstrike, Tf2 and Overwatch for example all have a lot of options but in competitive play these are rarely used (meaning AK's in CS, mostly stock in Tf2, always the same teamcomposition in OW untill a patch comes by).

In UrT this is an even bigger Problem i think, you will never choose anything above kevlar and helmet and in the end theres only one choice left. Balancing a laser vs a helmet is just very hard thing.
Having the helmet and kevlar beeing more costly than other options is a good idea but i think they would still be mandatory. As is the best weapon against kevlar in consequence.
Allowing more items in this loadout (helmet,kevlar,nades,medkit for example) would take away from the game i think, because per team there would be to many items. Balancing it with a weaker primary weapon would be possible, but kevlar and helmet are still there...

I hope this makes sense now, im known for not making sense while thinking^^

#9 User is offline   Iye Icon

  •   head moderator   
    Co-Chief Community Moderator
  • Account: iye
  • Country:
  • Joined: 07-June 11
  • Posts: 1,054

Posted 26 February 2017 - 02:58 PM

View PostFrankie V, on 26 February 2017 - 01:18 AM, said:

The first question should the load out allow for more complex configurations or to keep it simple as it is now?

Well, there isnt much too lose in adding items. Nobody is forced to use them, and unless they dont turn out to be entirely OP, they may very well not end up in the "meta" anyways.

View PostFrankie V, on 26 February 2017 - 01:18 AM, said:

Load out selection based on weight and not point or slot selection.

I considered this, but im against it. Changing your loadout would suddenly affect your movement. If you wanted to try "those items" over "these items" you suddenly may end up moving differently, and it would just be confusing/frustrating. (basically running out of stamina where you previously wouldnt). In the end you either take slowdown (or speed up, but thats the more rare case imo), or you end up calculating which items to drop. And that would just be the point system, masked as a "choice".
Same goes for an enemy you fight. Right now you can calculate how much stamina he has, how far he can get with it (under a lot of assumptions about his skill level and map knowledge). Weight influencing this would just make it "entirely" impossible.

View PostFrankie V, on 26 February 2017 - 01:18 AM, said:

Not to create a class system but to add the player model selection as part of the specification table. For example the male can carry more weight (moment penalty) while the female carry less but moves faster?

Now for male vs female models, i wouldnt be too much against a carry limit/speed difference. (i would probably end up playing female chars, i usually dont even play with kevlar...). But your movement would only change based on that. Same for seeing and enemy. You can immediately tell male/female and act based on that.

View PostFrankie V, on 26 February 2017 - 01:18 AM, said:

We have a selection of scopes and optic sights where the scopes have a further zoom but a limited FOV where the optics have a wider FOV but limited zoom if that's what you mean?

Yes and no. Snipers right now have a steady time, so a time where you may be scoped in, but the weapon isnt accurate yet. I just considered this as an additional way to balance, though steady time may actually be better as a weapon depending stat.

View PostFrankie V, on 26 February 2017 - 01:18 AM, said:

Urban Terror is a traditional run and gun and when Ironsights is mentioned the typical implementation has required the player to slow down to take steady aim. If implemented in HD there will be no advantage or disadvantage that would require the player to slow down.

Which is why i suggested ironsights as the "raw" variation, so no movement penalties. I then just extended it to more "fancy" scopes that would actually give you a benefit besides vision. This would require some sort of balance, and besides scope time there only is one other thing that would only affect scoped state, and it is movement.

View PostYAY5637, on 26 February 2017 - 12:18 PM, said:

Diversifiying loadouts could be fun, but i think its very hard to have these options balanced.

Sure. But tbh, balance is going to end up in a meta regardless. This even happens in perfectly mirrored games, one this will just be slightly better than the other. So unless one creates real OPs, a bit of disparity is fine.

View PostYAY5637, on 26 February 2017 - 12:18 PM, said:

In UrT this is an even bigger Problem i think, you will never choose anything above kevlar and helmet and in the end theres only one choice left. Balancing a laser vs a helmet is just very hard thing.
Having the helmet and kevlar beeing more costly than other options is a good idea but i think they would still be mandatory. As is the best weapon against kevlar in consequence.

If you just look at any competitive match, you could quickly fall under the impression that helmets are fixed. Because they somewhat are. Its one of those "choices" where you actually have no choice at all. The only thing one could do here would be either nerf all HS 1shots to 99 damage, or just fix the helmet to the loadout. I dont like either, but with the point increase i suggested, i also dont see a mandatory helmet being a problem.

View PostYAY5637, on 26 February 2017 - 12:18 PM, said:

Allowing more items in this loadout (helmet,kevlar,nades,medkit for example) would take away from the game i think, because per team there would be to many items. Balancing it with a weaker primary weapon would be possible, but kevlar and helmet are still there...

I also see this as a problem. Hence the items i suggested were either weapon attachments, or consumables. So only stuff that helps one player. On another note, there actually is no real reason why more items (not grenades, those are a problem. see the idea for an increasing cost/nade), may be a problem. In the end everybody would have those. Yet the choices should be meaningfull, not just allowing you to equip virtually everything.
Sorry for my bad spelling - I am still asleep. :)

|=| Iye's UrT Addon |=| Firefox Personas |=| Maps |=|
http://www.mediafire...vk3a602hcfg.jpg


  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

Advertisement


Copyright © 1999-2024 Frozensand Games Limited  |  All rights reserved  |  Urban Terror™ and FrozenSand™ are trademarks of Frozensand Games Limited

Frozensand Games is a Limited company registered in England and Wales. Company Reg No: 10343942