Class Struggle.

[Antagonist]

@Antag when you say two guns per loadout you mean max? You mean Halo style? You mean no slot system at all? You mean casual console FPS style? I think you're right in that having six pistols was dumb, but limit of two weapons is too much, I think.

Okay, you may be right but how about this?



The guy in the picture would have "Weight: light", because he only picked an smg. If he had brought only a pistol, then his mobility would have been "very light". His armor is just a cosmetic feature and offers no protection. He should get a mobility advantage for only using one slot, but I don't think that his running speed should be faster than others. Instead, I think that his stunts should give him more range and air time, it should take less time for him to stand up from prone and if there is some kind of climbing system, that should go faster too. I think that all acrobatics should be faster and better because he is light, and if there is a sprint system, mb just let people that have lighter load outs sprint much longer than those with heavier load outs.

So what I'm proposing now is a slot based system that limits you to two big guns or one big gun and two small. Akimbo could either be an attachment or count as a big gun (that can have its own attachments), depending on how complex you want it. I like the idea of having akimbos count as one two-handed gun in terms of weight and slot usage. I don't think a more complicated weight system than this is required for it to be fun.

This is just a mock up, but what about something like that? To clarify: slot 2 and slot 3 can hold two different small guns, not just akimbos of the same gun. In my opinion, three different slots would be okay, if akimbo guns always count as a big gun, and can replace any big gun. Having two pairs of pistols and THEN another gun feels like too many guns to me. I guess having four slots that can fit four different pistols wouldn't be gamebreaking even if it'd be a little silly, because some people might really really not want to spawn with anything other than pistols on them (sigh).

[Tilaron]

if there is a loadout screen can it please be exactly like that? ms paint and balls? :D

[Antagonist]

Sorry for editing the post a lot but I just came up with so much shit as I went along.

[misanq]

I like that slot idea.

As far as ideas of my own goes, the two best overall styles are already on the table (CS and COD, in my opinion), I'm more interested in how (or if) you plan to make the stunting system part of the rifle play-style. If you do, I would suggest not giving dives the heavy accuracy penalties that people were talking about. Personally, I feel the idea of rifle users having to stop to have a reasonable chance of hitting someone at closer goes against the idea of action games and I think that rifles should ideally have good enough running accuracy for a torso hit to be expected at 'medium' range. Also, if accuracy degradation were to be considered I think that it would have to recover quite quickly in comparison to CS.
I'd also like to see rifles and heavy load outs in general be able to do a side flip that didn't dump them on their backs. Indeed, I think that the low and medium side flips would preferably be replaced completely by full flips that were just slower and lower than the full flip.
Going of on a tangent, I feel that a lot of the stunting wasn't really thought out very well in TS, so that you had a lot of moves that were pretty awkward and dangerous like the low flips and others like the wall hump and flip that were theoretically very useful, but quite difficult to use spontaneously. There's a lot that could be streamlined and improved in that area.

At any rate, I think once you decide whether rifle users should be able run around and use stunts effectively or whether their gameplay style should involve stopping completely during a battle on a regular basis, things will start to fall together. Personally, I think there might also be a third option where rifles could be used both as a less accurate submachine gun and also a "real rifle" with neither option being the outright best.

Also, I question whether armour is a particularly great idea in general. After all, everyone loathed juggernaut even when it was a reward for dying.

[TheOtherChris]

My idea for rifle limitations would be these: Slightly slower run speed, still able to pull off most stunts at the same heights but with some recovery time upon landing. The main drawback would be less control during hip firing than SMGs and Pistols (which in action physics would be possible to shoot one-handed while running without as much problems). Rifles and bigger SMGs would be most effective when used in iron sight mode, which would negate those drawbacks almost completely but slow the player down to jogging speed.

BTW: I actually liked COD:MW2's separation of SMGs and Machine pistols...

[Dan]

Also, fuck new players. The thing that made old multiplayer games was the steep learning curve. If the game needs to be dumbed down to the point where people can't decide on what weapons they want to use and they need pre-made options spoon fed to them, they dumb and aren't worth having in the playerbase.

Oh look, it's the exact attitude that led to TS having its impressively terrible community.

I'm not opposed to classes at all. I won't emphatically defend them because I don't know how well they'd work in this type of game, but it might. I've said before, but I still think a lot of people are stuck in "TS mode." There's nothing wrong with implementing or exploring different ideas.

[Antagonist]

I just think that assault rifles should be really shit at hitting stuff in full auto when you're at long range, making players have to switch to semi auto or burst mode (with a cool animation for the fire selection switch) for that kind of shit.

I think that extra firepower should just come with extra weight and that a fast fire rate should be bad for long range fighting. That, combined with accuracy decay which is worse for harder hitting guns, will balance the shit.

I had some thoughts about making a very simple weight system.

One pistol adds 1 weight point. One SMG, shotgun without a stock, or akimbo pistols add 2 points. One rifle or shotgun with a stock adds 3 points.

Here's a list of stuff and examples of what you could be carrying to achieve the different weights:

1 point = Very Light (one pistol or go unarmed)
2 points = Light (one smg sized gun)
3 points = Light Middleweight (a single rifle or one smg size weapon and one pistol)
4 points = Middleweight (one rifle and one pistol, or two smg size weapons)
5 points = Heavy (one rifle and one smg size weapon)
6 points = Very heavy (two rifles)

[Vino]

We're really getting into the meat of things here ITT.

a reasonable idea

I see where you're going but it still screams way too much "Tactical shooter" and not enough "Action shooter." It doesn't mesh with the "loaded-to-the-teeth" action oriented style we're going for. Even if it's a cosmetic difference and functionally equivalent to what you're showing, I'd still feel better about it if it were at least presented differently. For example, you have a 30-slot system, rifles are 15, smg/shotgun are 10, pistols are 5, armor is 10. So you can have two rifles, or rifle/pistol/armor, or smg/smg/armor, or pistol/pistol/armor. In the end, the system ends up being identical to what you've shown functionally but I feel more like I'm configuring and loading up my dude rather than just dragging shit into slots. Of course that'd let people get six pistols and I say let them, if they want to be that dumb. (I just saw your most recent post on this topic and it's basically the same thing as I just said but divided by five, right?)

One of the main problems with newbies stocking up too much was that it made them slow and disabled the stunts, which was the main fun of the game. The more I think about it and read what people are saying the less it makes sense for any loadout to disable the main fun parts of the game, even for the users with the most weaponry. So instead of making full inventory slots disable all stunting, I'm leaning towards making it disable only the highest stunting. The disadvantage of rifle use would be elsewhere.

On another note, let's look at and discuss my best ideas for rifle mechanics:

Advantages:
* Long range
* Damage
* Accuracy
* Aim-in mechanism

Disadvantages:
* Inaccurate at high speeds
* Slowly lower movement speed
* Get-up speed somewhat slower
* Must aim-in to get that better accuracy/reduced recoil
* Must be bursted to maintain accuracy, accuracy decay otherwise

So basically, if you're not aiming in the rifle basically works like a high-recoil smg or auto pistol.

Misan, I agree that if we do inaccurate at high speeds it should drop fairly quickly once you stop/aim in. We want to keep the action as fast as possible.

[Antagonist]

I'm sorry that I kept editing these posts so much. I'd like for you to re-read them just to make sure you understand me correctly because it's not so different from what you're suggesting, I think. I think it would make a lot of sense to newbies if they saw the kind of weight divisions in their customization GUI. Six different weight divisions are all that is possible, but it would be just the same if it was presented with more points (like you said, 15 points 30 points etc) just to make it look meatier.

"Oh so putting one Benelli M3 and one M16 on my guy will make me V. HEAVY? Oh and that means I can't sprint for as long? And my stunts will be less effective and my guy won't be as mobile when climbing and getting off the ground? Okay, I guess I'll only put an smg on him instead of that rifle to gain some mobility!"

[Wish]

Disadvantages:
* Inaccurate at high speeds
* Slowly lower movement speed
* Get-up speed somewhat slower
* Must aim-in to get that better accuracy/reduced recoil
* Must be bursted to maintain accuracy, accuracy decay otherwise

So basically, if you're not aiming in the rifle basically works like a high-recoil smg or auto pistol.

Misan, I agree that if we do inaccurate at high speeds it should drop fairly quickly once you stop/aim in. We want to keep the action as fast as possible.

Vino, I like what you're saying, but what do you mean by slowly lower movement speed? I think you meant slightly, but don't want to assume.


And I don't think we can expect people to stop in a firefight, not even people with rifles. In Call of Duty it's a matter of course to walk while firing ironsighted - it's slow, but it moves you, and doesn't interfere much with your shooting.

Run run run - dudes [aim-in, but continue forward, shooting] = they die - I begin to run again, all without ever having stopped.

^is this kind of what you're picturing?

Can we aim in/out while in mid stunt?

[Vino]

Yeah I got ya. I think we're on the same page. Like all things with game design I think it will be a matter of guesswork to figure out what will work best. Once we get it in game we'll just have to try things and iterate to see how things work and what works best and what the best design is. But I think this is a pretty good starting point.

shotgun with a stock

Shotfucks with a butt, lol.

Vino, I like what you're saying, but what do you mean by slowly lower movement speed? I think you meant slightly, but don't want to assume.

Oops yes I do. And yes, aim-in would have you move slower, but not stop altogether.

And I don't know about aimin while stunting, but my guess is no. But like I said many things we'll just have to wait and see what works best when it's in the game.

[TOGSolid]

Did someone say class warfare????

So instead of making full inventory slots disable all stunting, I'm leaning towards making it disable only the highest stunting. The disadvantage of rifle use would be elsewhere.

Yeah, I agree here. It's not like having a ton of guns is some huge advantage, they can only use one at a time anyway so the disadvantages to being Blast Hardcheese should lie in the gun itself rather than in just fucking with the movement too much.
I dig the point based system and have nothing really to add to what's been said. It seems super solid and like it will accomplish what we need.

As far as rifles go

Misan, I agree that if we do inaccurate at high speeds it should drop fairly quickly once you stop/aim in. We want to keep the action as fast as possible.

Absolutely, otherwise people with more mobile weapons are gonna shit all over them. While doing any sort of high speed movement though they should be super inaccurate. I think slowing to a walk would be enough to allow the accuracy to come back to a useable level. I really don't want to encourage anyone to stop moving in this game. Fluidity should be the name of the game here.

* CS-similar deal where the movement restrictions for total weight are lower but a higher movement penalty for the weapon currently equipped. So, if you have a pistol and a rifle and the pistol is drawn, you still move somewhat quick.

I actually like this system these days cause it does make sense. A weapon that is in your hands and being used is gonna mess with you a lot more than a weapon that is slung and stowed on your body and thusly out of your way. It allows someone to just sling their rifle, pull out their pistol, and go be a pistoleer for a bit for as long as the situation demands it. It opens up a lot of options and (dare I say it) loadout tactics.

[Oreo]

Frankly I don't think that the dev team should fuck new players

There is a difference between our definitions of new players here. Clearly. Mine is "people who have yet to play the game". Yours is "people missing a frontal lobe". We were all new to TS once, and there was little to no documentation. But we all figured it out, because that's what brains allow you to do. Figure things out.

I think they should try grab as many players as possible using any sort of marketing "tricks" and handholding that need be, because what's the point of putting a tone of effort making a great game if nobody plays it? (And you must be joking to suggest that people will read manuals or watch instructional videos in 2011, surely?).

As the game's initial learning curve is made more gradual, it is harder to keep a higher skill cap. See, once again, TF2. Easy games for stupid people. The mechanics are all like, offensively easy. If there was no teamwork involved in that game, people would be bored in 5 minutes. Real talk.

More so, I find it somewhat strange that you see different sized and themed player models as offering the player less individuality rather than more.

The problem here is that I'm pretty sure EVERYONE here wants to make sure all of the players are on equal footing. Making character models that are larger or smaller than others would involve making some characters' hitboxes larger than others. See: the Elites in Halo 3. People liked the design of the Elites, but nobody fucking played as them, because the chances of a random bullet causing a headshot were WAY higher because of the hitboxes. So you had Spartans vs Spartans: Fate of All The Spartans.

And frankly I'd have thought people who view the game the way you do would jump at the opportunity to be able to RP as Beefy "The wolf" McHardpecs or vinne "kitsune" vinchenzo.

>implying that all TS players played TSRP

I'll reiterate that the original TS was already divided into a soft classes by weight limits

I already explained that this was NOT the case. I've explained that you could, at any time, throw weapons from your inventory and gain your movement speed back. That way, your initial weapon choice did not tether you to a certain play style as you can ditch your weapons whenever, on the fly. Something that a class system does NOT allow.

YIFF IN HELL FURFAG.

Oh, I see. Are we foregoing civility? In that case:

You really sound like someone who tries to play TS with 3 assault rifles in your loudout and BAWWWWW'd when you weren't able to fly around the map at retard speeds. In TS, everyone was on equal footing, and your desire to change that makes you, currently, the possible biggest threat to the success of this game (should it ever leave the planning stages). I've already constructed a response to every single one of your points, shooting them down with hard facts, and your reaction has either been to ignore them entirely or go "lol, nope" as you continue to make claims about game design with no supporting evidence other than "I right, you wrong". If I were part of this game's dev team, about now is when I would stop listening to anything you had to say; even BEFORE the random insults.

You know what game has a class system, characterization, AND a huge player base? TF2. Go play it, and leave this game's planning stages to people who know what they're talking about. GGPO.

[Vino]

Let's please not forego civility.

I don't know why you guys are arguing with each other about usability, that's my job. The game will be easy for a new player to get in to, but also fun enough for people to play it for a while. End of story.

[Hadji|DP]

Disadvantages:

* Must be bursted to maintain accuracy, accuracy decay otherwise

One of the things in Counter-Strike is that the rifles did much more body damage than pistols ever could, meaning that because of the ammo count of pistols, you had to make each shot count, while you could spray and pay with rifles, even if they had a ridiculous accuracy decay. Will bullet damages be based by caliber (boo), by gun (double boo) or will all guns just deal insanely high damage, leading to very high body counts (YES)?