Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Beaufort

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 27
Gaming / Re: Battlefield 3
« on: 01-10-2011, 14:10:44 »
Then why EA wants to scan everything in it ?  :(

I was a fan of Battlefield but this plus no mod tools means I simply won't buy it. And don't tell me they need this shit, they did perfectly well so far without it. Good for them they dont care about taking the Modern Warfare fanbase and loosing their own, I guess they don't have pride or something ...

Suggestions / Re: Tree resistance
« on: 20-09-2011, 12:09:16 »
As much as it hurts to type this, but the bomb shelter tents need to stay the way they are. They play too important of a role, especially in the desert maps.

What about trenches and bunkers digged in the sand ? Apart from kidney ridge, that may need one more trench at the top, most flags have enough of those to take cover from ennemy HE...

Modding / Re: French Hope
« on: 06-09-2011, 22:09:33 »
I have these maps and ran around on them and all I thought was "lol two whole teams could run past each pther here without ever seeing each other."

I've only played Dynamo with push but it didn't seemed too big at all. It was kind of like Siege of Tobruk with lots of planes... Of course counterattacks are harder because the map is bigger but it fits with the defence of Dunkirk situation so it is fine. I see how 4km maps can be too big, but big 2km maps are good, especially with the 128 players servers coming up. Anyway, with the push I hardly see two 32p teams run past each other like you said...

General Discussion / Re: Aug. 09/2011 Gamespy review of 2.4
« on: 17-08-2011, 12:08:25 »
I am just saying, don't make my idea for FH2 come across as ridiculous, especially why I am still lobbying for it, is all. You can put your fists down now.

Oh, okay. You're simply saying my comment is ridiculously put although it isn't. No need to punch you in the face indeed... ::)

General Discussion / Re: Aug. 09/2011 Gamespy review of 2.4
« on: 17-08-2011, 11:08:08 »
@ djinn :

Oh so this is your idea now ? Last time I checked it was Battlegroup's idea ... ::)

General Discussion / Re: Aug. 09/2011 Gamespy review of 2.4
« on: 17-08-2011, 09:08:33 »
Well, objects would be easier to avoid so I guess there would be less weird collision problems.

General Discussion / Re: Aug. 09/2011 Gamespy review of 2.4
« on: 17-08-2011, 09:08:06 »
When it comes to traversing anything that isn't flat terrain, it's a coin toss as to whether you'll be traveling across the ground smoothly. This especially applies to vehicles, with the dated physics system struggling to accommodate your halftrack hitting a pothole.

Another good reason to give two speeds to vehicles ...

General Discussion / Re: FH2 Teamwork theory
« on: 06-08-2011, 20:08:44 »
@ Archimonday

You seem to be complaining about the suppression effect giving an advantage to the mg gunner because the other guns don't have it, but this advantage was wanted by the devs to make mgs more effective iirc, not so much for suppression...  :-\

General Discussion / Re: FH2 Teamwork theory
« on: 06-08-2011, 07:08:06 »
Suppression increases team-play by giving players reason enough to work together to achieve fire superiority on the battlefield.

Last note:

Nobody is talking about increasing it, but making it universal to all weapons.

If all weapons have it, there will be more ... And fire superiority can be achieved without it. I repeat I've never seen "an smg gunner winning against 3 or 4 riflemen at any distances" nor eliminated "a whole squad with my garand or G43 with 3 greasegun shooting at me".

General Discussion / Re: FH2 Teamwork theory
« on: 05-08-2011, 22:08:32 »
@Beaufort, blur is to simulate the fact that you close your eyes when there's a bullet that land near you, like when somebody claps his hands infront of your face. And also to simulate the fact that dust, branches, rocks and other things bounce around making you close your eyes to avoid those things to hit your eyes.

Yes I know what suppression is for but the blur is just too much, so I'd rather have nothing. Increasing deviation or the sway with suppression would be nice but it's simply not possible with bf2 ... :\

You sound as if now any single man can easily beat up a whole squad, which is simply not true. We don't need an ugly effect on top of six ennemies, give us a break ... :P
It's so easy to take out a whole squad with a G43 or a Garand, even if under 3 grease gun fire, sounds like you don't play enough.

Okay then, screenshots ? ;)

General Discussion / Re: FH2 Teamwork theory
« on: 05-08-2011, 21:08:22 »
Well against a very lousy squad and with some luck perhaps ...  :P

General Discussion / Re: FH2 Teamwork theory
« on: 05-08-2011, 21:08:27 »
@ Archimonday

You sound as if now any single man can easily beat up a whole squad, which is simply not true. We don't need an ugly effect on top of six ennemies, give us a break ... :P

General Discussion / Re: FH2 Teamwork theory
« on: 05-08-2011, 17:08:18 »
LOL! Yer sure, an SMger at any distance takes out a squad of riflemen firing at him alone... I should stop arguing with you really!

Yeah you should, because you never said "at any distance", and no I've never seen that happen.

Natty asked me to explain myself regarding suppression aiding teamplay. Well, if a number of people firing at an enemy and hence suppressing them for another group to flank them and finish them off isn't a good enough example of teamplay, then I really don't know what clearer example of teamplay works for you.

Still, we don't need the suppression blurr for that to happen (and if you can't answer respectfully to someone who disagrees with you, you might as well shut up ! >:().

BOT and ignoring Djinn :

I don't like the suppression effect, but I think two speeds for vehicles would avoid a lot of teamkills and so make armors and infantry work a lot better together...

General Discussion / Re: FH2 Teamwork theory
« on: 05-08-2011, 16:08:37 »
See how that theory works - Go ahead, remove blurr completely, make the whizzes LOUD and see if that makes people keep their head down. Have you NEVER seen an smg go up against 3 or evne 4 riflemen and kill all of them?

Well smgs were made to pawn rifles, so yes I have and it's okay.

I mention not dissecting partial arguments because my argument had more to do with creating an effect that will make suppressed enemy's keep their heads down than just saying blurr, blurr and more blurr.

If you must counter an argument, is all I am saying, then use the argument total, not a word out of context.

Suppression =/ blurr.
Suppression, according to what I suggest = blurr (As it already exists) scaled DOWN to EACH gun + camera-twitch... Not the same thing

I'm not using arguments out of context, I'm saying like natty that suppression (i.e. blurr effect) DON'T increase teamwork and I wonder who the f* do you think you are to reply to us with such a condescending attitude ...  >:(

General Discussion / Re: FH2 Teamwork theory
« on: 05-08-2011, 14:08:19 »
Suppression makes people team-play more because... well, frankly, its a bit disturbing that I even HAVE to explain this to you, Natty... as a dev and all. Its quite obvious.

 ::) lol ... No it is not. Suppression is about hearing gun shots and whizzes around your head and not risking to take a bullet, not about some phoney blurr effect...

Ermmm... Ok, where do I start. Its a VIDEO GAME?

You can't simulate real life perfectly, that's why there is a Hud, crosshairs etc...?

And we all LOVE the HUD, crosshairs etc. don't we ?... (sarcasm  ::))

The blurr effect is to represent disorientation from near-hits and the effect it has on the mind of a person under such conditions. Some people in a suppressed ground ingame MAY be unblurred, or not blurred enough and can fire back. But with the volume of shots coming their way, they WONT. So they qualify as suppressed also. Some will face the total effect and will be simply too disoriented to fire back anyway... Its called a GAME MECHANIC. Its arbitrary, except when in context to create a certain desired effect, in this case, that of a RL suppression, which would otherwise not be possible.

And LIKE I SAID we don't need this effect  because other effects such are whizzes and gun shots are there for it ! You are dumb enough to get up against three shooters or more ? Well, that's one easy frag for them ...

DONT selectively read it - That's cheap tactics and muddies people's argument. Take the argument AS IT EXISTS, and dissect it that way.

Why you arrogant son of a  :-X  ...

Yes but the fact that this is a video game nullifies that risk... What do you care if you don't manage to shoot that MGer... You'll respawn in 15 seconds anyway. The "phoney blurr effect" would make those shots considerably more impossible thus simulating a real life situation where you would stay down if an MG is firing 1200 rounds per minute in your general direction. I remember watching a documentary last week where some US guys were on patrol in North Africa when an MG nest opened up on them. Some of them were shot and the whole squad had to wait until nightfall, they were too scared to even try to retreat...

Yeah, on the squad leader if you are lucky, but also perhaps in a very distant flag ... I say it isn't such a big deal that we should have more blurr, especially with more players it would be awful.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 27