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 - Safe-Keeper

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7
Suggestions / Re: Adding rifle to the mortar kit
« on: 29-09-2009, 18:09:55 »
I can picture that happening just fine... you run out of ammo and instead of waiting for more you think "ah, to **** with it, I have a rifle, might as well join the fun".

Suggestions / Re: FoxHole
« on: 29-09-2009, 18:09:06 »
I like the predesigned foxhole idea. As someone else said, I don't think placing bunkers and foxholes has a place in FH2. Trucks deploying barb wire or tank obstacles would be a different story, but the maps are just too small for new buildings, however small.

But control points in which you have to unearth a trench or foxhole yourself? No problem in my eyes, as long as it's doable from an engine point of view, that is (I guess you'd have to make a custom material for the 'terrain' covering the earthworks so that that it only takes damage from shovels and pickaxes and whatnot). I see gameplay benefiting greatly from such a feature placed strategically in a couple of assault maps.

General Discussion / Re: The Frostbite engine.
« on: 29-09-2009, 16:09:28 »
Also destructible enviroments is EXTREMELY OVERRATED.
Wow, never saw that one coming in a million years.

My all-time favourite video game is X-Com UFO Defence, a strategy game from the 80's or 90's that had a fully destructible environment (with 'fully' I mean 'fully', not the rudimentary 'we say fully, but we mean you can only blow up trees and buildings and put some generic crates in the ground and whatnot' things we see in 3D games today). Everything, including whole hills, could be destroyed. Only problem was that the engine couldn't update things as they were partially destroyed, so you could, say, blow off the base of a lamp post and the rest of it would just hover in midair. But the experience of fighting out a massive squad- or platoon-level shootout in a city and see it get reduced to fire, ruins and smoke around you as you fought... just awesome, and probably one of the #1 reasons people still play and love UFO.

I'm glad to see 3D games are finally catching up - trust me, while the fairly limited and rudimentary (compared to X-Com UFO D) destruction physics in, say, Crysis or World in Conflict may be overrated to you, I expect huge things in this field. When we have a 3D game like Battlefield with a fully destructible terrain, like in X-Com UFO Defence, I'll swoon with happiness as I kill snipers by blowing up the ground floor of the houses in which they hide, sending the entire structure crashing down with them inside  ;D .

Suggestions / Re: Spawn supression
« on: 23-09-2009, 21:09:37 »
It can be done. All you have to do is assign a group # to spawn points at a given flag.
Ooooh, right, of course you can. Funny thing is, I've known about this feature for a long time, but never thought of implementing it this way.

Suggestions / Re: Spawn supression
« on: 23-09-2009, 02:09:33 »
It baffles me why this feature isn't in the BF series already - every spawn point has a radius the mapper can toggle individually for each spawn point. If an enemy player or vehicle comes within that radius, the game disregards that spawn point until it's clear.

Another good feature would be to divide a CP into different 'spawn areas' and let them choose themselves where to spawn. For example, if a CP has one spawn point in a bunker and two more throughout a house, you can choose if you want to spawn in the bunker or house.

Oh well, something to suggest to DICE come the next BF installment, I guess.

Suggestions / Re: Sniper Tree
« on: 18-09-2009, 13:09:01 »
Sniper trees
I second this. Ents with sniper rifles would be awesome to no end.

Suggestions / Re: immersive hud
« on: 18-09-2009, 13:09:28 »
As much as I like minimalism in HUD design, I'm not hardcore enough to choose to use it when everyone else get a fully working HUD. More power to the people who do it, I respect that they dare give themselves that handicap, but in my eyes, it's about as tempting as deliberately choosing to spawn in with only half the ammo and equipment as everyone else.

About the minimap and ammo counter - it's amazing how fast you adapt to playing without them, especially the latter.

Suggestions / Re: Artillery communication
« on: 18-09-2009, 13:09:29 »
Altfuture: wow, Project Reality syndrome much? Lighten up, dude  :-\ .

Yeah, and what happens when you don't get targeting assist messages? Did anyone see the damn spot at all? Nobody ever tells anything about my spots. Even if they did, I would consider it to be an incredibly good FH day because the team communication was at the extraordinary level.
Agree with this one, though. Artillery players' mastery of the English language seems to extend to "Artillery requesting a target" and nothing else (oh, except from "someone man that AA gun next to me and take out that 109, 'cause no way in **** am I gonna walk those twenty meters myself!). If you give them a target that doesn't suit their taste - "Artillery requesting a target". Once they feel they're done with a spot - "Artillery requesting a target". Once they have a good spot, silence.

Suggestions / Re: Artillery communication
« on: 15-09-2009, 23:09:58 »
The irony is that artillery spotting is actually incredibly simple. Just call for artillery (admittedly a tricky procedure in FH2), have the gun line fire one shot, give them feedback on how their shots are landing, and tell them to fire for effect once they're on target. Then provide feedback.

Not harder than sitting there watching shots hit the ground and tell the gun line things like "more to the left", "hold fire", "hitting targets", "killed one tank", etc.

It's one of those things that we should do automatically, yet have to train ourselves to do. Gaming is weird.

Suggestions / Re: Artillery communication
« on: 15-09-2009, 21:09:17 »
I like the idea. Don't know how to specifically implement it, but yes, commands such as "Fire at will", "Friendly Fire/Friendlies in target area", "Shift fire {one command for each direction}", "Fire for effect", etc. would be incredibly helpful. You could have them affect only the people in your squad, and then have players form artillery squads, with the squad consisting of gunners and spotters.

Do we need all casual players to be checking the website to understand the basic gameplay features? Makes me sick about this game that what makes you a better player is how much time you've spent playing it. That totally sucks imo.
OK, now you lost me. Isn't that how it's supposed to be? Shouldn't games reward play time with an advantage over those who haven't played as long? I remember a Zero Punctuation review in which Yahtzee bashed Brawl for not rewarding experience, stating, paraphrased, that "no matter how good you get, you can still lose to someone randomly mashing buttons".

Or did you mean to say that FH2 isn't intuitive enough, in which case I can't really agree. Games with features such as artillery can't be intuitive enough to make manuals, guides and forums obsolete, and players should check these sources for information before embarking on the battlefield. Unfortunately, we've gotten to the stage in recent years where people expect to be hand-held into games and have everything explained to them, and reading the manual is considered a defeat for many people. Shouldn't have to be that way, but it is.

Oh, and there's also a very helpful artillery instruction video out there ;) .

Suggestions / Re: Some reasonable ideas (IMO)
« on: 10-09-2009, 02:09:10 »
Regarding #1: at least in 2142, you can fine-tune the speed of a land vehicle with the use of your joystick's throttle. It might not be worth it to buy an ultra-cheap joystick for only this, but if it also helps you fly planes better, consider making the investment.

Perhaps when there is time on an eastern front map, but it would draw resources from much nicer things like great tanks and weapons.... so not such a great idea. But you could try modeling one for FH Smiley
:glances at list of vehicles and weapons already in mod:

You've got, what, two dozen vehicles for the UK alone? Just how many do you need :P ?!

General Discussion / Re: Favourite Normandy Map
« on: 06-09-2009, 21:09:31 »
I voted Lesbey, because I love... what? It's spelled... oh. Oh.


(seriously, though, I'll withold posting 'til after I've played the maps. Purple Heart Lane and Point de Hoc look cool, though, as well as whatever towns with tanks and street combat like in the trailer I might find in the release :) ).

General Discussion / Re: A guide to Pointe Du Hoc
« on: 06-09-2009, 21:09:03 »
Either way, it's content that counts, not grammar and typos  ;) .

General Discussion / Re: A guide to Pointe Du Hoc
« on: 06-09-2009, 21:09:15 »
But everyone know that from Battlefield 1942  :P .

Either way, I give the OP four grappling hooks out of five!

One grappling hook retracted for a couple of typos and grammatical errors.

Suggestions / Re: Panzer VIII Maus
« on: 07-08-2009, 00:08:29 »
So in other words, it's like a mix of the warships of 1942, the cap ships in Galactic Conquest, and the Titan in 2142.

Wow. Just wow.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7