• Search
  • Register
  • Log in
  • Ace of Spades Game Forums » Gameplay
  • Note: This forum is merely an archive. It is no longer possible to login or register. - StackOverflow
    New Ace of Spades Forums: http://buildandshoot.com/
  • Three Class Proposal; Gunners, Grunts, and Assaulters
  • 12
     

    There seem to be three different sub-types of players. Those who like to build elaborate bunkers, those who like to dig a little hole and snipe, and those who say eff it and rush at the other two. I'd like to propose three classes and a few weapons that should make each camp more powerful at their preferred job, but more reliant on other players to cover their weakness.

    Here is a rough outline, with items listed by keybind.

    DEFENSIVE CLASS: Gunner

    Oriented toward bunker building and controlling terrain with his machine gun, his lack of grenades and reliance on a pistol when his gun isn't deployed means he is very weak when unprepared and needs teammates to defend his position's blind spots. His concrete is pick-resistant, grenade and shovel-proof but limited to base resupply, while his belt-fed machine gun can overheat but never runs out of ammo.

    1. Shovel
    2. Pick
    3. Blocks (x50)
    4. Machine Gun
    5. Pistol
    6. Concrete (x25)

    MIDFIELD CLASS: Grunt

    The current class plus, the Grunt is always capable at offense or defense, but at his best when supporting a specialist or attacking specialists from their weaknesses. He can heal teammates, but not himself, with the bandage, encouraging riflemen to buddy up to better survive. His camo blocks can be assigned any color as a regular block can, but consist of mostly empty space with just enough colored voxels to break up outlines, allowing him to conceal his face behind it and snipe at unattentive enemies.

    1. Shovel
    2. Pick
    3. Blocks (x50)
    4. Rifle
    5. Grenades (x4)
    6. Camo (x25)
    7. Bandage

    OFFENSIVE CLASS: Assaulter

    Slightly faster than the other two classes, the Assaulter sacrifices building ability and range for close-in firepower. Unable to dig, his limited supply of blocks, unable to be refilled in the field, are only intended for negotiating obstacles. However he enjoys the only mobile automatic weapon in the game, the somewhat inaccurate submachine gun, and the only concrete-busting explosive, dynamite. With these tools he is equipped to blast and shoot his way through machine-gun nests and trenches. However when stealth is preferred, the knife allows him to run silently at his slightly-faster speed and catch intel-guarding sentries unaware.

    2. Knife
    3. Blocks (x10)
    4. Submachine Gun
    5. Grenades (x2)
    6. Dynamite (x2)

    For a rough pattern I am looking at the Korean War, which featured a lot of hills and mountains, a lot of infantry brawling, and a LOT of trenches. There were three basic small arms used there; semi-automatic rifles, submachine guns, and machine guns. Everyone is pretty familiar with these from the volume of WWII games out there, but I'll be clear; powerful machine-gun positions (and doubley so artillery) force trench fighting. So I will start with the machine-gun and its class, the Gunner.

    DEFENSIVE CLASS: Gunner

    Currently most defenders can get sniped out of their elaborate multi-story bunkers without a need to close for hand grenades, leaving just a hollow box to ignore and avoid. With machine guns, the volume of fire allows you to win a plinking fight, but even this won't be good enough of itself. After all, if you get sniped in the head on the first shot, your machine gun dies as well. This gets rid of the incentive to watch out a window all day, since the enemy will spot you first and empty your helmet. Instead a machine-gunner might take the gun and pull a John Rambo, which is great and all, but now we've nothing but a newly overpowered offensive class.

    The solution is a deployable machine gun with a steel shield. Deployed like a block of voxel terrain, the tile occupied by the gun -cannot- be shot through, ever, and can only be destroyed by the pick (returning the weapon to its deployer) or explosives. Helping the gunner build a strong nest are his limited supply of concrete blocks, renewable at the base or slowly salvaged with his pick. With a bunker of his design the gunner can command everything the deployed gun sees outside of his window. With an interact key he can enter and leave the gun if threatened, and even let another trooper take over while he heads back for more concrete. Or if he decides to pack up and move, his pick quickly dismantles the gun back into his inventory and he can head for greener pastures.

    The machine-gun itself shoots rifle powered rounds at a steady rate of fire and near-rifle accuracy, allowing the gunner to quickly kill exposed troops but not quite give him a bullet-proof sniper's scope. Enemies occupying a trench with a machine-gun firing on it will be strongly encouraged to keep their heads down by the constant drumming of potential headshots whistling overhead. The gun itself doesn't run out of ammunition, but a heat bar will slowly build up. Once full the gun cannot be fired until it has completely cooled again. For a Gunner operating the weapon, he has the option to change the barrel with R, which plays a short sound and quickly returns the weapon to action. For other players borrowing the weapon, no such option exists. This reduces the usefulness of a borrowed MG and encourages but does not force Gunners to man their own positions. If a gunner is shot, his old gun remains in place and he is able to place a new weapon. However if he places a third gun, his first will despawn. This prevents MG's from cluttering the field but still lets gunners have two guns to play with.

    Naturally his pistol is a dismal eight-round weapon, fairly inaccurate, and unable to instantly kill with a headshot. Its only saving grace is a slightly faster-firing semi-automatic mode and low recoil. With clever murder-holes inside his bunker he stands a fair chance at defending himself from a single rifleman, but generally will need other troops around to protect him from close combat.

    Concrete is just what it sounds like; semi-permanent building blocks. It can be destroyed with a pick after about five seconds of frantic chipping or blown up with dynamite if you happen to have it, but otherwise provides grenade-proof, shovel-proof, bullet-proof protection for the industrious Gunner. Large blockhouses can form near the base to improve defensive play, while simple concrete walls or pillboxes grow as midfield positions prove their value. Each concrete block is a mix of a few shades of grey, making them possible to spot from ordinary grey blocks. Gunners are encouraged to use economy when placing concrete due to its requisite return to the base when the twenty-five blocks are exhausted, compared to dirt which is easily collected with the pick.

    Is it balanced? The gunner can dominate large areas of the map, but only one window at a time. He can leave second guns for teammates, but said teammates will no longer be watching his back from close combat. And he has no grenades, so he has no way to reach an enemy simply standing to the side of his window chipping at his concrete with a pick or dynamiting him out. The gunner ultimately relies on riflemen to protect the outside of his bunker from being overwhelmed from the flanks. And offensively, the gunner can be of some use in a hasty position hammering at the enemy battlements, but will require other soldiers to clear and capture territory.

    MIDFIELD CLASS: Grunt

    There isn't much to say about the Grunt, and that probably suits these players fine. By not changing much about the current loved trooper, we avoid shaking up anyone's playstyle. However we do add two tools to his inventory, camo blocks and bandages. These strengthen what he is already good at (entrenching and sniping) and add a team benefiting skill (healing).

    Grunts are as at home in a Gunner's bunker covering a secondary window as they are taking out an enemy bunker with grenades. Friendly assaulters will appreciate their shovel and pick in digging tunnels or breaking through defenses, while enemy assaulters will hate them for long-range firepower that picks them off before the SMG becomes effective. And of course two opposed pairs of Grunts can exchange curses and bullets with eachother as they exchange bandages with themselves. Grunts specialize in doing better what the other classes can't do at all, and so a Grunt player will always be a worthwhile addition to the team.

    The bandage is a simple 'weapon' that quickly heals up injured soldiers. It is infinite but cannot be applied in full force to the player using it, keeping it from being a rambo tool. Instead Grunts very slowly recover health while the bandage is held in their hand. A stubborn grunt in a foxhole can take a hit and return to the fight by himself, but two grunts working together will put a lot more pressure on the enemy in much shorter time because of the effectiveness gap between self-healing and buddy-healing. This healing power lets grunts hold trenches and foxholes more effectively than before. And if a revive ability was ever considered for the game, I would recommend the Grunt have it.

    Camo is another deployable block type. Unlike concrete, which obviously stops bullets, camo does not. It also does not block sight completely, having a mix of clear and colored voxels inside of the block. However it does prevent moving through itself, allowing players to build a sort of barbed wire wall that needs chopping through and doesn't provide shelter from defensive fire. Camo is destroyed by any explosive, picks, shovels, or the knife, being slightly more resistant than regular blocks for hand tools destroying it. It, like concrete, can only be placed or recovered, never collected by destroying regular blocks. Camo can be matched or assigned to any color allowing team-colored camo, concrete-colored camo, fleshtone-colored camo, or even black camo to make your 'barbed wire' a little more imposing. Camo will find its use largely in the midfield by breaking up the outline of helmets peeking out of trenches and foxholes, or be incorporated into bunker designs. Who wouldn't be proud of an enormous camoflague-covered concrete bunker guarding their intel with little machine-gun murder-holes concealed behind concrete camo blocks?

    Lastly, his offensive and defensive power is boosted with four grenades, keeping him effective against his upcoming short-range rival, the Assaulter, and able to flush out Gunners from even the most elaborate casemates.

    Is it balanced? By being better than the other two classes in most situations but worse than them in a few situations, Grunts should make up the bulk of teams, especially with the attractive healing ability and long-range weapon. This is ideal for everyone, I'm sure.

    OFFENSIVE CLASS: Assaulter

    Some people just can't stop moving. Other people aren't good with the rifle. Yet a few more just want to blow stuff up. The Assaulter is for these players. Armed with a submachine gun, dynamite, and grenades; this trooper sacrifices earthworking tools for offensive punch and a small boost to his speed as well. With Grunts providing covering fire, Assaulters storm concrete pillboxes and blast them open with dynamite, then clear out the defenders with grenades and submachinegun fire. If the assaulter comes across really well-built defenses, he may be stalled up with his lack of spade and pick if the explosives run out. In these situations, switching to the knife and trying to sneak in may be the best choice if he's cut off from the grunts. By offsetting his destructive and offensive power with a lack of range and construction tools, the Assaulter becomes a specialist just as the Gunner did, unable to replace the Grunt but far better as part of a team.

    The Submachine Gun is a simple enough weapon to understand. By firing pistol-powered bullets in quick bursts, Assaulters can drop enemies at close range before a Grunt or Gunner can pull the trigger a second time. But with its recoil and inaccuracy, Assaulters have to hope to get lucky beyond medium range shooting where Grunts excel. The weapon has a twenty or thirty round magazine (balance depending) and enough ammunition to last a quick and violent assault or a slow and methodical one. Ideally an Assaulter who runs out of ammo is already returning to base with the intel.

    The Knife is a specialty tool for the Assaulter. It allows him to quietly infiltrate enemy lines by removing his running sound while in hand and lets him destroy camo nets and deployed machine guns quietly, if he can sneak up on them. He does not run any faster, however, so once detected he's best off getting his gun out and shooting through.

    Dynamite behaves similar to grenades with two exceptions. One, it cannot be thrown as far but has a longer fuse time. Two, it destroys blocks two spaces away (5x5) where current grenades destroy blocks one space away (3x3), and destroys concrete one space away where grenades cannot destroy concrete. This makes it ideal for big demolition jobs like destroying an enemy bridge or trench, or cracking holes in concrete bunkers to knock them out with grenades. Dynamite emits the sinister hiss of a burning fuse when thrown, giving some warning to everyone around.

    Is it balanced? Unable to out-shoot a grunt or gunner at long range, but tearing through them at close range, Assaulters will never dominate the teams because they can neither hold terrain nor drastically manipulate it. Assaulters may well be stopped by terrain obstacles that Grunts could shovel through, and while they can make great use of hidden tunnels cannot dig them. Ultimately the Assault class will likely stick close to grunts and gunners, defending bunkers and trenches with their submachine guns until the call comes up to clear an enemy strongpoint with their explosives. Or, if feeling adventurous, the assaulter can try sneaking around the edges of the map to find a blind spot of the enemy's before a grunt pulls a bead on his head.

    In conclusion this proposal depends on only a few new programming tricks; partially colored and partially clear terrain blocks (camo), variable durability blocks (concrete and camo), placable, interactable blocks (deployable MGs), healing tools (bandage), and variable damage explosives (dynamite). Everything else is just new voxel art, sound effects and getting players (and the developers, obviously) to accept the ideas. I hope my time as a Project Reality developer lends a little credence to my suggestion, and I'm eager to discuss it with anyone who sees a possible problem and make changes as debate determines.

    I also had the idea for a mortar that tosses grenades based on bearing, elevation and power input, but maybe later.

    TL;DR

    Everything above is legalese nonsense promising you free beer if you post your complete agreement for the OP.

    #10208
    Nikov
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    LOVE IT!
    the only this is i don't want a deployable mg with unlimited rounds i want a regular one that does moderate damage but it takes long to reload.

    #10209
    Noire
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    My thought on unlimited ammo was that some limit had to be in place on how much he could shoot. However with limited ammo the gunner needs to pack back up, go home to base, return to his bunker, and find some jerk dynamited it while he was out. With an overheat system, gunners don't need to abandon their post or annoy other players (say Grunts) to resupply them. Even so, they can't lean on the trigger constantly and have to pause from time to time, either for a second between each burst to cool the gun, or a few seconds between long firings to change the whole barrel. I figured that encouraged more skillful play, and prevents people from building a gun so close to the base they can fire virtually non-stop.

    Also deploying the MG is critical. If the MG could be used anywhere off the hip it becomes a more powerful SMG with a big slow clip. In my experience as a modder for BF2, we found gameplay drastically changes when machine guns do rifle-class damage just as real life. In Vanilla BF2, the LMG's were only useful at close range because at medium range riflemen had time to get a headshot while your rounds missed. In PR, players won't even think about getting into a shooting match with a deployed, in-cover machine gun. It simply controls everything in front of it, and you have to either sneak up on it or go around. My hope is that in AoS, players under MG fire will start digging in and digging under as they did in WWI to avoid established machine guns behind bulletproof shields.

    #10211
    Nikov
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

    ......sorry I got a little excited about this, honestly this would be perfect except the MG should run out of ammo.

    #10212
    iCecilJackson
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    If that was a deal to get everything else in, I'd take it.

    #10213
    Nikov
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    IMO
    Best Class suggestion ever. Plenty of thought put in and well said.
    A few things though.
    I suggest that the concrete just be very sturdy, taking a lot of hits to break, however still being spade resistant.
    On the topic of the LMG with unlimited ammo is that in order for it to be used effectively, as the hip-firing is just a pray and spray thing, you must deploy it. When I say this i mean right click it on an open block that allows you to actually aim it. Now with the overheating counters unlimited ammo, I suggest that a 15-second maximum firing rate would overheat it for close to 10 seconds or so.

    #10215
    Bobbunny
    Teh One Bunneh
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    Technical figures like the exact seconds to overheat are things that need tweaking, but that can only really be done over a couple of patches.

    Hip firing the MG may well be spray-and-pray, but in a short range bunker it remains powerful. My focus was to make the Gunner nearly defenseless against grunts and assaulters in a close fight or when surprised to offset his power at long range or any range he's dug in and established to defend. Letting him shoot off the hip, however inaccurate, makes him much more powerful when surprised than if the MG only worked when deployed in an open block.

    #10222
    Nikov
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    I was suggesting hip-firing as an inefficient, but useful way to fire, and the deployed way to fire it more accurately.

    #10224
    Bobbunny
    Teh One Bunneh
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    If the recoil is bad enough the pistol is preferred, ala DoD Source, its a non-issue. If its a rifle-round firing submachinegun, its a serious problem. So I guess it depends where it falls in there.

    #10227
    Nikov
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    I would play the game even more like that.... but in my opinion I find it a little like A.V.A
    But I would LOVE the offensive class.

    #10230
    Gnome
    Someone intellectual
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    Makes me wonder who's agreeing to the actual thread or just the promise of beer.

    I dunno, it's well thought out and everything, and would be pretty good for a mod, but I don't think it would help the core game- by introducing classes you're limiting people's options. Once they pick a class they're forced to play in that style, and one of the great things about AoS is it's level playing field for all players.

    Besides, the rifle could still wreck anyone and everyone at any range unless you nerfed the accuracy, and reducing the weapon accuracy would not improve the game in any way, shape or form.

    Forcing us to pick a class just so we can lay down camoflaged blocks is a horrible idea, too. I would never pick a class purely so that I could mark enemy tunnels I haven't discovered yet, and at the same time finding one and NOT being able to mark it would be incredibly frustrating.

    I'm a little unclear about how accurate the Machine gun would be- you say near rifle accurate, but does that include the massive recoil? If it fires rifle shots, you realise that most players would just treat it as such, firing 1-3 shots to get a target, and never bringing the gun close to overheating.

    At the end of the day though, your gun innaccuracies would force players to seek closer range combat, which in turn would promote far more tunneling. You need to find a way to balance this out to make above ground equally tempting, otherwise all those camo bunkers and concrete structures will be useless.

    We have a similar problem over at the artillery mounts thread- wondering if falling artillery will make more players migrate to tunnelling. Currently the best counter-tunneling idea so far has been landmines that discolour a block- easily spotted on the surface, but much harder to see (though still possible) down in tunnels. Have a look if you're interested: http://ace-spades.com/forums/topic.php?id=222#post-3796

    One final note- as a player that spends most of their time sneaking into the enemy base and wreaking havoc, I rely on the sounds I make mimicing those of the enemy. The fact that my rifle sounds like everyone else's is the only reason I can get away with it most of the time. If I were forced to use a submachine gun- a close range weapon that the enemy certainly wouldn't be firing close to their own base, I'd give my position away the first time I opened fire. Kind of destroys the stealth possibilities, doesn't it?

    Also doesn't it strike you as odd that the class that gets the dynamite is the only class that can't dig? Seems a bit backwards to me. If anything the grunt should be the one who can't dig, but now we're once again taking away options from the original game.

    #10231
    Beret
    Commando
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    Beret, I read half, but YOU ARE COMPLETELY FRIGGIN' RIGHT!

    #10233
    Gnome
    Someone intellectual
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    Despite me making an ass of myself at first, I would have to agree with Beret. All the class system would do is make it more linear and less open and free. unless of course you found the perfect balance of power and accuracy for all the guns

    #10242
    iCecilJackson
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    I keep my stance, just with edits. I prefer of a class/weapon picking sort of thing

    #10243
    Bobbunny
    Teh One Bunneh
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    If you let every player hold all three weapons at once, you'd probably find that the rifle would get used the most by far anyway (assuming the MG is only mountable). In fact you could just solve the option limiting by giving everyone all those weapons and abilities. Level playing field restored.

    #10249
    Beret
    Commando
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    You wrote an entire essay on this? You don't have to go into minute detail, Ben can figure that out if he decides to add it.
    Almost 2500 words.
    Also I agree, we should all get free beer.

    #10251
    Loaf
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    Heineken

    #10258
    Bobbunny
    Teh One Bunneh
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    Paragraph by paragraph.

    1. Once someone chooses a class, they can always choose a different class on respawn. Furthermore if they don't want to change their way of playing at all, they can be Grunts and just ignore camo and bandages.

    2. The rifle will be unchanged. See point one.

    3. Camo was given to the grunt as concrete was given to the gunner. It is simply to compliment his existing style of play. Players may continue to mark tunnels with any of the classes, as all classes can still lay down colored blocks.

    4. Near rifle, minimal recoil, when deployed. Just like the real thing. If a player keeps himself to short controlled round bursts, good for him. He is skilled. Overheating is a mechanism to prevent holding down the trigger and sawing through hillsides, not to prevent him from being effective.

    5. This doesn't follow. There is no decreased accuracy for the rifle. The machine gun is accurate at long range. Only the assaulter is oriented for close quarters, and he is discouraged from digging his own tunnels to prevent what you just suggested. See point two.

    6. You are not forced to use a submachine gun. You may use your rifle. See point two.

    7. It would make no sense to take digging away from the grunt, so I didn't. If it makes more sense to give the assaulter a pick and spade, that's fine.

    Giving all players all weapons and all abilities removes the teamwork incentive of complimentary abilities. It also results in a very cluttered keyboard. However you are correct that the rifle will most likely be the most use. This is by design, since everyone seems to rather like the rifle being the game's mainstay.

    #10262
    Nikov
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    "Giving all players all weapons and all abilities removes the teamwork incentive of complimentary abilities. It also results in a very cluttered keyboard. "

    I'd have to strongly disagree with that- I see no reason why everyone having the tools would diminish teamwork at all. Quite often I've seen a player building a fort, and another player will spot this, switch to the same coloured block, and start helping the construction. If it's in no mans land, others often turn up to cover the builders' backs as they construct. None of this teamwork is planned or even appears in chat. Everyone is free to help as they see fit, and they choose what role to fill based on what is needed most, NOT based on what their class limitations will allow them to do.

    It also wouldn't be a cluttered keyboard if everyone had everything. Just assign them to the numbers like most shooters do: 1=spade, 2=pick, 3=blocks (including camo, concrete, maybe even a barbed wire block) 4=Rifle, 5=Submachine gun, 6= Mounted Machine Gun, 7= Bandages, 8=Dynamite, 9=grenades.

    Simple.

    #10273
    Beret
    Commando
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    I fail to understand how adding two new classes with new abilities will 'limit' players. It only gives them more options and allows them to choose what suits them best. You continue to draw this false dilemma between being able to help by having everything at hand or being crippled from helping because of class 'limitations'. You simply choose how you'll help the team most at spawn. You can attack with any of these classes. You can defend with any of these classes. The question only arises "do you want to be better at attacking or defending"? And if you choose to be better at attacking, you give up some ability to defend and vice versa. Players are free to choose any class they want as there is no limit to classes or weapons. They are not limited in any way because they make a choice to have X or Y bonus for A or B drawback, or stick to Grunt for no particular perks or penalties but a strong package all around.

    Its like ice cream. Vanilla, chocolate, or vanilla/chocolate swirl? You are not forced to choose between vanilla or chocolate.

    #10284
    Nikov
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    lol no. classfags.

    #10296
    Nomad
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    It's really quite simple. When you spawn, do you know what's going to unfold and how best to tackle it? Do you know where the 16 enemies are, will be, and how good they are? Do you know where a bunker needs to be built, tunnel dug/blocked off, bridge built or destroyed, structure undermined or completed? Do you know how many blocks, and of what type, are needed to complete a vital tower/pillbox? Do you know where the main artery for enemy troops are which needs suppression the most? Do you know where the sniper nests, deep infiltration tunnels, fake entrances and enemy miners are?

    No. you haven't a clue. Nobody does.

    Now, based on these variables, and bearing in mind you have no idea whatsoever where, when and how you will encounter any number of these variables, you have to choose, right from the get go, what you will specialise in. Choose the Gunner, and BAM- you're useless if something needs to be quickly blown up, if your mate needs healing badly, or if -god forbid- an enemy gets close to you.

    Choose the Grunt, and BAM- you can't make tough structures if you get pinned down, and once again you can't lay a charge if the situation you find yourself in calls for it.

    Choose the Assaulter; you can't dig. You can't build. You can't suppress. In fact apart from laying explosives you're pretty much useless at anything above close range. And you have a knife which you will never, ever use.

    The obvious argument to this is that you pick a class based on what you intend to play like.

    Fair enough. So what happens when you choose a Gunner, and head towards a bunker under construction in no-man's land to help out and set up shop, but before you get there you find yourself spotted by an enemy sniper? You think your pistol will save you? You think you can deploy your MG while the sniper has a bead on you with his rifle? Supposing you were an Assaulter in the same situation? you couldn't even create cover for yourself, or dig a hole to hide in, and your wild useless SMG return fire would only add to the enemy's joy as they planted a bullet right in your head. And for what? you lose just because you picked the wrong guy at spawn? how the hell were you supposed to know what to pick? You're forced to play in a very linear, predictable way based on what class you chose.

    This is what I mean by limiting players. AoS is an incredibly dynamic game. You never know how any given life will turn out, what you'll need to be able to do, what situation you will encounter and how best to deal with it until you get there. By limiting a player's kit, you limit what they can deal with, and because of that, you limit how they will play. You spot a Grunt and it's all 'ok, so his gun outranges mine, better dig in and wait here under cover'. You see a Gunner and you automatically think 'Right so he'll be hunkering down, the obvious thing is to flank him and get in close' etc etc.

    It's mechanical, robotic and monotonous. With everyone having the same abilities instead, each player has far more scope to be creative, be equipped to approach any situation they encounter, and who wins and who loses comes down to personal tactics and skill, not some arbitrary lotto at spawn, and how well you performed within a predefined way of playing according to the class system.

    TL:DR: I don't want to be better at attacking. I don't want to be better at defending either. I want to be able to meet any challenge I find knowing I have the right tools for the job, and knowing that my opponent has the same stuff I do, so that our fight will be decided on our skill and tactics alone, not some rock paper scissors game we played several minutes before.

    #10315
    Beret
    Commando
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    Yeah, that's what I meant. Thanks Beret.

    #10324
    Nomad
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    So your argument is that since choosing a class will make you less than ideal in all situations, regardless of how it might strengthen you in others, you never want to have classes. All new weapons and tools must be added universally, no compromises. Under no circumstances should a player have to decide between anything other than green or blue. You want Unreal Tournament with all guns from the start or no gun but the current same-old rifle.

    If that is your position, there is no need to argue with you. You will be against any suggestion to tweak or balance the classes in any way unless everything ever added to the game is availible to everyone always. And regardless of the many successful games out there that feature classes as a means of encouraging teamwork, I suppose you can't be argued to view the Tribes, Day of Defeat, Team Fortress, Battlefield, or any other franchise as a good example of class based play giving more options to players without overwhelming them with capabilities or overpowering them to where teams are useless.

    Your opposition on principle is noted, but everyone is still free to offer their thoughts regarding the specifics of this class-based proposal.

    #10349
    Nikov
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    I always like class-based gameplay. Actually, i just want keep the class simple enough (assault attack, medic heal, etc, etc). i dont agree on the part where its says " some guys fight, others build.". each class has it own building ability. Thats what i dont wanna change, at all

    i like Beret opinion. But, what i really like about AoS is the goddamn TEAMWORK. AoS surprisingly amuse me for its realism. You need to cover, make bunker, & stick together as a team. The class what i mean is a class that have it own strong & weak point, making players rely on each other, not the class like in COD, when you can become 1 man army and kill everybody. In this game, alone means pretty much dead, means every class has each own role. i also want each class have limit how many player can use the class in each team (Medic, lets say, 4 on each team).

    #10376
    adhiofawkes
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    After reading through the comments, I seem to be in the minority of people, but I love this idea.

    I fail to see the logic in Beret's argument about wanting to be able to meet any threat on your own. That is what teamwork exists for. Gunner? Buddy up with some Grunts. Assaulter? Buddy up with some Grunts. Defensive Grunt? Buddy up with a Gunner and some Grunts. Offensive Grunt? Get an Assaulter for a partner. Offensive & Defensive Grunt? Partner up with more Grunts.

    By "limiting", as people seem to insist on calling it, what each class can do, you encourage teamwork in order to be able to face whatever may come your way. In the current game, I only see around 2 or 3 people per server actually act as a team.

    Another argument that came up was that you don't know what to expect when you spawn, so you won't know what class to pick. That is why you pick a class that compliments your play style.

    I really why some people are so resistant to change and prefer to stick to the status quo. Ben said that he plans to add more guns, and I doubt we'll see the day when we can go all GTA-style and carry a personal arsenal in our pocket. Classes are probably on the cards in the future anyway.

    #10392
    Influx
    Ceci n'est pas une poster
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    Well, sort of, but also not quite. Class based games can work just fine, and indeed TF2 is doing an absolute roaring trade with it, and I actually come to AoS from a Battlefield background so I'm fairly familiar with the merits of a class based game.

    It's just that TF2, DOD, Tribes and even Battlefield work as class games for particular reasons- they're all multiple objective based multiplayer experiences with weapons that aren't perfectly accurate (Tribes perhaps though). Now, one class' defficiency is made up by contributions from others working together in a team to cover each other's tactical blind spots etc etc etc.

    The thing is, AoS plays very differently from those shooters, and this is what makes it so popular. In all the others, you can memorise the layout and routes, you know more or less what the enemy will be trying to do and if, say, control point X over there goes grey, you can decide at a snap what class would be best to deal with it. With Ace of spades, the terrain is completely random, and completely changeable. Troops can get around to literally anywhere on the map undetected by creating their own path. This means that you can come under attack literally at any time. Combat is virtually always at medium to long range, and a balance is maintained with accurate shooting, dodging fire, and navigating the voxel landscape, often at the same time.

    Now unlike those other games, AoS is much more of a casual experience- there's no ranking, no server browsing (to see who's playing) and no friendlists. As it is, the teamwork in the game is as dynamic as the gameplay- friendlies may group together for a while to get something done, then disperse. Many players I've seen are quite versatile in their play style, and will build, hunker down, intel grab or sabotage the enemy on the fly as their situation sees fit. The random nature of AoS' terrain and the varied ways in which every player moves and fights favours improvisation, far more than the other games (yes even BC2. Sure the buildings collapse but it doesn't change the paths).

    That's basically why I think in the case of Ace of Spades, and it's particular kind of unique gameplay, a class system which would work fine in another game would be to this game's detriment rather than its benefit.

    But relax, it's just my opinion! It's not gospel or anything.

    #10413
    Beret
    Commando
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    Wtf? More class suggestions? The first few suggestions were bad enough, now it's getting stupid.

    #10458
    Dynasty
    Novelty
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    Beret,

    From what I've read between you and Nikov, it sounds like you believe that most players (yourself included) will gravitate to the rifle exclusively. If this is worth anything, it tells me that 90% of people won't be using these new classes because they won't be familiar with them, because their weapons won't be as "jack-of-all-trades" as the rifle, because the won't be able to shoot a dime from five-hundred paces, and more. Fine. So most players don't expand a little bit. So what if you aren't as adventurous as others? No big deal. Stick with the grunt class.

    These other classes are merely complimenters. Just realize that if one or two people per team are playing as an offensive/defensive class and the rest play as grunts, that that will make a difference. A couple people with TNT on the offensive can do short work of a good pillbox. A couple gunners can make a good defense great. You can't expect to have any game work with players choosing one class exclusively, so we must assume the opposite, that players will "pepper" the mainstream class with the more specialized classes.

    Like you said, this game is very dynamic by nature. There is no way that this could work if there wasn't so much freedom of exploration, the freedom of combat, the freedom of building tactical resources, and the like. How can one know what to expect out on the field? The truth is that you can't. As you get more experience, you will find ways to adapt to more and more situations and avoid making stupid mistakes that inevitably get you killed. The addition of two classes to compliment the main class will simply add more flair, more challenge to an already great experience. When you get in close-combat with an Assault class, you have to make the split-second choice: should you take cover, should you toss a grenade, should you go for the reaction shot and hope to take him down? All I'm saying is that the current system is functional, but bland. These will add new challenges for players to face and add a new dynamic to gameplay.

    Also, not to sound rude, but if classes get implemented and you prefer the rifle to the extent that you do, stick with the rifle class, but please don't ruin other's experiences with your ideals.

    These classes are a fantastic idea imo, Nikov. I think what needs to happen is for there to be a limit on classes to keep emphasis on rifle-based play, this limit can be set when the server is launched so that this variable can be exploited for the most game balance.

    #10460
    iamthemoose
    Member
    Posted 12 years ago
     

    No, moose, it has nothing to do with 'not being familiar' with new weapons. The rifle was once new as well, you know. Nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with how 'adventurous' a player is. How adventurous I am as a player is neither here nor there- the point I'm making is that due to the nature of this particular game, most combat takes place at medium to extremely long range. The rifle is no 'jack of all trades', it is the best suited weapon to the kind of combat this game involves. New weapons won't change that. Combat will still be long range, and the rifle will just make more innaccurate weapons redundant. As a result, people-will-not-use-them the way they are currently suggested. Not even the stragglers that you hope for. Who would want to be stuck with such an abundantly inferior class anyway?

    you have to make the split-second choice: should you take cover, should you toss a grenade, should you go for the reaction shot and hope to take him down? All I'm saying is that the current system is functional, but bland. These will add new challenges for players to face and add a new dynamic to gameplay.

    All those 'challenges' you listed are already in the game.

    They happen all the time if you know how to find them.

    if classes get implemented and you prefer the rifle to the extent that you do, stick with the rifle class, but please don't ruin other's experiences with your ideals.

    Sorry if I offend you, but like I said, they're just opinions, for pete's sake. Hell I'm actually trying to work WITH the idea and find a solution. Besides, if this forum is anything to go by, the 'ideal' of classes seems to be more at risk of ruining other's experiences than any notion of not liking them.

    #10478
    Beret
    Commando
    Posted 12 years ago
    12
    RSS feed for this topic  

    Reply »

    You must log in to post.

  • Tags
  •  

  •  
    Ace of Spades Game Forums is proudly powered by bbPress.   //   Theme by Mike Lothar  
    [ Time : 0.188s | 13 Queries ]