1 Topic by Safe-Keeper (edited by Safe-Keeper 2007-07-05 20:00:02)

  • From: Grong, Norway
  • Registered: 2006-07-25
  • Posts: 5,192

Topic: Inherent strenghts and weaknesses of various factions?

I just got to thinking - in Ground Control, you had two factions, the Order of the New Dawn and the Crayven Corporation. The Crayven units were slower and more heavily armoured, while the Order units were faster and less hurt by suppressive fire, and armed with beam weapons which did more damage than the cannons and rifles of their Crayven counterparts. In most RTS games, you have the same thing. Americans get a +5 bonus in this, Chinese get a -10 penalty in that. It's part of adding flavor and atmosphere to the game - each faction has its own winning strategy.

Could this be an idea for First Strike? For example, if the Mon Calamari were added, their infantry could, engine permitted, be faster swimmers than those of other races. I had this idea for Galactic Conquest that they be exempt from drowning, but no was was ever found to make drowning time  be map or faction-specific. The Imperials could be slightly slower due to their armour, but probably not much, as the armour seems to be very light and mostly for psychological effect. Possibly they could have some bonus due to their strict military discipline. I think the wookiees would evidently get something strength-related, like slightly more hit points?

What about it?

Edit: Wrong forum, sorry. Please move to 'Wants List...'.

"One of the bitches actually gave birth while she was attacking, and her puppies joined in on the carnage."
--the awesomeness that is Boatmurdered.

Safe-Keeper's Website

  • From: Tuscaloosa, AL
  • Registered: 2007-01-20
  • Posts: 332

Re: Inherent strenghts and weaknesses of various factions?

hmmm... the rebels could be more faster then the imps it makes since to because they are always on the run and dont usually have as much equipment/armor

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/8104/sigpic4877913.jpg
non est innocentia, solum sunt noxiae gradus, There Is No Innocence, Only Degrees Of Guilt

generalrievous's Website

  • Registered: 2007-05-29
  • Posts: 546

Re: Inherent strenghts and weaknesses of various factions?

In an online class based game this up to weapons (ie the class).

Why? Because the player choose them, they are not forced onto him. Everyone is equal from the start. And that's what players like, unless its a roleplaying game. Me, I just want to drop down on a map, pick a weapon and go up against the enemy.

An obvious exactly is picking the standard stormtrooper, which carry a very nice long range rifle. The class knows how to use it with deadly effect. Or you could choose the heavy trooper and get a machinegun thing. Lots of blasting power, but not so good on accuracy. Etc.

Point with all this: Its redundant and will cause annoyance to players, because they wont have a choice. Its not a bad idea dont get me wrong, I'm just inherently negative tongue

  • From: Grong, Norway
  • Registered: 2006-07-25
  • Posts: 5,192

Re: Inherent strenghts and weaknesses of various factions?

Why can't we have both inherent differences and classes? Why does this need to be limited to RPGs?

"One of the bitches actually gave birth while she was attacking, and her puppies joined in on the carnage."
--the awesomeness that is Boatmurdered.

Safe-Keeper's Website

  • From: Canada
  • Registered: 2007-05-03
  • Posts: 26

Re: Inherent strenghts and weaknesses of various factions?

Probably because of the obvious noob factor. In CSS, the awp is a 1 shot kill, it ruins the game from the get go, making all the other guns obsolete. Having character skills that differ from unit to unit are only good when you are playing by yourself, because there are always flaws that the creators can't forsee. Like if what you say with the wookies having more hitpoints, you could have your team use them in a close quarters map and own the imperials because they can't beat a superior hitpoint team. You may have the same weapons, but it gives you an obvious advantage over them, because your team mates can take more damage then probably then two of your guys can.

I prefer just having everything evenly balanced with internet gaming, then the complaining issue gets pushed out out of the way.

"I am the King noob of all the noobs in Noobland!"
- LekLan

LekLan's Website

6 Reply by Mr. Wookiee (edited by Mr. Wookiee 2007-07-06 23:58:10)

  • Registered: 2006-07-07
  • Posts: 291

Re: Inherent strenghts and weaknesses of various factions?

Formula to a good game:

1: Depth
2: Variety
3: Realism
4: balancing
5: Aesthetics

If you have the depth and variety, then you can have more realism. Balancing (which takes away from realism) wont matter as much because somwhere in the variety the sides will equal out.

The problem is, when you dont have a good element of depth, then the variety doesnt matter as much, because everything becomes too similar. Realism can't be done when things are too similar because then balancing becomes an issue, differences become more noticable and negativley affect the game. This forces many developers to rely on the appearance of their game to sell it, and they end up with a formula like this:

1: Aesthetics
2: Balancing
3: Variety
4: Depth
5: Realism

With only two sides of the conflict and a few classes to choose from, a small strength or weakness would throw the game off balance, but if each side had, say, 15? (pick a  number), or somthing, then sides could be given more realistic abilities and offbalances.

I understand that this game is coded to prevent a true variety, (which by itself, if possible, would be a large undertaking) so it is probably better if each side does not have very much in the way of inherent strengths and weaknesses, and with only 4 (or 5) classes per side, I dont think each side having exclusive character kits would work very well.

  • Registered: 2007-05-29
  • Posts: 546

Re: Inherent strenghts and weaknesses of various factions?

Safe-Keeper wrote:

Why can't we have both inherent differences and classes? Why does this need to be limited to RPGs?

It doesnt have to be limited to RPGs, my point is that in a COMPETETIVE MULTIPLAYER GAME everyone want to be equal on the playing field. They want skill to determine whether they win, not some racial special ability or wildly varying hitpoints.

Is this taking the easy way out? You'd think so, but BF is so much more. Weapons and vehicles are what matters, and yes there are inherent strengths and weaknesses to the factions there. Imperials got a badass armoured AT-ST as part of their standard assault team. What do the rebels have? Well maybe they can strap an ion cannon on a tonton, but that's about it.

But hey, luckily for you I'm not the one making such decisions about the mod wink