Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ONS/Warfare/Assault movement.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    ONS/Warfare/Assault movement.

    These are gametypes that are a long way off, but I was thinking maybe the movement for them should be different to regular arena game types like CTF/DM/DOM.
    The maps are just built in such a different way and are generally full of wide open spaces compated to the rooms and tunnels of classic arena gameplay, that I'm not sure it makes sense to have the exact same movement for both.

    I was thinking perhaps these gametypes have an expanded move set that gives enhanced mobility, like say a powered suit with recharging jumpboots/jetpack, high air control gliding, a grappling hook or dodge jumps/lunging or all of the above, or something i haven't thought of yet. These would allow you to move fast but not as fast vehicles and not as heavily armored. You could still use weapons, but there would be tradeoffs against it.

    I liked the hoverboard somewhat, but I felt having zero offensive ability, being picked off one damage point on top of the regular infantry having nerfed movement and being repeatedly pancakeable by Mantas on spawning is a bit meh, It would be nice if you could just leap out of the way of Manta's doing that and had an energy charge meter associated with these mobility options as well as the option of pulling out a weapon to defend yourself.

    Anyway, it doesn't have to be any of those ideas, but I want to generally open up the discussion on what to with movement for gametypes like that, whether it be an a high mobility power suit, a translocator, a hoverboard or some UT2kx/UC2 style moves. Any new ideas on it are welcome!

    #2
    I think there should be additional movement too, but one of the things to point out is both games that vehicles (UT2004 and UT3) had the same run speed which is kind of slow. This game has a pretty fast runspeed. So movement, but default, is going to be way better for getting to places more quickly than it was in those two games.

    I'd like to see somebody make Torlan with no vehicles just to see how fast you can actually run around the map, because I think you'd be surprised. I'm not saying that should be ALL there is, but the most annoying part of navigating large maps in UT2004/UT3 has basically already been solved now that you're actually moving faster.

    I want to see the hoverboard looked at again. It was an honest compromise by Epic to keep some form of Manta stacking in the game (we're not getting that back sorry, shouldn't have to explain why either) but it was far too easy to knock people off the hoverboard. Considering you're defenseless on the thing I always thought not being able to fire your weapon on it was pretty silly, but I understand why Epic doesn't want VCTF flag running with vehicles to be as free as it was in UT2004 where the only way to stop a flag run was by actually destroying the manta in one shot and killing the flag carrier in the process.

    I'm also not opposed to some sort of Tribes/Half Life style rechargeable long jump module thing.

    I doubt dodge jump is going to be put in vehicle game modes when its not already in the core game. I could be wrong, easily, but the same design ramifications of having it large, wide open maps in regards to weapon balance are still there, so its not like they're going to go back on the hardest/most controversial decision they've made yet now that we have vehicles.

    Comment


      #3
      Map design is another thing to consider. Titanfall did a good job of making the maps interesting to play for both the soldiers and mechs (sort of having "two maps in one"). I think going down this route would make for more interesting gameplay than simply altering movement, and the feel of the game could be kept consistent across game modes.

      Comment


        #4
        In UT99 Assault we also have huge custom maps and we managed to pass a long way quickly by launching our teammates.

        There are 2 methods, which actually worked pretty well:


        First one:

        Rocketlaunches. Shoot rockets on to your teammates feet and he flys over the map, depending how good the launcher fired the rockets.


        Second one:

        Hammerlaunches. You can launch your teammate by loading up your impacthammer. The one who gets launched has to jump into that hammer. It is even possible to set 2 hammers and jump into that two hammers. The more hammers are set, the wider the launch goes.


        This actually requires some nice teamplay. And that is what you have to be out to do in Assault, ONS, etc... "Teamplay!"
        UT4 ASSAULT - Server Admin | Community Admin
        UT4ASSAULT.COM

        Forum Thread | UTA Discord | UTA Facebook
        UTA Steam Group | Email me

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by FuLLBLeeD View Post
          I'm also not opposed to some sort of Tribes/Half Life style rechargeable long jump module thing.
          That, except it's "Unreal II XMP-style".
          Unreal Tournament 4 eXpanded MultiPlayer (UT4XMP) efforts
          My website, listing all my Unreal series mods and mutators

          Comment


            #6
            Or maybe a movement similar to titanfall?

            Comment


              #7
              I've been playing a lot of Titanfall lately, mostly Hardpoint. Though it's a blast, and the parkour movement is generally cool, there are two problems. First, in close range pvp, the bunny-hopping is almost ridiculous. Second, the parkour + mantling allows players to scale structures and there is a ton of camping-from-on-high. That's fine, but in a game-mode where someone has to get to and control the hardpoints to win, this creates imbalance. The hardpoints are never placed on top of a structure, you almost always have to go low to get to them and expose yourself to campers. (Some of the hardpoints are on the second floor, tbh)

              Comment


                #8
                I don't really think having a modified base movement for these game types would be a good idea. It would make transitioning from the particular game type to lets say CTF or DM a lot harder, further segmenting the game. Part of the problem with Warfare (using it as an example since I played it most) is that public matches aren't played properly. The maps are larger, so teamwork and towing with vehicles around the map is crucial. This coordination doesn't happen often in public matches.

                I liked the hoverboard in UT3. Normally you can see an enemy player in the distance, so you have time to hop off. Obviously if you are going to hoverboard on Torlan from your core to prime, you are most likely going to get picked off. But you aren't supposed to do this any ways. You are supposed to be towed behind a vehicle (or flung). An easy fix would be for Epic to implement a base shield with the hoverboard, so a single enforcer shot would not be enough to knock you off, but 2 shock primaries would. I'm open to any other alternatives, but I think the advanced movement like flings in Warfare and VCTF should be continued in UT4.
                Join us for friendly UT4 Pugs at irc.globalgamers.net #ut4pugs

                Comment


                  #9
                  I don't understand why people keep saying that titanfall movement system is better/more interesting than ut3. I mean, if you come from ut serie, tf is nothing of special at all!
                  In ut3 you could be able to do amazing things with your hoverboard and *a little* of teamplay, and I'm not even talking about those risky hammer jumps.
                  In warfare, like Infra said, the problem was that it was difficult to find some coordination; another issue was with players always picking up boots without having the orb (don't make me think about those games in Downtown...).

                  I'm posting here because I read somewhere, time ago, that Epic wanted to add some movement mechanics to gametypes played mostly in wide areas: I say that the only thing that was wrong and should be fixed in the next UT game is the fact that hoverboard should not be considered as vehicle (scorpion globes, scavenger blades not making an insta-kill etc.). About the rest... well, I hope that everything stays unchanged, because warfare was the best part of ut3 and it is the best team based gametype I've ever played!

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by pnzr` View Post
                    I don't understand why people keep saying that titanfall movement system is better/more interesting than ut3. I mean, if you come from ut serie, tf is nothing of special at all!
                    In ut3 you could be able to do amazing things with your hoverboard and *a little* of teamplay, and I'm not even talking about those risky hammer jumps.
                    In warfare, like Infra said, the problem was that it was difficult to find some coordination; another issue was with players always picking up boots without having the orb (don't make me think about those games in Downtown...).

                    I'm posting here because I read somewhere, time ago, that Epic wanted to add some movement mechanics to gametypes played mostly in wide areas: I say that the only thing that was wrong and should be fixed in the next UT game is the fact that hoverboard should not be considered as vehicle (scorpion globes, scavenger blades not making an insta-kill etc.). About the rest... well, I hope that everything stays unchanged, because warfare was the best part of ut3 and it is the best team based gametype I've ever played!
                    That's an excellent first post sir; it made me extremely happy. Just wanted you to know that.
                    Join us for friendly UT4 Pugs at irc.globalgamers.net #ut4pugs

                    Comment


                      #11
                      It is very crucial that the movement is the same for all gametypes I think.
                      Having a different movement in different gametypes would seperate their players much more. It also seems pretty illogical having different movement possibilities in different gametypes, that would be more a game collection than different gametypes of the same game.

                      I think we must find a good and classic UT movement with both innovations and old traditions that fits both tiny arena architecture and open battlefields. Afterall a movement for my favorite gametype vCTF needs to suit both (base architecture & battlefields) anyway.

                      My vote has an expanded UT3 movement: A useful water movement + dodge-jump and/or dodge-slide added to UT3's stock movement, tweaked around a bit and it's going to be fun in all elements and gametypes. I definitely can't see any use in the dodge-roll the pre-alpha currently has or the lack of air control.

                      I also agree with the many posts before me that UT3 hoverboard and vehicle taxiing was great and should be kept! I don't think it should get harder to be knocked off the hoverboard or that it should be made more powerful, like allowing the possibility to shoot while on the board. It simply shouldn't become harder to disturb an ongoing taxi and it also shouldn't become easier to perform one. It should also remain only possible to transport the flag with hoverboards or on foot for those reasons.

                      My views on the new UT in a nutshell │ Social MarketplaceModern UT4 AllNew Dynamic StandardsMore iconic U and the 4 neededUE4 Free - I Epic

                      Comment


                        #12
                        What I think, and this might blow some minds, is we simply make maps playable with no vehicles at all.

                        Now hear me out, but what, just hear me out... what if... right?... what if...
                        Vehicles were designed to support players on foot?

                        Step 1: Make vehicle wrecks persistent for far longer and more or less indestructible. Now you make cover to advance and contested areas become more infantry friendly (and blockage makes it harder to move vehicles through)

                        Step 2: Make "High road/low roads" a map design idea, where vehicles avoid tricky terrain and use their speed to move groups of players more safely (like a steel umbrella on a shopping cart) if it has multiple seats, or provides "safe" fire at a distance to keep defenders at risk if they try to shoot your team without dealing with you first. Trickier terrain that won't bother infantry should allow them to get high or low of vehicles so their weapons are generally ineffective.

                        Step 3: Redo vehicle designs from scratch. To be honest they felt like their primary purpose was to act as disposable personal vehicles and anti-vehicle too much so nothing short of a Goliath (which had an actual anti-infantry weapon overshadowed by a HE round main cannon anyway) or highly skilled Manta could cause serious threat to infantry that have access to AVMLs and even the Rocket Launcher. The Raptor's sole purpose was basically Goliath tickler. And don't even get started on the Cicada, the "Oh look the mapper likes this so he put one in for people to fight over, get up to the ceiling and spam missiles slowly at things like turrets and ants".

                        Taking step 1 and 2 into account you can have vehicles impact the map in a dynamic way instead of just making a map tolerable for simply being open and bigger than average. Plus I'd just like a nice combined arms strategy instead of shopping carts with rocket boosters.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          @SpaceOracle: Without knowing, I would say you must come from UT2004, because what I understand from your post has mostly been realised in UT3 already.

                          My views on the new UT in a nutshell │ Social MarketplaceModern UT4 AllNew Dynamic StandardsMore iconic U and the 4 neededUE4 Free - I Epic

                          Comment


                            #14
                            As far as I can remember that's hard to say in UT3, because half the maps have asymmetric vehicles and virtually all of the Necris ones are worthless. Fancy physics based stuff for tech demos, but strategically useless. They were paper thin and their weapons were pretty pathetic.

                            It's also pretty hard to get an idea of how vehicles really work when you only play against AI since the online was dead from the start.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Like Sir_Brizz told me, this is apparently really an understandable first impression, but it's not true if you give them enough time.
                              They're very different and need new approaches to make them useful, yes. But most UT3 players I know prefer to be on the Necris side rather than Axon.
                              With the right experience they can sometimes even become overpowered (i.e. Fury > Raptor).
                              UT3 after patch 2.1 is really working well btw, still enough bugs remaining to complain but great enough to call it the best game ever imo.

                              My views on the new UT in a nutshell │ Social MarketplaceModern UT4 AllNew Dynamic StandardsMore iconic U and the 4 neededUE4 Free - I Epic

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X