Jump to content

Home

FreePizza

Members
  • Posts

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • Location
    Washington, DC
  • Interests
    working out, cycling, reading, movies, beer, coffee

Contact Information

  • AIM
    LiveViaDC

FreePizza's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

10

Reputation

  1. ''On Hoth I just camp by a ammo bot and get 100+ kills to 0 deaths'' I think you might should qualify that. Are you online or offline playing with yourself? Are you playing against any humans? How many on a team? What level of play is going on...hard, medium, easy? Any AI playing? And I'm sure there're more qualifiers we can't begin to list. Obviously, whoever is flying snowspeeders or AT-ATs, or AT-STs aren't very good. They'd spot you pretty quickly cuz 100 plus kills is pretty much better than capturing 4 CPs, and that would be unusual. I've seen some damn good players online who might get 30, 40, maybe 50 kills but that's rare in a decent game. Even spawnkillers won't get 100 plus.
  2. Personally I think Battlefront has so many flaws in it that starting from scratch in the code makes more sense than trying to fix this one. I love the game, don't get me wrong, but so many things are noticeably wrong with BF and would certainly have seemed easy to fix...and haven't been addressed. At least from the looks of things. Walls shooting you? AI units, who should have similiar attainable skill levels to human players, can operate turrets with one shot accuracy while it's absolutely impossible for humans (due to the way turrets move). The list is long and we've all gone over pretty much all the errors and flaws by now and LA hasn't fixed them. And lately, after the Jabba Palace release, even more things are acting screwy. Maybe it makes more sense for a re-do and put it on disk instead of trying to download a ton more code. Anyway, love the game, but I'm really worried about the community dying before it has a chance to catch on. Little things make a difference, and we're waiting on those little things to get attention.
  3. Being a sniper is good, both from the recon droid perspective (on certain maps not all) and getting a large number of kill shots. However, most everyday online you deal with a squad of team members who want to be nothing but snipers. Regardless of your kill count, you'll probably lose the game. A few well placed snipers can help win the game, but if most everyone plays a sniper there's no chance of winning because capturing CPs is the goal. You'll never snipe fast enough to equal the number of reenforcements taken away from the other team by just one extra CP. These past few weeks I've seen many games lost by players who insist on being a sniper all the time, or who get two people in an AT-AT when only one is needed. It's amazing to listen to teammates online when the score is 186 - 56 to your favor, and yet you have only one CP left actually think they'll win the game. They won't, neither will they stop being a sniper for a few rounds or hop out of the AT-AT or whatever long enough to capture that necessary to win CP. Being a sniper is fun, flying an X-Wing is fun, but learning how to be a well-rounded player and using the appropriate weapon for the appropriate time and map is more valuable than just specializing in one thing.
  4. Completely agree. Depending on the planet, or even how a specific game is going a player might take on a different role other than just killing but still be valuable to success. For instance, some command posts require defense constantly just to keep them. Your kill numbers might be low, even your capturing CPs, but your value would still be worth some credit. For instance, keeping a vanguard inside of the Homestead on Tattoine who lays a mine at each entrance and keeps replacing them as they blow up is a sure fire way to guarantee success if you're playing alone against just AIs.....and it helps when you play online. But you get no CPs and few kills. I saw a guy on last night, he was bragging that he had killed ''32'', however he had '18'' deaths. Not sure he had much value to be honest, and in fact, he lost that game. And he certainly should have been near the bottom of the list instead of at the top. With spring break in full gear now, strategy is out the door and finding a good game of people who are playing with strategy as well as kills is hard to come by. I've pretty much given up playing online for the time being, why get frustrated with Halo2 rejects?
  5. I'll admit that I'm fairly new to online games, but I've quickly become addicted to BF and pretty proficient at it as well. In the past 3 months or so I've enjoyed many of the games I've played online, but not all. I understand the occasional team killer will pop into a game, and I deal with it. I understand that at least once every few days I'll have to mute a player or two who are obnoxious, rude etc. And just as of this past week almost every game I've played has involved many players who have nothing but a Halo 2 mentality. Kill, kill, kill with no concept that capturing Command Posts is one of the most important aspects of winning the game. Yes, by now many are getting bored of the deathmatch games of Halo 2 and want to move on. They come into a game like BF that requires some strategy, as well as proficiency in using various weapons or vehicles and they fail miserably. It makes for a stressful game to be on a team of 12 players and only you understand the importance of the narrator constantly telling you to ''destroy the shield generator'' or ''protect the techno union ships''. And worse yet, none of the other players will even listen. What would seem to help would be to balance out the ''kill'' numbers with other objectives accomplished. For instance, why aren't there awards for Command Posts captured? Or Shield Generators destroyed? Even making capturing CPs worth ''X'' number of kills and so forth. Even nicer would be to use CPs captured, along with kill numbers and so on to rate players. By rating players one could get get into Optimatch games that are with players that are similiar in experience that you are. It would also give you an incentive to get even better (play more) so you can continue to play with the same players as they progress in skill. It would certainly eliminate those who play a lot from having to deal with those who are mostly playing for kill egos or even to be distractive and even abusive. What led to all of this was playing for several days in a row this week where none of the players had a clue as to what the game was about or how to play. And worse, wouldn't even listen. To end up being the only player on Hoth trying to destroy the Shield Generator (without an AT-AT even) ends up not making the game worth playing at all. This happened on every map and almost every game for several days this week. Fortunately, every now and then I could find a game where some friends were playing and the game ended up being fun, interesting, etc. as usual. But I see as summer approaches and children are home alone all day, and Halo 2 players getting bored of the DeathMatch games of online that BF will become even harder to enjoy.
  6. It would be hard to imagine that there weren't just a few people in biz dev, marketing and finance departments who did believe this game was intended for mass market. Certainly the marketing wasn't up to Halo level (Slurpee's at 7/11 with MasterChief images on them as well as the game for sale at 7/11's). Then again the game is at Target, Best Buy, etc...so isn't that mass market to begin with? There are also a variety of levels of SW fans out there. I've played many Battlefront games online where there were players who had never seen any of the movies. On a daily basis you spend a little time explaining that an AT-AT is not a metal dinosaur, etc. Of course RC being out there and hot when the new movie is out makes a lot of sense and the movie's previews are certainly intended for the mass market and not just SW fans, right? There are many reasons to play Battlefront or RC other than just the fact you are a SW fan...after all, they are games. Foremost, for Lucas Arts..CA$H is, and should be a factor. In fact, for SW gaming fans the more money they make the more they can put into developing games and upgrading the games we are playing. More buyers, more players equals better SW games and more SW games. So yeah, my personal guess is it was meant for the mass market. There was the hard core SW fan that could be counted on, but the non-SW addict would have been the gravy that greased the machine for more and better. But back to the main point, why give us deathmatch online with a game that's absolutely designed for teamwork, strategy and missions? Why give us a game that is designed for teamwork, strategy and missions and only allow single player at home? Just seems odd to me that swbattlefront.net forum cries for splitscreen multiplayer had no effect on dev of RC.
  7. I realize we want to play SW themed games. But on a mass market scale, not just SW fans, isn't Halo 2 Deathmatch, CTF, KOH pretty much the same as RC Deathmatch, ctf, koh, etc? The more people who buy the game and play the game (especially online) the more support you'll get...or rather should expect, right? New maps out quicker and so forth, and yet if Halo2 basically equals RC for online play why would someone who's not a SW fan purchase RC? For the campaign level maybe, but even there the weakness is it's only single player so the dorm, frat house Halo2 party doesn't exist and can't exist...well, unless you put away RC and plug in Halo2. This is happening so why ignore it? Sorry to rant, just rather disappointed the multiplayer part of this game appears thrown in at the last minute as an after thought and yet the muitiplayer mode because of the theme and possibilities of RC would make multiplayer the best game out there if a little more had gone into the planning process. well, at least that's what it seems like. maybe LA has a plan.
  8. ''multiplayer really just kind of looks like it was thrown together last minute., no offense to anyone, just really that atmosphere of RC is missing.'' Looks more like it was taken directly from Halo2, just a switch of maps, weapons and announcer voices and definitely last minute. Halo2 has the market for DM, CTF, KOH so let it be. RC has so much more potential for online multiplayer.
  9. I would assume the accents would come from the people they were trained under. For instance, say Aussie's were the best explosives experts, then clones that were designated to be explosives experts would be trained by Aussies and probably have their accent. Or Texans were the best snpers, then clones would be trained by a group of Texans and have that accent...or Brooklyn, etc.
  10. Actually, it'd be nice if it was similiar to Battlefront with regards to online play and to some degree multiplayer play. DeathMatch, CTF and such gets boring and everyone has Halo 2 already. You'd think that with the concept of a Squad in RC, online play would be with a Squad and work similiar to capturing Command Posts. As it stands, the strongest point of RC is the campaign and yet you can't even play that with a friend (in Halo you can). Battlefront has issues certainly. Mainly if playing multiplayer with a friend with splitscreen the person sitting next to you can see your screen and what you're doing...vice versa as well. So if you are multiplayer at home it's you and one friend against computer gernerated forces. Halo 2 is dominating the dorms cuz 4 guys per dorm room can share one TV and X-box. That's what's killing Battlefront or will ultimately kill it, and without multiplayer Squad campaigns why buy another Halo 2 type of game for CTF, Deathmatch, etc? BTW, I'm a Battlefront addict, but only with online play. Once friends are over I have to put it away since they can't play. I really like RC campaign mode, but would love it best if I could play it with a friend or two as well. I'm not sure what good Clans do for Deathmatch, etc. It's a small arena and all the tactics in the world won't change the chaos of a small environment.
  11. Here's the deal on ''two threads''. Each was posted under a different category, in that way it could be possible to get someone to help if they read just one category instead of all or two. I felt confident that they were both listed under categories that did apply. What information you need? You go online via X-box and try to play Battlefront today. Today being the day that Microsoft required a download and Lucas Arts had a new map called Jabba's Palace. From some point in time after those downloads today (03/01) online via x box went haywire. In fact, it's still that way at this point in time. Try doing a QuickMatch and you probably would see the issue at hand. And no, the waiting for X number of players included ZERO as a number to be waiting on. Which obviously shouldn't be happening, right? Waitin on 1 or 2 or 3, etc. players could be understandable but under QuickMatch it's rare one ever has to wait for players at any time of day, muchless late afternoon and evening. Best bet. Go online, try to play QuickMatch via cable modem if you want, whatever on x-box and see what happens. Since I've been able to play via optimatch and everyone playing in those games I've talked to have been experiencing the same problems with QuickMatch I'm not sure if more explanation is necessary or simply tell you to try it yourself. your choice. It's a new map, a new upload, glitches and bugs happen even with the best of QA.
  12. so let's see. there was a required x-box update from microsoft then soon after today we get the new map. yet now you can't play with anyone cuz for some reason we're always waiting on either 1 or 0 or whatever players to join. what's up. online is only fun if you're playing with others.
  13. It really would be nice to have split screen multiplayer online. Beats sitting alone at home playing all the time or just playing offline when a friend is over so he's not bored.
  14. Since you can only keep 4 mines down at a time in any game when you are a Vanguard, it'd be nice to know when one blows up so you can lay down another. Maybe there is a way to know this and I'm not aware of it. There are times when playing online and there are only 3 people in total on the map and the only way to guard your outer CPs if you're the only one on one team is by mines. But you can't do that if you've already used your 4. Mines are a pain I know, but getting stuck on one map for 30 minutes or longer going round and round recapturing CPs gets boring quickly.
  15. A friend and I were playing Galactic Conquest recently with the game set on hard. We were in the water near the second or third set of stairs that go up to the CP at the end of dock two. There was supposedly one other player left on the field from the other team. My friend started yelling that the wall (stone dock) was shooting at him. I walked over and bullets were definitely coming out of the wall. I went up top and looked over on the other side and jumped down and no one was there and it was still shooting out towards him on the other side. Finally we captured all the CPs and the game ended so we never found out where the other player was. Through walls I can understand to some degree, at least if there is a player on the other side but in this case it was was just a wall that decided to fire on us.
×
×
  • Create New...