<GuNs>

[Solbe M'ko]

You agree with everything? Dude, I'll venture a guess that you weren't on the school debate team.

 

I would like to see more uses for weapons as well. Although it's too late to consider this for JA, I think it would be cool if some guns had different uses, like the secondary function in Perfect Dark for N64. I would love to shoot some rodian under the table with a blaster or hit someone over the head with the handle.

[Emon]

Guns are a necessity for the class based (at least in Siege) for MP.

[Solbe M'ko]

Well, there wouldn't ABSOLUTELY have to guns for a class system to work. As we saw in JO, there are plenty of possible force combinations, so that COULD be incorporated, but guns are probably the better way to do it.

[Kurgan]

As far as I know, we have seen ZERO (0) multiplayer footage or screenshots so far.

 

Everything at E3 was from a SP demo as the screenshots have been as well. The info on MP is bare bones (until recently we didn't even know what the new MP modes would BE).

 

The official trailer showed the BlasTech DL-44 (what Han Solo uses) pistol, and the BlasTech E-11 blaster rifle (ST Rifle) in use while riding a Taun Taun.

 

I would expect the same weapons from JK2 to return, with maybe one or two additions or alterations (for example: it makes sense for the DL-44 to replace the Bryar, since the Bryar is Kyle's signature weapon, and you're not playing as him this time around). It'll be interesting to see how they work and especially in MP.

 

Remember that Mysteries of the Sith started you with Sabers and Force, yet you still got plenty of gunplay in the mid-portion of the game. Even Obi-Wan (when it was a PC game) was going to have portions of the game where your lightsaber was either ineffective or missing, so you had to rely on "other means" of combat. ; )

 

I would expect this should be no different. I just hope that they don't make it so that Jedi in MP cannot use any weapons besides the saber. Even Luke used a blaster, and Kyle is a guy who uses lots of weapons, so you'd think his students would be trained that way as well...

 

Removing the guns would mean removing the options, removing variety, and shortening the lifespan of the game, in favor of some odd notion of purity of saber-only cultists. I love the saber, but the JK/DF series has always been about the guns as well as the other Jedi stuff. This is a new breed of Jedi, post-movies. They need all the help they can get, and they fight dirty if they need to. Some missions just require things like Sniper Rifles or explosive charges... stuff you can't do effectively with a Lightsaber.

 

 

But, as others have pointed out, having a class system alone basically proves there will be non-saber projectile weapons (guns) unless we're just going to have seventeen varieties of Jedi (though that would be interesting).

[Solbe M'ko]

"Other means"? That would rock! Not just guns, either. Hand to hand combat, guns, hitting the guy with a big rock (Ewok style).

[StormHammer]

I'd go with those who want to see some Bounty Hunter style weapons in there...like whip-cords, dart-throwers, maybe even a flamethrower...

 

I seriously can't see any of that making it into the game, though.

 

I think Kurgan's right in that we'll probably have the same line-up as JO with just a couple of swaps and a couple of additions...

[MuDvAyNe]

guns and sabers have thier ups and downs

anyway will thre be ctf in jk3?

i heard from this mag that maybe they wont have ctf? =/

CTF IS THE MOST IMPORTANT GAMETYPE!

[StormHammer]

Originally posted by MuDvAyNe

guns and sabers have thier ups and downs

anyway will thre be ctf in jk3?

i heard from this mag that maybe they wont have ctf? =/

CTF IS THE MOST IMPORTANT GAMETYPE!

 

I'm pretty sure CTF will be in the game...but if you want to talk about CTF, please do it in another thread.

[Solo4114]

I remain optimistic that Raven can come up with interesting new guns that will not simply be variations on the old themes (a different looking rocket launcher, a different looking flak cannon, etc.). A flamethrower type weapon would be AWESOME. They could use the code from RTCW. Remember, Fett had a wrist-mounted one of those. No reason we couldn't see a full-sized flamethrower. And that could be the kind of thing you could use against a rager. He comes charging at you, you whip out the ol' barbecue machine, torch him, and run away while he burns.

 

Instead of explosives I wouldn't mind seeing heavier blaster type weapons that have a mild concussive/explosive effect. The concussion gun is just one example of this, but I might do things with it like tweak it's rate of fire, alter its range, etc. Those are all balancing issues.

 

I agree that I'd rather not see one single uber weapon, the same way that I'd like to see no single uber swing with the sabre. Why? Because if you creat it, they will spam it and that will make the game BORING.

 

RTCW did probably the best balancing act I've seen in an MP game in this regard. You had SMGs, a sniper rifle, the heavy machinegun (venom gun), the flamethrower, a rocket launcher, grenades, etc. The balancing act usually came in terms of a crucial weakness of the weapon, or what it did to the soldiers. IE: the flamethrower was a great weapon, but was short range, and slowed you down just slightly when wielding it. The venom gun was really powerful, but inaccurate and prone to overheating. The rocket launcher was EXTREMELY powerful, but REALLY slowed you down when using it, and only had I think a max of 4 rounds. That said, you could easily hold a choke point on your own with one of those things. The SMGs were great all around weapons, but did different damage (IE: thompson had higher damage than the MP40, but a smaller clip and slower rate of fire) and were still not the most powerful guns in the game.

 

At least as far as the team MP game goes, something along those lines is what I'm looking for. Each class has inherent strengths and weaknesses, so no single class dominates. That'll probably be it for my MP gaming, since I don't particularly enjoy FFA or TDM. In those modes, you could tweak how the guns work as well. IE: if you pick up the flechette cannon, all of a sudden you'll be moving considerably slower, or you have a smaller max-ammo amount in Team MP. But in FFA, it works the same way it always did. Something like that. This way you have a variety of game styles that function differently not only because of the underlying style itself (CTF/DM/Obj. MP), but because of the way the weapons work as well.

 

That said, I'd still like to see more Star Wars-ish weapons.

[JDKnite188]

RtCW has from what I know the best balanced weapons + team gameplay multiplayer around maybe only facing a challenge from Counterstrike.

 

JKIII has to have CTF! Its a classic team multiplayer mode, and JK2 had a good version of it. Obviously there will be the Team FFA (hopefully with more than three teams in one map) and some sort of Team Based Objective mode.

[SeanTB123]

A lot of people are saying that saber-dominance is ok in SP but in multiplayer the focus should be on guns. Why? The game is called "Jedi Knight". A Jedi is not inclined to use guns, plain and simple. The fact that guns are present, should be considered a blessing.

 

As for the concussion rifle that everyone wants back. This would completely ruin multiplayer (sabering). Do you remember what the conc rifle did? It made sabers in a gunning game obsolete - completely. You could pull the conc rifle, but I know first hand from my experiences in JK1, everyone in the game got really irritated when you would continuosly pull weapons left and right. And I'm not too selfish as to not allow people their fun.

 

If conc rifles are brought back in JA, the focus of lightsabers in multiplayer will be completely removed.

 

I do suport the idea of a seperate gaming mode, where sabers aren't even available. Since the Jedi Knight games still include guns, there will always be people who prefer the guns, seeing as how the Dark Forces/Jedi Knight series is the only StarWars FPS to my knowledge. It would be fair to have a gaming mode that completely disallows lightsabers for that particular server. I'm not aware if JK2 currently has such a feature enabled. This would keep the gunners happy, and the saberists happy, as they would each have their respecting game play modes to participate in.

 

I would also be in favor of an optional class-based mode. Gunners vs Jedi. I know there are mods which enables this, the most popular of which is Artifex's Promod I believe. But an (optional) class system built into the game would be nice.

[Solbe M'ko]

I don't have JKI, but from what I hear, it just has a balance issue. If you rebalance all the guns, there should be no conflict.

[munik]

I thought that JO balanced the guns against a saber very well. The primary modes could be blocked by a saber, and the secondary modes could be countered with force powers. I enjoy games that involve both the saber and guns. Even 1 on 1 I use both saber and guns, I like to swith it up and use all available resources. The only thing I dislike is the saber throw. It just grates on me, and not that I'm a Star Wars purist or anything, but how often did a saber get thrown in the movies? Just once I think, during the fight between luke and vader on bespin (or the fight on the death star, can't remember). So, one move that wasn't even that spectacular that occupied maybe 2 seconds of the movies gets added to the game, solely because it was in the movies.

[Solbe M'ko]

The saber throw has been in way too many games for my liking. It was in Super Star Wars, for crying out loud.

[munik]

Definately. Light saber, not light boomerang.

[Darth Groovy]

Originally posted by Squater

2. Reapeter Blaster E-11.

 

 

As long as that one is in there, I am happy. That was always my weapon of choice second only to a lightsaber.

 

I DO miss alot of the guns from Jedi Knight, like the concussion rifle, and the rail gun.

[JDKnite188]

Originally posted by munik

I thought that JO balanced the guns against a saber very well.

 

Sabers were very weak. In SP one or two slashes could kill an opponent. In MP it took many, many more. It was a hackfest that usually couldn't be won by the saberist if it was guns vs. sabers.

[munik]

You think so? In multiplayer, you have shields and such which make it take longer to kill, but aside from that I think that sabers do very well against someone without.

 

I was talking about defense against guns. You can counter every attack from a gun with a saber and force powers. As for offense, I see no possible way to defend against a saber using a gun. I have no problem killing an opponent with my saber if he has a gun, as his only defense against the saber is distance. But distance isn't a device of the gun, it is from the player. You can easily kill anyone with the saber as long as you can get close enough to hit them.

 

I don't agree that the saber was weak, but I do think that it should be stronger. I believe sabers should kill with one slash, I don't think that it would change the dynamics of the game that much. It would ensure players would use the saber more, without imposing artificial restrictions on the weapon choices.

[Kurgan]

The 1.02 sabers were quite powerful (some say "cheap") against guns.

 

They were "nerfed" and tweaked I guess because people found them "too powerful" against other sabers in dueling situations. So they ended up being weaker against some other weapons.

 

The thing is, the game wasn't meant to be a class based deal where Gunners went against Saberists.

 

The saber was meant to be another weapon in your arsenal you used with the rest.

 

Why do you think they made Jedi Vs. Merc? Because the regular game wasn't meant for that kind of play.

 

I imagine it will be similar with JA. Even the double sabers/dual sabers probably won't make the sabers all powerful (if it does, people will complain because the other weapons would be useless).

 

I think the problem is that some people want to be able to just use the lightsaber the entire time and have no trouble dispatching everyone else, unless its another saberist, in which case they want a long, drawn out "movie style" duel. I don't think you can have both.... which is why FFA and Duel should remain seperate, except for class based play.

 

Class based play is a different story.

[StormHammer]

Originally posted by Kurgan

I think the problem is that some people want to be able to just use the lightsaber the entire time and have no trouble dispatching everyone else, unless its another saberist, in which case they want a long, drawn out "movie style" duel. I don't think you can have both.... which is why FFA and Duel should remain seperate, except for class based play.

 

Class based play is a different story.

 

That's how I perceive it as well. Some of the saberists I've met do seem to just want to mow down all the gunners to prove their worthiness as Jedi...and don't really stop to think that the gunners want to have fun, not just act as saber-fodder. IN those terms they would be better off facing tough (beefed up) Bot gunners.

 

Anyway, I hope Raven can find the right balance out of the box, this time. I still believe that they should tweak the weapons separately for each different MP game mode, but I don't know how difficult that is to implement. At least then, when you join a particular mode of play, you know that the combat has been properly balanced.

 

I hope the class-based mode proves successful for both gunners and saberists...

[JDKnite188]

With weapons like the Flechette, the saber is no match. How long would a saberist last against a quick gunner using a flechette firing the explosive balls? The Flechette guy has range, power, and frequency of damage over the saberist. Only a saberist who was quick enough to push back the explosive balls or pull the guy's flechette from his/her hands could have a chance.

 

Well, actually I guess it won't make much difference is the saber is stronger. It should be though. This game is about the saber and making it a little stronger like in SP wouldn't hurt the gunner community. Or would it ? . . . .

 

Remember, the saber could be really strong in close combat, but you can't . . .

 

1. Snipe/barrage (barraging done with Flechette or Golan) with a saber.

2. Launch waves of defensive or offensive fire.

3. Splash damage an area

[StormHammer]

Originally posted by JDKnite188

With weapons like the Flechette, the saber is no match. How long would a saberist last against a quick gunner using a flechette firing the explosive balls?

 

How many saberists claim the Flechette is a lame weapon? the simple fact is that by improving saber-blocking against blaster-fire, gunners had to turn to other weapons that could not be blocked so easily. And they they get called all sorts of names for using the same weapon against saberists all the time.

 

Making the saber into an ever more powerful weapon will give the saberists what they want...but many will still complain when they are killed by any kind of gun. I don't actually see the need to make the saber any stronger than it is...unless it's in a game mode totally outside of FFA. In FFA, all weapons and Force powers need to be balanced, and should suit different situations.

 

Although JA's SP will concentrate more on saber combat...the simple fact that Raven are including even more guns in JA should indicate that JA is still about using the best weapon for a particular situation...it's still about guns and sabers, not just sabers.

 

Anyway...this is the same old argument revisited, and I'm just going to wait until the game's released to see how they've balanced it.

[SeanTB123]

I really think force powers should be noticably reduced while using a gun. Like they are doing with the lightstaff and twin sabers. Any guns that occupies two hands should have some kind of force penalty. The idea should be using guns at long range. If a Jedi gets close enough, you should need to switch to saber to regain access to your full power, and of course to keep yourself from being sliced through. Leave the damage amounts alone.

[Emon]

What some people don't understand is that, although in the movies a Jedi may be unstoppable against any weapon, this is a video game, and it needs balance. Therefor a Jedi should have no overall advantage over a gunner. Allow me to demonsrate...

 

-Gunner with E-11 at short to mid range + Jedi = corpse of gunner on the deck in less than six seconds

 

-Gunner with bowcaster at short to mid range + Jedi = pretty equal until the Jedi gets close

 

-Gunner with mines or TDs + Jedi = No more Jedi

 

-Gunner with rocket launcher at any range + Jedi = Either party in chunks in a few seconds

 

Etc, etc...

[Solbe M'ko]

I don't play FFA, but I know for a fact that if a gunneris mowing down jedi, the jedi should switch over to guns to balance the range issue. if a jedi get close to a gunner, he should switch to his saber. it's about play style, not game balance. Game balance is those little alterations that help to eliminate dominance of one particular weapon. I remeber in Counter-Strike (Beta 2, of course) the PARA was the biggest gun, but it didn't mean that it was better than an MP5 or a Desert Eagle. the guns in that game were balanced, in that, no matter which one you chose, you had even odds against other players. That way, the most skilled player got the kills, not the guy with the biggest gun. I'm not saying all the guns should be the same, they should just be equal. By altering damage, firing rate, accuracy, and ammo consumption, the guns become balanced. When the guns are balanced, you can choose your favorite, the one that works best for you, instead of everyone wanting to have the biggest gun in the game, like in games like Quake 3, or even Half-Life MP, for that matter.