Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Desolator2k

#1
Public Discussion / Re: VoiP
December 14, 2007, 02:17:34 PM
omg stop with the noob +1 posts.

Everything you post is negative or positive at first but then just to make sure no one thinks you might actually be a normal decent person you just add some bullshit at the end. Well done.

These are ideas and if you don't like them suggest somthing else, it's called constructive critisism, you're supposed to suggest improvments to others ideas not just "that sucks" to 90% of them.

It's your decision how you want to behave but on a public discussion forum your constant bashing is totally inappropriate.
#2
Public Discussion / Re: VoiP
December 14, 2007, 01:47:15 PM
You could always add a PHAT static noise for his buddy when the merc gets necked/jumped whatever if you REALLY didn't want 3rd party VoIP to be used.
#3
Public Discussion / Re: Knockout
December 14, 2007, 01:40:40 PM
In my opinion this game doesn't need to be totally different from SvM and making it complicated will just increase the build time.

All that my original posts were saying is that KO should be a viable stealthier option than neckbreak and to encourage people to use KO in a tactical way instead of just being like "Oh shit the other mercs here i may as well break this guys neck then.".

Having the mercs visor scratched is realisticish and a nice idea, but it would just be damned annoying and wouldnt make much difference except wanting a new helmet.

My opinion is that the only things that should be changed are these:

-Short KO animation time - Yes(Must have imo) - means other merc can viably save his teammate just by presence.

-No KO on screen message/cut chat - Maybe (Some chat program disadvantages/imbalances) Adds stealth.

Don't wanna do anything too gamebreaking.

#4
Public Discussion / Re: Knockout
December 12, 2007, 08:36:52 PM
I think that no "KO" on screen message + no comms + quick KO drop and release seems like a good package to me.

What I always found wierd in CT is that if you (the merc) know your dead - why can't you struggle? Wheras if spies KO half as much as they neckbreak then you are abit more at the spies mercy while previously a grab almost certainly meant certain death in 90% of occasions.

So if theres a good reason for spies to drop the merc fast e.g. other merc sniping at them, you would be able to save your partner alot more.
#5
Public Discussion / Re: Knockout
December 11, 2007, 09:24:10 PM
I meant just disable comms while you have a black screen - just as it adds stealth to it so you can't call for help straight away. The minute you get you you can spam the chat window like "OMGZ HELP PLZPLZL"

I just wanted to create the ability to make a swift silent neutralization with almost no warning till you start hacking while getting the merc down. Cams don't have notifications so why should a silent stealth KO?

Thanks for the feedback.
#6
Public Discussion / Knockout
December 11, 2007, 09:04:53 PM
It has always seemed that the neckbreak option is vastly better than the knockout option during a grab.
I know that if you neckbreak then they get equipment and that on some maps (orphanage for one) having them knocked out at the bomb means you can get upstairs before they get up as aposed to them spawning upstars.

I was discussing with SITHDUKE that I thought that neckbreak should be penalised but then he convinced me that nothing was actually wrong with the neckbreak, it was just that the knockout ability doesn't have much going for it.

So without doing any damage to neckbreak we thought that if a merc was KO'd that there wouldn't be any onscreen notification to the other merc and possibly disable the ingame mic/chat for the knocked out player, and that when the merc got up he would have no HUD for a few seconds so he would not be able to detect intrusions for 5-10 seconds. - Perfect Stealth tool, just the way it should be.
#7
Public Discussion / Re: Instead of berserk
December 08, 2007, 04:19:24 PM
I'm not suggesting we get rid of the current berserk animation - i just though adding the sidestep before the spin would be an efficient way to make the animation look clean (not knocking a spy out above your head with a level spin.)
#8
Public Discussion / Re: Instead of berserk
December 08, 2007, 05:01:30 AM
I will attempt to fix

So basiaclly you side step the spy hits the concrete and breaks his neck from miscalculation and then you do the good old meat grinding animation on his corpse to finish him off.

Sidestep would have to be a real fast animation if it would be used in a sidestep>berserk automatic animation sequence.

There's no real way of stopping a body/person landing on you short of hitting it with a grenade unless you dodge.

Although this might look silly in practice if you were using it as a ground to ground berserk but i dont care cos it's 3 am. I'll think about it later
#9
Public Discussion / Re: The Utility Belt!!!
December 08, 2007, 01:03:26 AM
Yeah I agree the balance is totally off, but possibly each item would have it's own negative drawback to balance it's self as aposed to trying to balance them each against each other.

Another way of balancing may be to catogorize them so you can have 1xlaunchers nadelauncher/shottie etc. 1xWeapon improvment stock/taped up rounds/foregrip etc. and 1xItem Scope/phospherous bullets etc.
#10
Public Discussion / Re: The Utility Belt!!!
December 08, 2007, 12:53:52 AM
Another Update - This is more of a brainstorm and yes I am aware some of them are crappy but they are just a few ideas  ;). Tell me what you think anyways.  :D



^ That should say "Puts the idea of Pnades to good use"
#11
Public Discussion / Re: The Utility Belt!!!
December 07, 2007, 09:25:20 PM
Yeah i realise a strap wouldnt really do that but this is a game.  ;)

Remember there are laser mines and proximity mines and all other kinds of malarky.

I did think about this actually and thought it might help if they implement a penalty to accuracy while running. The stap could help with this and another upgrade could be an improved stock.
#12
Public Discussion / Re: The Utility Belt!!!
December 07, 2007, 07:42:06 PM
Expanding on my previous idea of custom weapons - very crude visual aid i chucked together, but you get the general idea.

#13
Public Discussion / Re: The Utility Belt!!!
December 07, 2007, 06:24:37 PM
Quote from: Gawain on December 07, 2007, 06:20:07 PM
all zip lines make you vulnerable. even on polar base a zip line tool would suck. there are zip lines on most maps and they are used quite rarely. if there's a spot good for a zip line, the map maker can implement it in a balanced way. really no need for an additional tool.

The best place for a zipline is where people dont expect it - so putting them in the map sucks anways. I think the idea is that you can place it where you want which gets you where you want to go - not where the map thinks you want  to go.

Quote from: Gawain on December 07, 2007, 06:20:07 PM
the idea with the inverted neck break pipe is just hiliarious.

Is that a good or a bad thing  ???
#14
Public Discussion / Re: The Utility Belt!!!
December 07, 2007, 06:16:48 PM
What about if you fired the zip line horizontally and it becomes a regular grab-able pipe/wire thing - inverted neck break ftw. kthx
#15
Public Discussion / Re: The Utility Belt!!!
December 07, 2007, 06:10:41 PM
Rofl - warp speed zip line?