test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

How do we make ground combat more fun?

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
Just wondering what small tweaks could be made to make ground combat better.

I personally like how we are getting a new targeting system, but that won't remove the tedium of pressing 1 and 2 over and over.

maybe less mob health in general?

maybe some ground based instant attacks or a combo system for different weapons like the melee weapons have?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    We should wait to see what changes Cryptic has done with Ground Combat, never know what they came up with.


    For me, I really want rifles to be rifles, sniper rifles to be sniper rifles and there is a difference in using pistols. For instance, Rifles are good for long range, but useless in close combat. Pistols being not so good at long range, but get better the target is to the player. But close range combat needs to be pure hand-to-hand.

    In fact, I would love it that Hand-to-Hand combat was necessary and players have the option to train in different techniques. For instance players can choose Kirk's street-style combat, choosing a branch of the various Trek Martial Arts, or a third option in learning use of blade-type fighting (Swords, Knives, etc).

    (This would be enough to seperate player's Space Skills from Ground skills).



    Second, the ability to shoot over or around obstacles (hate to say it, but like TOR is doing) and NPCs learning to take cover than standing out in the open.

    Third, Kits being somewhat customizable (but dont in a way it's balanced).

    Fourth, changes to the Expose / Exploit system that simply if a player or NPC is out in the open (I.E. not taking cover), they are exposed. But when crouched, in prone, or behind an obstacle, they aren't exposed. This would make combat more cautious (expecially in PvP).

    Fifth, player weapon customization / crafting, where you can enhance the weapon to your personal specifications. Scope for accuracy, power packs for stronger damage, etc.


    Those are some of the ideas I would like to be considered. :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Azurian wrote: »
    For me, I really want rifles to be rifles, sniper rifles to be sniper rifles and there is a difference in using pistols. For instance, Rifles are good for long range, but useless in close combat.
    While I agree that rifle ranges are laughably short in this game, you should realize that your strange, and probably Hollywood induced, idea that 'rifles are useless in close combat' is just completely incorrect.

    Anyway, Cryptic needs to fix the 'insta-gank your whole team dual pistols'. Once they've fixed that they need to work on what the real problem with ground combat is: the way the ground combat missions are designed.

    It's my belief that (other than the bugs) the biggest problem with ground combat isn't ground combat itself, but the ridiculously stupid ground combat missions themselves.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    While I agree that rifle ranges are laughably short in this game, you should realize that your strange, and probably Hollywood induced, idea that 'rifles are useless in close combat' is just completely incorrect.[/I]

    I don't appricate the personal insults, Falcon.

    If you ever handled a real Rifle (M1, M16, AK47, Remmington, Winchester, Browning etc), you aren't going to be shooting at someone less than 3m away from you. Instead, you would ready yourself for hand to hand combat.

    And it very well applies in Trek as well, because go ahead and reference the times they were shooting them. In the Klingon war, they went into defensive positions. In First Contact, Security stopped firing at the Borg (even before they knew they adapted). So no, it's not Hollywood or stupid. It's reality.

    Anyway, Cryptic needs to fix the 'insta-gank your whole team dual pistols'. Once they've fixed that they need to work on what the real problem with ground combat is: the way the ground combat missions are designed.

    It's my belief that (other than the bugs) the biggest problem with ground combat isn't ground combat itself, but the ridiculously stupid ground combat missions themselves.

    Yes, those Dual Wield Pistoled Mobs, the Rapid Fire Mobs, the Klingon Swordmasters, and the Reman Captains all do need to be revisited and properly rebalanced. And on Elite setting they really need to put somekind of cap, especially with the new mobs (Breen, Fekliri, and Devidians).
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I agree that the way the ground missions are done seem to be more the issue than the actual mechanics. I noticed that ground combat is way more fun in the featured episodes for example seem way more fun that most of the other PvE missions. Though i am sure the mechanics of ground combat can afford an overhaul too.

    I'd like Kits with passive bonuses, like and engineer's kit with a passive ranged weapon's buff in place of an active power, or a Tactical kit with +resistance or a minor heal along with their normal powers. So you can dabble just slightly into some of the other career's abilities just enough to compliment your play style or specialize fully into your career (like an engineer gets to choose which ship type to play, he can choose to give up some engineering abilities for some more tactical or science oriented ones to mix and match).

    I'd also like to see Shield and health get lowered for players and NPCs alike to speed up ground combat. But to go with that, have shields have a greater bleed through so that they last longer overall. This means that you can eventually kill NPCs spamming shield heals can be eventually killed, and the NPCs spamming Medical tricorders will die quickly once you take their shields down.

    For players, this gives healing more use for Sci and engineers (since both shields and health would go down at a more constant rate, rather than one instantly, then the other instantly), and also allows Tac officers a chance to survive by being able to kill off their opponents more quickly. While all three would be ideal in a group, you can viably make up for the lack of one with the other two. If you have an all one career ground party, it might be tough, though I'd question your judgment at that point :p

    Just my 2 cents. even if they did a fraction of any of that, it would be a big help to making ground combat more fun.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Azurian wrote: »
    I don't appricate the personal insults, Falcon.
    I feel the same way. It sure is a good thing that at no point did I write anything that even remotely resembles a personal insult.

    Azurian wrote: »
    If you ever handled a real Rifle (M1, M16, AK47, Remmington, Winchester, Browning etc), you aren't going to be shooting at someone less than 3m away from you. Instead, you would ready yourself for hand to hand combat.
    I've handled both M-14s and M-16s while I was in the US military. If someone is less than 3 meters away from me there's absolutely no reason that I wouldn't continue to shoot them with my rifle. And if they get within my reach I'd buttstroke them in a manner similar to the way the characters do in STO.

    I don't care what some actor in a red shirt did in some movie. Your understanding of weapons and warfare is wrong. There is no insult there. As someone who's been shot at IRL I'm telling you that you're wrong.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I feel the same way. It sure is a good thing that at no point did I write anything that even remotely resembles a personal insult.


    I've handled both M-14s and M-16s while I was in the US military. If someone is less than 3 meters away from me there's absolutely no reason that I wouldn't continue to shoot them with my rifle. And if they get within my reach I'd buttstroke them in a manner similar to the way the characters do in STO.

    I don't care what some actor in a red shirt did in some movie. Your understanding of weapons and warfare is wrong. There is no insult there. As someone who's been shot at IRL I'm telling you that you're wrong.

    someone needs to buy you a pony...
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Azurian wrote: »
    I don't appricate the personal insults, Falcon.

    If you ever handled a real Rifle (M1, M16, AK47, Remmington, Winchester, Browning etc), you aren't going to be shooting at someone less than 3m away from you. Instead, you would ready yourself for hand to hand combat.

    And it very well applies in Trek as well, because go ahead and reference the times they were shooting them. In the Klingon war, they went into defensive positions. In First Contact, Security stopped firing at the Borg (even before they knew they adapted). So no, it's not Hollywood or stupid. It's reality.

    Yes, those Dual Wield Pistoled Mobs, the Rapid Fire Mobs, the Klingon Swordmasters, and the Reman Captains all do need to be revisited and properly rebalanced. And on Elite setting they really need to put somekind of cap, especially with the new mobs (Breen, Fekliri, and Devidians).

    Eh.

    Although Falcon is being excessive your list doesn't lend me to believe that you know what your talking about. You pretty much just listed several different weapons types, all with their own effective ranges and uses. In that I can understand his frustration because I do have a passion for guns and this just is not helping your argument. For instance I would not use most hunting rifles (im assuming that what you mean by Remington/Winchester) at 3 meters, I would however use an 16inch AK47 at 3 meters and closer.

    That being said using any cannon source in trek for how their rifles work is suspect at best, their capability changes based on what the plot needs and when it needs it. At times they shoot dramatic bursts and at other times they shoot beams, sometimes they can kill people by vaporizing and other times they barely cause a second degree burn.

    Im not sure if this would make ground combat more fun but one thing about this game that always irked me was that you can take a directed energy hit over and over again even without shields up. There are times in ground missions where I don't bother to recharge my shield since it seams to make little difference.

    I always thought It would at least seam more real if personal shields became a much larger component of ground combat by drastically increasing how much damage is done to unshielded opponents. You really should only be able to take a few shots at most before you go down, again I don't know if it would make it more fun but it would certainty make it more dramatic.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    It is about situation, experience and optimum performance.
    An Para or ACP round has better stopping power and less recoil on short ranges than a 5.56. Also if you fight in a cramped CQB enviroment a 0.5m gun with low recoil and high ROF is much easier to wield, maneuver and aim than a 1m long gun with heavy recoil and moderate ROF.
    So on very short ranges (<100m), pistols and MPs tend perform better in all aspects than long guns and perform somewhat better than carbines.
    On intermediate ranges (100-400m) carbines rule, long guns do well, but pistols and MP loose performace rapidly.
    Over 400m long guns and sniper rifles all the way.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Azurian wrote: »
    For me, I really want rifles to be rifles, sniper rifles to be sniper rifles and there is a difference in using pistols. For instance, Rifles are good for long range, but useless in close combat. Pistols being not so good at long range, but get better the target is to the player. But close range combat needs to be pure hand-to-hand.

    In fact, I would love it that Hand-to-Hand combat was necessary and players have the option to train in different techniques. For instance players can choose Kirk's street-style combat, choosing a branch of the various Trek Martial Arts, or a third option in learning use of blade-type fighting (Swords, Knives, etc).

    I beleive the ability to train in different types of combat styles is already available to some extent. The problem I see is the limited number of training Points that are available to raise you Toon in any or all areas. If I train my Toon to 5 or 6 in one area, I run out of points, then I do not have the ability to raise them in another area. If Ground is Stronger, then Space is Weak. If you make Hand to Hand strong, then you leave Rifle Targeting Weak.

    A few more Training points might help the problem find a solution....
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    ugh go away hypothetical gun nuts, were dealing with lasers here
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Startruck wrote:
    ugh go away hypothetical gun nuts, were dealing with lasers here

    then technically there should be no difference from 1ft to 300ft. (aside from the particals it travels thru to deminish a tad off the dmg points)

    but in reference to pistols over rifles, one could say the rifle has more "power" storage verses a pistol, but given the time frame we are in, one would think aything of a laser use would be effective at any distance within a line of site of say....oh....cpl miles for giggles.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Maybe hitting people with the butt of a rifle hurts more than a palm strike?

    And people don't yell "Leg Sweep!" when they perform leg sweeps.

    and I don't understand why I can only take three hits on ground elite missions. my boffs don't agro at all.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    We need more ground powers and mechanic types.

    When we team up and group with others, we loose the imagined 16 powers our Bridge Officers contribute. Suddenly, we have primary/secondary fire with a handful of powers with long cooldowns. This is where claims of "all I do is press spacebar" or "1 or 2" come into play. Sure, we can position ourselves in different areas but combat is either painfully easy or impossible (and 1 hit death without even being exposed is impossible).

    Mobs need to be redesigned (and they are). They need to focus on a greater variety of powersets for mobs, instead of just buffing their damage, healing, and stats by arbitrary algorithms.

    Once mobs are redesigned (as the devs are doing), we can do more to expand what ground powers are available.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    We need more ground powers and mechanic types.

    When we team up and group with others, we lose the imagined 16 powers our Bridge Officers contribute. Suddenly, we have primary/secondary fire with a handful of powers with long cooldowns. This is where claims of "all I do is press spacebar" or "1 or 2" come into play. Sure, we can position ourselves in different areas but combat is either painfully easy or impossible (and 1 hit death without even being exposed is impossible).
    Thank you for saying that. I've been talking about this issue to anyone who'd listen since Closed Beta. This problem is especially apparent if you compare STO's ground combat to the two previous games Cryptic has created, CO and CoH/V.

    Perhaps the answer is customizable or expanded kits or perhaps it's more team-oriented powers that a Captain gains only if there are other players on the team on the ground, but whatever the answer is, the root of the problem is the loss of abilities and forcing our Captains to use less abilities then they have on their own.

    When you solo ground combat, you're a commanding officer, when you team with others on the ground, you're merely a soldier. This problem doesn't exist in space combat because each Captain still gets to maintain the same abilities whether on a team or not, but things have been like this since Closed Beta and it's time for a change...

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    hmm

    *More Melee weapons
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Make it like Battlefield 2!!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I think fewer BOs (even with fewer enemies) and emphasizing movement are a good start and an indication they're thinking about it.

    I think you're just too small a part of the success of your away team in a five person group.

    IMHO, the ideal would be two named BOs and a weak redshirt (who cannot be rezzed, maybe) against slightly smaller enemy groups. With flavor accolades for redshirt deaths (ie. number of redshirt deaths, types of redshirt deaths) and skill accolades for keeping redshirts alive.

    Maybe also the ability (and incentive) to rotate out BOs mid-mission more, to encourage using all of your BOs more. (for example, locked doors that require two engineering BOs to open, forcing a temporary trade out).

    I'd also like some Kingdom Hearts inspired play with optional mission specific BOs who can be rotated in and have special abilities or functions. (For example, Worf becomes a temporary option for a mission; you can use him or not but you have to rotate him in for some story objectives.)

    I know the gameplay is largely very different but I think Kingdom Hearts is a major place to look for ground improvements. Just take that and make it Trek with melee karate chops and Kirk bodyslams coupled with ranged target exercises. Obviously, that game has a lot more Z axis on the ground with high jumps but you can mimick some of that effect with increased use of horizontal axis.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    LordOfPit wrote: »
    Thank you for saying that. I've been talking about this issue to anyone who'd listen since Closed Beta. This problem is especially apparent if you compare STO's ground combat to the two previous games Cryptic has created, CO and CoH/V.

    Perhaps the answer is customizable or expanded kits or perhaps it's more team-oriented powers that a Captain gains only if there are other players on the team on the ground, but whatever the answer is, the root of the problem is the loss of abilities and forcing our Captains to use less abilities then they have on their own.

    When you solo ground combat, you're a commanding officer, when you team with others on the ground, you're merely a soldier. This problem doesn't exist in space combat because each Captain still gets to maintain the same abilities whether on a team or not, but things have been like this since Closed Beta and it's time for a change...


    I think a major way to enhance this is to enhance BOs, again following the Kingdom Hearts dynamic.

    I'd give you tray abilities tied to your primary two BOs, simulating them wearing kits of their own. (In turn your redshirt is more of a dummy, like the current BOs.)

    If you have two named BOs with "mini-kits" equipped, that could be another 4-5 buttons.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    The cross hairs should help a lot.

    Make it where you can fire your weapon at any time.

    Improve on the Bat'leth combos so they are not so easily interrupted and make some more simple combos.

    Add some counter attacks.

    Make some target-able ground objects we can shoot to make them explode for more environment interaction.

    Give us the ability to remove a stun or slowing effect every minute.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Pendra37 wrote: »
    It is about situation, experience and optimum performance.
    An Para or ACP round has better stopping power and less recoil on short ranges than a 5.56. Also if you fight in a cramped CQB enviroment a 0.5m gun with low recoil and high ROF is much easier to wield, maneuver and aim than a 1m long gun with heavy recoil and moderate ROF.
    So on very short ranges (<100m), pistols and MPs tend perform better in all aspects than long guns and perform somewhat better than carbines.
    On intermediate ranges (100-400m) carbines rule, long guns do well, but pistols and MP loose performace rapidly.
    Over 400m long guns and sniper rifles all the way.

    A 5.56 has no recoil.
    You can fire it one handed .... in fact I have seen pistols chambered for 5.56.
    It's a varmint round.

    That said, even a nine pound scoped .338 mag bolt action with a 26" barrel is 100% effective at the muzzle.
    A hole through you, is a hole through you and in every case is far more effective then a fist.

    Now when SWAT bursts into your apartment they don't shoulder thier AR's and Subs and pull out knives.

    The weapon in your hands is the weapon you will use.

    Star Trek itself is a little different.
    STO is again a little different.
    After all we are not scorching the walls for 5 minutes while the scene developes untill we finally land a shot on our enemy.


    Personally I like the way the weapons are implimented in this regard.
    Skill differences aside, a 32dps pistol is no better or worse then a 32dps assault weapon.

    It allows for personel preferance without penalty.
    For example, I like to use rifles on my toon, while I give my medic pistols. My engineer BO's get fast refire weapons so as to minimize the downtime of setting up turrets and such, while my Tac BO's get the heavy hitters.

    Change effective ranges in the ways you are suggesting and I'll have to outfit my away team with the one 'best' type or suffer a penalty.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    #1, Make it a first person shooter

    #2, Add environmental triggers and more hazards. (cans of plasma that can go boom, gas leaks from pipes, computers that give off elect

    #3, Vehicle combat is always a great addition....1 driver, 1 shooter.

    #4, Weapons that go boom; we use grenades and mines so why the hell not?

    #5, Random power ups: speed enhancers, power boosts to shields/weapons/health. Also infrared tech to find players/npcs easier.

    #6, Option to play with "smart npcs." Basically A.I. that will make the most logical choice for a kill or to survive without having the ability to one shot players.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I personally would like to see ground combat completely re-done. I'm not sure what would be best, maybe make it a bit more interactive.

    I hate to say it, but Gears of War style Star Trek ground combat, with the current but improved skills and abilities system would be fun for me. Obviously not so gory.. it is Trek. The cover system is very Star Trek (they always duck behind rocks etc in the shows).

    Just make it feel like you're part of the ground combat rather than hitting buttons now and then and getting TRIBBLE off by mobs that two-shot you.

    Maybe even a Fallout 3 style system, albeit in third person.

    Changing it to styles like these would also make it feel more like there's a real difference between space and ground. At the minute, ground combat feels like a ganked, de-evolved version of the space combat.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I think you're just too small a part of the success of your away team in a five person group.

    Where did you find competent BOffs? I do 99% of the work on all my away missions...

    Realistically I've soloed through several missions due to glitches or wonky AI or map issues, and at the end of the day about the only difference I see is that my characters tend to get less healing if my BOffs are off twiddling their thumbs.
    Englebert wrote:
    Improve on the Bat'leth combos so they are not so easily interrupted and make some more simple combos.

    Eh. The real problem with the Bat'let is that it's range is shorter than your arm and enemies can easily just back away shooting you while you're trying to close. It needs it's minimum range buffed slightly, and something needs to be done to prevent people from so easily keeping you out of range (maybe a minor slow or stagger effect on hit).
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Dahm_bomb wrote: »
    #1, Make it a first person shooter

    #2, Add environmental triggers and more hazards. (cans of plasma that can go boom, gas leaks from pipes, computers that give off elect

    #3, Vehicle combat is always a great addition....1 driver, 1 shooter.

    #4, Weapons that go boom; we use grenades and mines so why the hell not?

    #5, Random power ups: speed enhancers, power boosts to shields/weapons/health. Also infrared tech to find players/npcs easier.

    #6, Option to play with "smart npcs." Basically A.I. that will make the most logical choice for a kill or to survive without having the ability to one shot players.

    1# if its optional i'll guese thats okay

    2# yes

    3# YES!!! devs... we need new PVP fronts... ground,sea,air plus space :P (tom paris wanted to join the starfleet naval patrol thingy mabob.. so sea battles could work :D

    Air = shuttles/runabouts/fighters in atmospheric flight :P

    Land = ground maps... large maps with the odd vehicle or two :D

    4# you mean like a rocket launcher?

    5# N/a

    6# N/a
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Where did you find competent BOffs? I do 99% of the work on all my away missions...

    Realistically I've soloed through several missions due to glitches or wonky AI or map issues, and at the end of the day about the only difference I see is that my characters tend to get less healing if my BOffs are off twiddling their thumbs.



    Eh. The real problem with the Bat'let is that it's range is shorter than your arm and enemies can easily just back away shooting you while you're trying to close. It needs it's minimum range buffed slightly, and something needs to be done to prevent people from so easily keeping you out of range (maybe a minor slow or stagger effect on hit).

    I run one engineer captain with two tacs, one engineer and a science. Between constructs and BOs, I don't have to do a lot. I just equip them all with exposes and target the blinking mobs for my exploits and run around flanking. I just try to pop two turrets, two drones, and a medical generator every fight.

    Sure they're not rocket scientists but neither are the enemies.

    Also, I play on normal because I have an allergy to frustration.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I think a major way to enhance this is to enhance BOs, again following the Kingdom Hearts dynamic.

    I'd give you tray abilities tied to your primary two BOs, simulating them wearing kits of their own. (In turn your redshirt is more of a dummy, like the current BOs.)

    If you have two named BOs with "mini-kits" equipped, that could be another 4-5 buttons.

    This doesn't solv ethe problem of playing on a team.

    Suddenly, we've lost what little features we gained from the boffs and been relegated to the primary/secondary attack and long-cooldown abilities from kits.

    It's like we've got FPS-style weapons but lack the visceral, click-per-roudn that FPS's offer.

    in this sense, we get the worst parts of FPS (only two attacks per weapon) and the worst parts of MMOs (long cooldowns on everything else).

    Either we increase pwoer variety (from both a player and enemy standpoint) or we go to FPS mode.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    A 5.56 has no recoil.
    You can fire it one handed .... in fact I have seen pistols chambered for 5.56.
    It's a varmint round.

    I'm calling BS. I know I could fire an M16-A2 one-handed.

    However, proper marksmanship on that weapon involves a high firm grip and tight-in-the-shoulder (but not forced there) precision. Anyone who doesn't understand that the trajectory is affected by the recoil is wrong. Yeah, it's not going to leave a bruise like an improper stance with the M870 Shotgun but it's not like the recoil won't affect the round. The buffer spring is just that - it's a buffer on the M16 (which fires a 5.56 round). It won't stop bad stances where the weapon isn't secure (but not muscled into) the shoulder.

    Of course, you might mean any other 5.56 weapon but I know of absolutely zero weapons that fire a 5.56 and don't have some (even marginal) recoil (which is corrected by a proper stance, grip, and should support) - even the M9 Service Pistol (which fires a 9mm round) requires proper handling for the recoil - you don't just hold it loosey-goosey.

    =====

    Absolutely none of that has to do with Star Trek Online.

    Phasers and the like should be recoil-less because there's no kinetic force. If there's kinetic force, we can talk about recoil (but that would only manifest in reduced accuracy on a weapon-by-weapon basis).
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I have to say, I really like ground combat right now. The only exception is the ridiculous dual-pistol people, but other than that, I think it's great.
    Suddenly, we've lost what little features we gained from the boffs and been relegated to the primary/secondary attack and long-cooldown abilities from kits.

    I'm not sure that's true. In my opinion, most BO powers are basically just kit powers, with a little more customization. By playing on a team, you don't lose anything, and in fact, gain quite a bit: a fully intelligent ally (or four).
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I hate to say it, but Gears of War style Star Trek ground combat, with the current but improved skills and abilities system would be fun for me. Obviously not so gory.. it is Trek. The cover system is very Star Trek (they always duck behind rocks etc in the shows).

    Well i don't hate to say it, but Gears had solid, dependable gameplay. Yes it was heavily action oriented, but a non-combat camera position a la Mass Effect would allow for scientific and anthropological gameplay while preserving a Gears type of combat.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    ...in this sense, we get the worst parts of FPS (only two attacks per weapon) and the worst parts of MMOs (long cooldowns on everything else).
    That's the quintessential problem in my opinion as well. It's like the more people on your team, the less appealing ground combat becomes. Having no way for a team to interact with the NPC's, as a team, simply adds insult to injury... :(
Sign In or Register to comment.