Greetings!
If you would like to take part in the discussions, sign in below!
Categories
Latest Discussions
- Teamkilling
- Late nighterz
- Require all new joiners to go through basic training
- Getting a mover to stop on hitting another mover
- Automatically ban for the round jump and shoot players
- AAL Europe League 2020
- Will America's Army Proving Grounds Ps4 get another update?
- Service Affiliation for veterans?
- Need help on Proofing ground
- America's Army News- Developer Hiring?
Comments
I think it would make things overly complicated, we already have 2 paces while ADS. You'd need a new keybind.
I also think that the current ADS movement speed is fast enough, I feel like having and even faster option wouldn't be good for gameplay... Everyone zipping around, while being accurate... But of course, this is not based on any hard facts.
Of course everything would depend on the actual realization, but I personally don't think we'd get this big of an overhaul to the movement system at this point. I mean it doesn't make too much sense to redesign the movement in a 4-year-old (4?) game.
If the Army wants eSports (see the R&R forum), they should obviously pair AA5 with their eSports initiative. SUre, AA5 will never be as big as DOTA, LoL, CSGO. But there's some sweet marketing potential to bring a team of real life Army gamers to these festivals/conventions and host small-scale events/tournaments that often occur with the less popular games. Like an undercard to a boxing main event, AAPG could start making the rounds at Dreamhack and whatnot with CSGO, LoL and DOTA2 headliners.
How sweet would it be to have 5 Army dudes in uniform walk up on the stage, greet the crowd and hang around after the match for some PR? You're welcome.
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
What could a new AA version bring to the market that is DIFFERENT but interesting and captivating for retention (and gives the Army value)? I don't feel we're getting that kind of feedback here from the comp oriented crowd, who instead seem to want CS/COD with an AA branding on it.
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
Cause honestly i dont want a COD clone either.
#Support Comp Mode
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4YhM6jUB2MxVj8i3b9rhw
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
I do think there's a need for a competitive ADS shooter that's less structured than R6 Siege. Go from there.
Casual shooters don't sell on PC unless you're Fortnite (and even there you can say that there's a decent sized skill curve). So where else do you go?
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
Without the latency triggered buggs and issues
(as a concept AA3 was/is far "better" than AA:PG, but might have been to much)
Changes to netcode, recoil, and that sort of thing should not happen after release. Just new maps, new training missions, unlockables (like AA2 maps, not like air strikes), etc.
I liked the mission/training progression of AA2 in principle, even though it didn't affect the way I played, or even where I played. After my first soldier, it was kind of a pain in the buttocks to go through the training.
1) boot camp. Learning basic movements of your pawn, get yelled at by some CGI drill instructor. Sit through some short (skippable after maybe 30 secs) modules about whatever the Army values. Take curriculum directly from the Army BMT classrooms. Progress through to weapons training/familiarization.
Limited maps and load outs are unlocked.
2) Adv Training 1. Blah blah blah blah. Some advanced techniques (more video game than real life) that teach mechanics and strategies like cover/conce
I think you're both correct!
I agree.
Overall, I think the mechanics are solid, but I still have to harp on the skill curve. Need to expand that.
Make movement more fluid/quick so that sprint is not so constantly needed (I think sprint around so often in this game). I'm not about making the game super fast, actually I do think it needs to be slower overall. However, fast movement gives the player more control, which is a good thing. The way you slow the game down is through action speeds, faster time to kill, things like that. Honestly, I wouldn't be opposed to increasing TTK by a single shot on top of what we have in AAPG.
Figure out a risk reward system for most actions. Performing an action should typically give you a benefit, but also present some sort of drawback. The movement and lean example is one. I also think that action speeds should be slower and more deliberate. Reloading should take longer, switching weapons should take longer (pistol can be fast), switching back and forth to grenades should take longer. If I run out of ammo, my main course of action should be to get to cover and reload, if I can't do that then I should have to resort to my pistol or secondary. In AAPG it's rare where switching to your second weapon is needed. Throwing a grenade should have a penalty of taking an extra moment to switch back to your primary, especially if you intend grenades to be as lethal or close to it as they are now. These kinds of things are so important. If you have an action that benefits a player, there should be drawback even if it's not a massive one. Slowing down all of these actions would also slow down game play a bit. which is perfectly fine. Just because you move faster, doesn't mean that the game play needs to be at a blazing speed.
Same goes with the breathing. The figure 8 thing is actually pretty decent, I just wish they included that stop at the top and bottom and really increased the harshness of it. Being near a teammate can reduce it, being still, being prone, etc. Including the stop and bottom allows players to time their shots to the pattern. I'd also say to get rid of the hold breath function if you do this. If you want to include it, then have holding your breath outside of the natural cycles cause a penalty of some sort. Also, include a penalty depending on which scope you use. Higher powered scope = more penalty. Sniping shouldn't be as easy as it is in AAPG. Snipers should need to mount/go prone to make shooting easier. Again, slowing things down, making things more challenging. Mounting and dismounting should take time as well, look at how AA2 did it. Risk & Reward.
Actually another part to add on to this is something I've seen in sniper games. In AA2 we had CEM to tell you how your environment, health, etc. would affect your accuracy and ability to aim. Sniper games have a heart rate function that serves a similar purpose. Being shot at raises your heart rate. Sprinting raises your heart rate, heck even movement raises your heart rate. All sorts of things like that. The higher your heart rate, the more difficult it is to aim your weapon and things like that. Obviously being injured would raise your hurt rate as well. Would be a nice way to add that sort of immersive type of function to the game.
It's funny, if you look at AA2, the game was slow, but it worked well competitively because whether the Dev team intended it or not, most actions came with a trade-off. I remember so well that if you were on the opposite side of the door for an enemy and you go to a stale mate, there was such a meta there. Someone pulls out a grenade, suddenly you think they're going to toss one at you, you charge in, but they change back to their primary blow you away. On the flip side, they pull out a grenade and go to toss it at you, the slower speed of the actions allows you to charge in before they can switch back to the primary and kill them. Not having back up makes throwing that grenade so risky. All sorts of things like that occurred more frequently.
Some ideas for categories:
Marksmanship - The ability to hold your rifle steady (sway)
Weapon Control - ability to control recoil
Stealth - How loud your footsteps are
Athleticism - How fast you move, vault, and get fatigued. Maybe how far you can throw grenades.
Bravery - How much you are affected by being shot at and being injured
Leadership - Extends the range of a player's influence over his teammates (doesn't need to be as close) and the extent of that influence (reducing penalties).
If players wish for one category to be increased, they have to drop another one. There could also be a variable to set all players to the standard numbers for competition if needed.
So in this situation, a player would have the same number of points to use regardless of rank? That's the only way I could see this work.
If you earn more points as you rank up, I wouldn't like it. I'm not sure I like it as I understand it, but it's interesting. It's a level playing field in the sense that everyone has the same number of points to work with, but some players will be stronger in certain areas than others depending on point allocation.