co-op missions

markonymous · Post by **markonymous** » 2007-10-31 20:18

I for one would like to have some co-op missions in PR. like a campaign where the US army or British army or whatever Attacks an insurgent stronghold to place a bomb in some room for some reason. this would only allow 5-10 ppl to play together on the same mission but i think it would be fun. What do the rest of u think?

zardez · Post by **zardez** » 2007-10-31 22:25

hm, i think this is a good idea but with some tweaking it could sound quite interesting.

how about similar concept only the insurgents are played as well, so that 5-10 people on each team with one goal, this way you dont have the endless running around capping flags, so just two ends one objective, insurgents have to reduce opposing sides tickets to zero, or hold out until time runs out, USMC or British forces have to plant C4 in an underground room ect, no vehicles purely infantry.

ideas?

markonymous · Post by **markonymous** » 2007-11-01 06:00

that would make it more interesting

zardez · Post by **zardez** » 2007-11-01 09:26

lol , i dont think anyone else checks this thread

BUMP

markonymous · Post by **markonymous** » 2007-11-01 13:16

nope me neither

kf_reaper · Post by **kf_reaper** » 2007-11-01 13:26

i would really enjoy that kinda game play now and then

G0ggy · Post by **G0ggy** » 2007-11-01 13:31

Sounds good too me.

supahpingi · Post by **supahpingi** » 2007-11-01 13:53

If u want Coop u need to set the AI to guard and stuff aint it?
is that even possible?
But it rly sounds good!

darkNight · Post by **darkNight** » 2007-11-01 14:40

I thinks that's possible. I like this idea!

Warmagi · Post by **Warmagi** » 2007-11-01 19:31

Playing co-op would eliminate smacktardness of some players, AI cant act like retards unless it ment to do it, but I think that playing with real ppl gives you more adrenaline and makes things less repetitive. IMO future is objective based gameplay.

For example 1st team is tasked to destroy few radar towers in the area, and destroy airfield communication ability, after that they need to capture airfield and size some enemy air transport to atack some fortress on a mountain or something like that. While the other team need to defend and protect.

Or... we are playing just a small part in a bigger conflict. We need to cut enemy supply lines and try to cut off enemy reinforcments. This will create oportunity on a main front (in which we are not participating-just a plotline) to advance or defeat the enemy main force. One team need to deliver at least one of two convoys to certain area (no AT kits), the other team needs to destroy or capture both convoys and disable a bridge before train with reinforment cross it. Just my imaginatory ideas.

Waaah_Wah · Post by **Waaah_Wah** » 2007-11-01 19:42

markonymous wrote:I for one would like to have some co-op missions in PR. like a campaign where the US army or British army or whatever Attacks an insurgent stronghold to place a bomb in some room for some reason. this would only allow 5-10 ppl to play together on the same mission but i think it would be fun. What do the rest of u think?

Played to much CS havent we?

markonymous · Post by **markonymous** » 2007-11-01 20:18

I actually don't play cs at all it was a fast example to explain what i meant. did u understand it?(if u did u see my point)

zardez · Post by **zardez** » 2007-11-02 00:21

yeah, i didn't mean have bots (to clarify my last post) but rather be online. i think if you make it more than one objective you will find nubs doing them in the wrong order, or people waiting by the next unprotected objective. i think just a clear cut 'defend' or 'attack' this building is the way to go, for example, insurgents are in an abandoned shopping center, USMC or British forces must get into the building (wouldn't be easy) then destroy something in one of the top rooms. of course this is just an idea so that people can understand what sort of map or co-op im thinking of

markonymous · Post by **markonymous** » 2007-11-02 07:27

insurgents should outnumber attackers but have less and worse gear.

zardez · Post by **zardez** » 2007-11-02 07:56

markonymous wrote:insurgents should outnumber attackers but have less and worse gear.

yeah for sure, they should have 20% more people but have weapons with no optics, US forces have no explosive kits.

US can attack from any angle of the building, its a multilevel building at least 3 stories and the objective spawns on top level, bottom floor is fairly open but once your in its an open area to cover.

I like our ideas mark

markonymous · Post by **markonymous** » 2007-11-02 10:20

hehe ye me too

Waaah_Wah · Post by **Waaah_Wah** » 2007-11-02 15:43

markonymous wrote:I actually don't play cs at all it was a fast example to explain what i meant. did u understand it?(if u did u see my point)

Well in CS you have a bunch of ppl (5-10) on each team trying to set up a bomb in a building for some reason. And the CT team has to stop them. Do you really want this in PR?

Morgan · Post by **Morgan** » 2007-11-02 15:52

It's what I see as CS and maybe GR:AW crossed in some hybrid idea onto the BF2 engine... Pointless IMO, just go play CS.

markonymous · Post by **markonymous** » 2007-11-02 18:02

well the thing is cs sux

Morgan · Post by **Morgan** » 2007-11-02 22:35

It's not that bad a game, it's okay for a 20 minutes of run and gun fun but it does lack a bit of depth... Still the suggestion is in itself CS.