Page 1 of 2

slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-02 21:19
by maarit
so...
after playing 0.9 what you guys feel about it?
is gameplay enough too slow or too fast to you?

i prefer even more slower gameplay.

my ideal gameplay is just that maybe 10 minutes or more is just quiet but then begans fighting,maybe 10 minutes,,,and the again silence.

so...should pr go even more slower gameplay or faster,or is it fine what is now?

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-02 21:26
by darklord63
Personally, I think it's fine, I mean it's not really changing. The thing that really determines your playing experience is you squad's ability to use teamwork, and because of all the new players from .9 who are coming in, I'm only rarely getting good games.

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-02 21:51
by -Prowler-
I like it now.

I don't think making it faster would be more beneficial...

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-02 22:11
by Arnoldio
Its as fast as you make it :D

But you know the magical combination of W+Shift (or 2xW) drives many people faster, further... deadier?

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-02 23:53
by GrimSoldier
Seems slower imo cause of the rally change. Makes it in some ways less exciting but oh well.

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-02 23:59
by ReadMenace
Slower the better -- it would be neat if we could have a game where an ambush actually caught someone by surprise. ;)

-REad

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 01:27
by boilerrat
I wish gameplay was more like this:



But in all seriousness, it is fine as is.

Nothing is more satisfying than waiting 30 minutes watching your IEDs when a LAV-25 rolls over 10 artillery IEDs spread over a area.

Then later find out you got a tank at the same time.

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 01:48
by Phantom2
I like the gameplay as it is. Sometimes it's just fun to go by a choke point and throw an rkg-3 at the unsuspected HMMWV/Stryker to scare it a bit. If the gameplay got any slower with the non-fun rounds, I'd be killing myself.

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 07:27
by RHYS4190
I think PR to unfriendly towards people to have a job, most of the game these days are simply walking through un contested territory, there are no real established front lines, so fighting is usually very dis organised, you spend most of your time waiting for some thing to happen or walking looking for the enemy.

I think Pr should be fast passed and organised yet tactical, front lines should be encouraged, bigg fire fights should be common and very gritty and down out. often resulting in one team having to give grounld and then regroup.

some of you might not have a problem waiting half an hour for a fight that over in a few shots, but most people simply don’t have the time for that.

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 08:42
by L4gi
The speed of gameplay is fine, although I'd like it a bit faster. Usually the gameplay speed on a server is set by the players. Others have a faster pace, others go slower.

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 09:36
by Hunt3r
There really needs to be more focused fighting if it's for infantry, but for vehicle warfare, it would really make sense to have bigger ones.

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 10:26
by Iceberg
I think the gameplay is fine as it is

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 13:36
by General Dragosh
Yep, the gameplay is fine as it is =P

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 13:51
by Rudd
I really like the pace ingame, especially when you get an infantry squad buddied to a vehicle

I like that you can move fast and flank, but also go slow and careful.

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 14:47
by gazzthompson
Rudd posted what i was going to say, so ill just expand.

I think the pace of the mod is pretty much great right now, you can take it slow and be rewarded for it but also with some teamwork with APCs/Helis etc you can skip across the battlefield pretty fast.

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 15:00
by Redamare
i would say its JUST right ... its not too fast or too slow its right on the money lol it still encourages all ofthe basic pr functions such as teamwork and fair balance

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 15:08
by AnimalMother.
i've enjoyed the game pace of 0.9 alot more compared to previous versions


echoing gazz and rudd, you can tactically advance anticipating enemy contact, it may not happen but such is war and it builds up the tension for when you make contact. Alternatively you can request transport and blitz your way to death or glory.

my favourite battlefield role of transport pilot has it's own mix of slow and fast pace. can be sat idling for a while then when we cap a flag alot of squads need moving.

With certain people on the server you can will get a good balance of slow and fast paced gameplay.

hell it could be 0.8 where a firefight took ages as you either sprayed bullets wildly or waited half a century to get an accurate shot off

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-03 23:02
by the_ganman
boilerrat wrote:I wish gameplay was more like this:



But in all seriousness, it is fine as is.

Nothing is more satisfying than waiting 30 minutes watching your IEDs when a LAV-25 rolls over 10 artillery IEDs spread over a area.

Then later find out you got a tank at the same time.


HAHAHA he said the maps are so big :P :? : :? : :? : :? : :? :

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-04 03:39
by Iceberg
There should be more infantry based levels imo

Re: slower gameplay or faster?

Posted: 2010-04-04 04:58
by stealth420
Make all vehicle times, Including Air vehicles , 5 minutes and you got faster gameplay.