If you a troll or just another one of the PS2 crowd here to read this just to flame me or the post , **** YOU i have no time for you anymore. The lack of strategy may come down to a fundemental design at the core of the game. Basically im talking about the hit point model and armour penertration physics or lack off. The game gives you an amout of damage/hit points for said spawn be it an infantry, tank or plane and gives the weaponry a damage value.So if you in a main battle tank every ****** under the sun with a pistol can take a shot at you and cause damage. With this approach to the game style your never going to get straregy. Infantry when shot should die or be wounded YES wih one bullet ! Then a well placed unit would be able to hold off against a superior force or skill would figure greatly in the outcome. Harsh i know but feels real. Tanks should have armour values and the weapons should have proper ammo variations and a proper armour penertration physic. Then the well placed Main battle tank with 120mm of frontal armour would be a Threat indeed, like the famous TIGER TANK the germans had in WW2 among others. Had to get real close to take out one of these babys or swarm it with numbers. One hit to other armour of the day with its rifled high velocity 88mm main cannon and BOOM. Harsh but true Aircraft when hit in the real wars depends greatly where they are hit to determine weather or not the shell is going to bring it down , and the type of shell/rocket . Not pumping round after round into them only to see there damage bar go down a bit then turn to fly away. Ok here comes the trolls , "go play ******* arma you NOOB this aint meant to be a real life war simulator you FRICKING ****NOOB ! " yes i can hear them allready. And i do play arma and belive me if your looking for a game with strategy theres one for you , but arma dosent cater for 2000 ppl battles dose it !. And there is my point , it anit based at all in one single way in real world warfare and that is why you will never get strategy in this game even with lattice links and tigther base design ETC ETC . Ok well im gonna go back to the grounghog day warfare we call PS2 , but i can only stand to play these days for an hour or so before saying **** it. It aint gonna change and when if it does will it be for the greater good of the game ? that remains to be seen. Thx.
This doesn't need to be like ArmA but the point of MMOFPS is a break from static generic 'arena maps' and the invention of a dynamic battlefield created by the players. Excluding large scale strategy from a war based MMO (FPS or not) is excluding a vast amount of player created content. Where I disagree with you is adding mil-sim like realism to the game. Certainly I'd still play it but the pew pew coming from the generic market would be significant and community breaking. Arcade is okay in moderation and I think the implementation of the 'shield' is actually quite good as it serves as a 'suppression' like feature. Gameplay mechanics will never fix stupid.
I don't think this is really true. There have been lots of stories going back to the B-17s in WW2 that came back missing tails, parts of wings, entire nose shot off, more holes that swiss cheese, and they not only made it back to England, they finished their bombing missions! http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/contents.htm In the 80's there was a story of an F-15 that took a hit when the guy landed, 3/4 of his left wing was GONE! Then there are the stories of the A-10 during both Gulf Wars. Those things are probably the closest to the ESF's in PS2. They are beasts! A-10s can absorb so much damage and just keep right on going it is scary! http://www.cradleofaviation.org/history/aircraft/a-10.html So, i guess what i am saying is that I don't think this is unrealistic.
game design will never cure ******ation, sorry bro. when people cant understand basic lines of fire, basic engagement ranges for weapons, not to attract air attention by shooting at them with ineffective weapons then I have little hope for them even beginning to comphrehend complex strategic gameplay implemented directly into the game.
There's a lot more stories of planes that didn't make it back after missing parts than there are that did make it back. OP is correct, this game needs vehicle hitboxes and negative effects of personnel HP loss.
lolwut? Realism =/= strategy. Plus if it only takes one bullet to kill, all the more reason for stupid pubs to camp all day instead of actually taking the damn point. And if it only takes one bullet to kill, why bother to aim? I'll just spray and get 1 bullet into as many guys as I can. And you want tanks to be even more of a threat? Sorry, I didn't sign up for World of Tanks and Heavies. And you're right, this isn't a god damn simulator, and you're terrible at game design and theory. If you want a war simulator, go play a war simulator. Leave us to our game. Real war is not fun. And strategy isn't something for the masses, strategy is something for 5 guys in dress uniforms sitting around a table in Washington. Maybe you're thinking of tactics, but that's not really for the masses either, that's for the platoon commander.
