It puts a smile on my face when I see I have succesfuly headhshotted an enemy sniper with the pistol 1.
Firstoff I have to quote that cause it makes me giggle. Trickster should know why. Well every class in the game can use Pistol1. Pistol1 is just as good as it was in 2.0 so what?!?! Its actually worth using it again. QFT
The mortar is kind of stupid at the moment, given that there isn't really anything you can do against it if the grenadier has cover. The gren can pop out and shoot you far faster than you can shoot the gren, even with near perfect reactions your DPS is going to be too low to actually kill them in the 2 shots (if you're lucky) that the mortar takes to kill people. Kind of stupid that the anti tank class has one of the better anti-infantry guns in the game. This really isn't a good balance becaus there's fuck all the other classes can do against it. You can't shoot the gren and you can't close range in the time it takes the gren to fire 2 or 3 shots at you.
Grenadier is balanced on the top of the skill curve. Very good rifleman like harryhoot, michael or bitterjesus kill me all the time when I attack them as gren. You cant balance a competitive game on the skill of the average player. The mortar is super efficient as a noob killer cause those people dont know how to avoid mortar damage. A good player will always know how to strafe away from a flying shell and crouch/snipe you bevor the projectil hits the ground.
Yes, although I don't like the class, but more importantly I've played against them. Making a class unkillable assuming the player is good at it is not very smart, because it results in a few players killing shitloads of other players, this is not a good balance because it means you're making the game fun for one player by making it shit for many. You can't strafe away from a shell with a wide blast radius that hits as quickly as a mortar shell does at medium range, and you can't shoot back because the grenadier can instantly return to cover before the shell even hits the top of its arc. I've seen grenadiers pop in and out of cover faster than my crouch key even responds. It isn't a matter of skill, it's a matter of the mechanical limitations of the game being far greater for classes using conventional guns. Also yes you can balance it like that, because the average players are by definition the people who will be playing it most.
No you cant because the best players would dominate the rest of the playerbase if it would be balanced for the average player. Balancing for the average player works for casuall games but not if your game is very competitive. Games like starcraft, Heroes of newerth, WoW PvP or Bloodline Champions are balanced for the top one percent of the playerbase for a reason. In a competitive scenario you can balance for people that actually know how to perfectly play the game. Thats not newbie friendly, thats not making it fun for half the players but it guarantees that the game is played fair and balanced. The best riflemans in empires know how to move to avoid getting hit by a mortar, they know how to keep distance and the aim good enough to kill the grenadier in that half second when you crouch/shot the mortar. I play this game for 3 years now (I guess I dont really know) and I guarantee you that a very good rifleman will kill a very good grenadier in 90% of all encounters. An interesting point is that those rifleman are also good grenadiers too. Its the same in every competitive class based game. You cant be the best of the best if you dont play all classes because else you dont know how to counter the other classes.
screw that balance shit, if grens wouldnt stand a chance against rifles noone would play gren then since tanks are the only counter to tanks anyway. though with so many noobs its quit fun atm, but thats gonna change as soon as they get that the best anti infantry weapon is the tank itself. and with each roadkill we decrease this time ... so whats the issue with grens and riflemen being able to kill eachother effictively? rifle will pwn the gren at long range (even a total noob can dodge the mortar on this range), grens have a advantage in chokepoints and med-low distance. only thing is that SMG and so scunt and engi dont play a roll in this, smgs should be buffed a bit. pistol1 is way to accurate after the 1st shot. if you refuse to decrease dmg then at least increase the accuracy loss after the first shot. and please fucking stop to buff accuracy to be superaccurate, empires maps are huge and fairly open. its just bullshit that you can use all weapons at any range. its not about that they have falloff dmg anyway (thats good) its that pistols let you snipe guys that are in view distance as long as your monitor is large enough to aim well ...
lol, It is kind of weird seeing you say that weapons in 2.0 were fun. What's funnier is that i find myself agreeing with you. About hit and cover mortar: I had no problem with it in older versions, you could see when gren was preparing to hop out and take the shot . It was very easy to prepare for that and either kill him or inflict heavy damage. Without targets its impossible to time it (except if the gren follows a obvious pattern [but then he is probably a low threat anyway]). You wanted targets gone, you deal with the fallout. Tough shit.
I want the arbitrary limitation of only having one shell in the air at a time removed, it's incredibly obnoxious to hit fire and hear the sound, but nothing goes, and do that two or three times before you actually fire. I can't be the only one who shoots almost straight up?
No, that's what happens if you design the game around stupidly high skill caps, which is what you're arguing for. If you design the game to be played well with average skill that menas you essentially put a very hard skill cap on it, so no matter how good you are, you can't gain a significant advantage, thereby making it fairly easy to be good at the game. Because being unable to hit the rifleman at long rang with my mortat = not fun, all I can do is get shot at. Equally so, being unable to shoot the grenadier at close range with my rifle, not fun. Stop balancing things around stupid situational effectiveness and retarded infinite skill caps.
Fun differs from person to person. Just because it's fun for you doesn't mean its fun for me. The game should not be balanced around "fun".
The sole point of a game is to be fun, if anything in the game is not contributing towards it being fun, or if it is actively getting in the way of it being fun, it needs changing.
I don't get it.. why do some people always complain about grenadier, no matter what version and how useful or powerful it is.. now it's actually very playable class considering rifleman is very powerful against infantry. Even if there's 3 or more grenadiers shooting at the same time, one rifleman can easily take them all... Grenadier is still the most vulnerable class to every other class at close range. I find gren the easiest class to kill as any other class.. there's just something I don't quite understand in this thread.
Games that have a hard skillcap thats around the skill of an average player wont get played for a long time. Look at css or starcraft. Both have a insane high skillcap with people acting almost like robots on the top but still millions of sucky random average players enjoy it. Its ok if you dont want such high skill caps but the majority seems to want it. Just look at every super popular competitive multiplayer game.
TF2? TF2 doesn't even do it very well and it's insanely popular. Certainly seems to be more popular than CSS if my friends list is any indication.
TF2 has a pretty high skill cap, dunno if you ever watched some solid soldier/demo play. Two things can happen when you balance a game around bads. 1. Players get decent, get bored of a game that takes 2 days to master and quit. 2. Good players exploit the noobshit mechanics and stomp all day
