But if you've many objectives to defend it's getting harder, anyway I should try it out, it sounds like TTR and it was funny.
Last edited:
Official INF 2.9 Bonus pack announcement 2 month old today
- Thread starter geogob
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Beppo
Infiltration Lead-Programmer
just a little remark on the replayability...
sure EAS missions do not change in most maps out there but is that really a problem?
I don't want to compare INF with other games but in terms of replayability you can compare if needed. So tell me why do folks still play Enemy Territory on the same damn handful of maps since it was released? Why do they play Day of Defeat still on the same maps over and over? Same for Desert Combat or anything else out there...
I can answer this myself for DoD and DS...recapturing of an objective is possible. But still, the maps play pretty much the same each time you do, but noone complains, all play and have fun. ET has a mix of recapturing and 'final' objectives that can only be taken once and still it is very repetitive... but the players do not care, they play this game still.
Sure these games have way more players than INF has but most folks I know play on the same bunch of servers all the time and so play with the same people most times. So the replayability is not base on the high number of players and so the different tactics some may have. Each map plays almost exactly the same each time you play it in these games, and still people have fun with it.
I have fun with INF each time I play it, no matter what map is played and even if I know the map for a couple of years already.
sure EAS missions do not change in most maps out there but is that really a problem?
I don't want to compare INF with other games but in terms of replayability you can compare if needed. So tell me why do folks still play Enemy Territory on the same damn handful of maps since it was released? Why do they play Day of Defeat still on the same maps over and over? Same for Desert Combat or anything else out there...
I can answer this myself for DoD and DS...recapturing of an objective is possible. But still, the maps play pretty much the same each time you do, but noone complains, all play and have fun. ET has a mix of recapturing and 'final' objectives that can only be taken once and still it is very repetitive... but the players do not care, they play this game still.
Sure these games have way more players than INF has but most folks I know play on the same bunch of servers all the time and so play with the same people most times. So the replayability is not base on the high number of players and so the different tactics some may have. Each map plays almost exactly the same each time you play it in these games, and still people have fun with it.
I have fun with INF each time I play it, no matter what map is played and even if I know the map for a couple of years already.
Last edited:
Well, i don't know why they keep playing these games, but i sure know why I 'm not playing them : it's because they're repetitive. Beppo haven't you notice by then that Inf players are an elitist community that pretty much despise every other "realistic" fps outthere ? In that regard, i don't think comparing Inf to other fps is a good way to make a point. Inf is better than most games outthere, please don't lower it by making comparison with other games being played by 14 years old. Inf community is quite mature and that's probably why it's very demanding when it comes to gameplay.
i agree with antkilla
the people who play over and over the same maps with the same objectives on the same server for 3 years are brainwashed kids whose pleasure is rushing/knowing the game by heart to use any tip to kill the newbies
theires people playing like that on the inf germany tdm server though
the people who play over and over the same maps with the same objectives on the same server for 3 years are brainwashed kids whose pleasure is rushing/knowing the game by heart to use any tip to kill the newbies
theires people playing like that on the inf germany tdm server though
Vega-don said:theires people playing like that on the inf germany tdm server though
At least there is a populated server that you can hop on. Of course TDM is repetetive as well but it still seems to attract some players.
Defending in EAS instead can be a rather lame job. You stick to your spot (in case you do have decent teamplay) and guard it. If you do it over and over again it seems to bore people... at least that's how I explain the desinterest in EAS. (together with the mentioned concentration on the league of clans)
Having more dynamic missions (like Mostar) can help to improve this point.
I personally joined a clan to be able to play EAS regularly (beside the general interest in INF). That's probably the only option if you want to play it 'the way it's ment to be played' (teamsize, communication, teamplay etc.)
I agree to ant to a degree, but I´m one of the ppl who can enjoy a map for years, if it is a good map.
I think some EAS maps are very good, but its a waste if this maps are always the same. Playing TDM maps are not that important, cuz it is only about tactical enemie killing, but missions depend on maps.
I always dreamed having maps not in just one map, but in a 'mission pack'.
In this pack, you have the same maps, with different sub missions that belong to the primal mission.
For example Mostar:
Part One
The first mission part, is at the evening, where team A have to take down the chopper with a Stinger, team B have to prevent them. The emphasis in this mission is a special part on the map.
- If team A fails, the mission is replayed, but team B takes the role of the agressor. If team B fails too, next map will be launched.
Part Two
The chopper is down.
It is night, team A has to reach the chopper and team B protect it. The battles are full of CQB in the streets and buildings.
The emphasis is in another point of the map and more places are accessable.
- If team A fails, team B takes the role of the agressor, in the first mission part. If team B fails at the first mission part too, next map will be launched.
Part Three
It is dawn. You hear the muizzin shouting.
Team A has the stuff from the chopper.
They have to escape, while the battles are hard, cuz team B has to prevent team A from escape at all costs (hey, no reason for terror).
The emphasis takes even here in another point, and probably more places are accessable.
- When team A succeed, next map will be loaded (or team B take place of team A). If team A fails, team B takes the role of the agressor, in the first mission part.
If team B fails at the first mission part too, next map will be launched.
I know, it takes work and time to create such missions, but those missions would create realistic operations, which takes a whole day, sometimes. It would make the same map different every mission part and the same map can be reused therefore.
I can imagine Road to Kandahar, such a genious map with so great embience, splitted in different mission parts.
The server can use those missions different. You can play the whole 'mission session' like described above, or you can use just one mission part to play it as a single map, like the actual EAS.
If a mission is selected in the menu, they will appear a submenu, with the mission parts listed, you can coose one of them. If you do not choose, just select the map and it will be played with all parts as described above.
Also you can skip the first mission part, and begin with the second and continue with the third. That would be called 'custom session'.
But they should still stay maps, like in actual EAS, where you play just one map, with one mission part. Take something, and reach a extraction point, all in the single mission.
And what about having one map, with different objectives selectable? Take mostar, you could define, do you want to take the CD from the chopper, or do you want to let a bomb detonating in the enemie camp?
A map can be used with normally imfantry, or a sabotage mission, with limited firepower, light Special Force armory and silencers and so on.
-edit-
I made a Mission Suggestion thread
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=144725
I think some EAS maps are very good, but its a waste if this maps are always the same. Playing TDM maps are not that important, cuz it is only about tactical enemie killing, but missions depend on maps.
I always dreamed having maps not in just one map, but in a 'mission pack'.
In this pack, you have the same maps, with different sub missions that belong to the primal mission.
For example Mostar:
Part One
The first mission part, is at the evening, where team A have to take down the chopper with a Stinger, team B have to prevent them. The emphasis in this mission is a special part on the map.
- If team A fails, the mission is replayed, but team B takes the role of the agressor. If team B fails too, next map will be launched.
Part Two
The chopper is down.
It is night, team A has to reach the chopper and team B protect it. The battles are full of CQB in the streets and buildings.
The emphasis is in another point of the map and more places are accessable.
- If team A fails, team B takes the role of the agressor, in the first mission part. If team B fails at the first mission part too, next map will be launched.
Part Three
It is dawn. You hear the muizzin shouting.
Team A has the stuff from the chopper.
They have to escape, while the battles are hard, cuz team B has to prevent team A from escape at all costs (hey, no reason for terror).
The emphasis takes even here in another point, and probably more places are accessable.
- When team A succeed, next map will be loaded (or team B take place of team A). If team A fails, team B takes the role of the agressor, in the first mission part.
If team B fails at the first mission part too, next map will be launched.
I know, it takes work and time to create such missions, but those missions would create realistic operations, which takes a whole day, sometimes. It would make the same map different every mission part and the same map can be reused therefore.
I can imagine Road to Kandahar, such a genious map with so great embience, splitted in different mission parts.
The server can use those missions different. You can play the whole 'mission session' like described above, or you can use just one mission part to play it as a single map, like the actual EAS.
If a mission is selected in the menu, they will appear a submenu, with the mission parts listed, you can coose one of them. If you do not choose, just select the map and it will be played with all parts as described above.
Also you can skip the first mission part, and begin with the second and continue with the third. That would be called 'custom session'.
But they should still stay maps, like in actual EAS, where you play just one map, with one mission part. Take something, and reach a extraction point, all in the single mission.
And what about having one map, with different objectives selectable? Take mostar, you could define, do you want to take the CD from the chopper, or do you want to let a bomb detonating in the enemie camp?
A map can be used with normally imfantry, or a sabotage mission, with limited firepower, light Special Force armory and silencers and so on.
-edit-
I made a Mission Suggestion thread
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=144725
Last edited:
Yeah, now that would be cool, dynamic missions. Anything besides just get the disk.
In True Combat, a mod I used to play, we had missions like
a. Blue team will blow through a few walls of a building, blow a safe, get a list of spies from red team, get back to a waiting boat and escape the harbour.
b. Red team will try to defend the safe or blow up the boat and prevent the escape of Blue team.
Similiar to EAS but a little better. At least we got to blow some walls and such and there was a little more mission. But yeah, I'd like to see better than this. Don't know if that can be scripted in unreal tournament or not.
In True Combat, a mod I used to play, we had missions like
a. Blue team will blow through a few walls of a building, blow a safe, get a list of spies from red team, get back to a waiting boat and escape the harbour.
b. Red team will try to defend the safe or blow up the boat and prevent the escape of Blue team.
Similiar to EAS but a little better. At least we got to blow some walls and such and there was a little more mission. But yeah, I'd like to see better than this. Don't know if that can be scripted in unreal tournament or not.
ant75 said:
A****ingMEN. I couldnt have said it better. Gotta disagree with you there beppo. The regular INFer is NOT a regular gamer. I tend to believe most INFers are of above average intelligence and cannot be easily entertained like some other neanderthal players of other games. If your goal is to make INF main stream and popular with its next release, you need to do the following:
A> Release INF for the next engine ASAP while its still popular. (the engine)
B> Make DTAS AND EAS a standard game type.
C> Make more dynamic maps ala Mostar, AND small static maps like ACityBlock.
D> Worry less about balance and just focus on realism. Realism is what sets this game apart from shooter #14039.
E> Continue to be submerged in the community like you have been. Great job on that. But listen and pay attention a bit more. Its been agreed for months by most people EAS is repetative BECAUSE of the reasons stated, yet you come out and make a counterpoint on your sole opinion. While that is ok, its not stopping the problem if you stick to that.
So anyway, good luck. Im sure INF will always have players as long as some other company doesnt release something "realer."
I was wondering what would happen to some of those nice looking unreleased maps.
Well I quit playing INF because of EAS. Even the "good" maps weren't really all that fun. We could go on all day as to the specifics of the problem, but I'd say overall, it was just too damn difficult. It required too much attention. I would leave for a few days, and those who played frequently would walk all over me next time I played.
Thank god INF was recently blessed with the rebirth of DTAS. DTAS was the last good memory I had of INF, so I gave it a try after several months of letting dust collect on INF. After a 2 gig mutator and map DL, I was able to jump right into the action, and actually had fun. It was random. I didn't know where the enemy would come from. The whole point of playing online for me is the chance for a new experience every time I play. I can play the same map over and over, and yet it is different every time. Yet with EAS, it was like I was playing a scripted AI. The same crap would happen every round. Snipers, traps and CDs all in the same spots every damn time. I got bored almost instantly. I don't know who EAS was made for, but it sure as hell wasn't me. And it seems it's not for most other people as well, considering the amount of people playing EAS versus a community made mutator.
As for the bonus pack, you'd think people would have little or no expectations as far as a delivery date from the infamous INF team. And maybe DTAS should be part of the bonus pack as well, which could run on all maps.
Well I quit playing INF because of EAS. Even the "good" maps weren't really all that fun. We could go on all day as to the specifics of the problem, but I'd say overall, it was just too damn difficult. It required too much attention. I would leave for a few days, and those who played frequently would walk all over me next time I played.
Thank god INF was recently blessed with the rebirth of DTAS. DTAS was the last good memory I had of INF, so I gave it a try after several months of letting dust collect on INF. After a 2 gig mutator and map DL, I was able to jump right into the action, and actually had fun. It was random. I didn't know where the enemy would come from. The whole point of playing online for me is the chance for a new experience every time I play. I can play the same map over and over, and yet it is different every time. Yet with EAS, it was like I was playing a scripted AI. The same crap would happen every round. Snipers, traps and CDs all in the same spots every damn time. I got bored almost instantly. I don't know who EAS was made for, but it sure as hell wasn't me. And it seems it's not for most other people as well, considering the amount of people playing EAS versus a community made mutator.
As for the bonus pack, you'd think people would have little or no expectations as far as a delivery date from the infamous INF team. And maybe DTAS should be part of the bonus pack as well, which could run on all maps.
![Cleeus[JgKdo]](/data/avatars/s/30/30543.jpg?1424422840){kind=avatar}
I'm in the "Anti-Repetition" crowd for EAS. I love EAS but since 98% of the maps are static and do not change, it gets boring after a few months. If each EAS map could have a group of 10+ objectives, with one chose randomly at startup, that would extend the map's life quite a bit.
I don't like DTAS mainly because of people dying and causing me to explode. That, and I don't like standing next to a flag over and over and over. It feels like a good "gametype", but doesn't feel like a "mission" to me. Once you capture this flag, it's over. No need to extract it, no need to worry about getting out of there.
So... How's that Bonus Package coming along? Go Euro testing clan Go!
I don't like DTAS mainly because of people dying and causing me to explode. That, and I don't like standing next to a flag over and over and over. It feels like a good "gametype", but doesn't feel like a "mission" to me. Once you capture this flag, it's over. No need to extract it, no need to worry about getting out of there.
So... How's that Bonus Package coming along? Go Euro testing clan Go!
Sigh not the DTAS death thing again. Also why would you extract the flag. It only marks an area to be secured. It is the area that is important not the flag.
So what you are saying is we need a third position to be spawned but only after the "flag" is captured. That could be interesting.
Edit: Actually it makes more sense if it spawns at the begining but only the attackers know where it is until capture.
Edit: Actually it makes more sense if it spawns at the begining but only the attackers know where it is until capture.
Last edited:
DTAS relies on the simplicity of the "mission". I agree that it hardly can be called a mission but there is a reason that it isn't: No respawns (Respawns are bad).
To accomplish a complex mission with multiple objectives there have to be respawns. Otherwise the game would reduce to a TDM and the last one or two surviving attackers have to accomplish the objectives that are left.
Respawns are bad.
Thats why the DTAS "mission" is so easy. It is just hard enough to force the attackers and defenders do something and it is easy enough to be accomplished with 1 live on each side.
Making the flag area a point, like the CD, or creating a need to extract (which would then be CTF anyway) would make the goal to complex to be accomplished without respawns.
Respawns are bad.
A solution would be a round-based EAS. Each objective has to be fullfilled in one round. Attackers spawn, defenders spawn - with 1 live, game runs and there would be only one objective (only one, thats important). If the attackers succeed, the next round will be about the next objective. If the defenders succeed, the attackers will have to try again.
To accomplish a complex mission with multiple objectives there have to be respawns. Otherwise the game would reduce to a TDM and the last one or two surviving attackers have to accomplish the objectives that are left.
Respawns are bad.
Thats why the DTAS "mission" is so easy. It is just hard enough to force the attackers and defenders do something and it is easy enough to be accomplished with 1 live on each side.
Making the flag area a point, like the CD, or creating a need to extract (which would then be CTF anyway) would make the goal to complex to be accomplished without respawns.
Respawns are bad.
A solution would be a round-based EAS. Each objective has to be fullfilled in one round. Attackers spawn, defenders spawn - with 1 live, game runs and there would be only one objective (only one, thats important). If the attackers succeed, the next round will be about the next objective. If the defenders succeed, the attackers will have to try again.
I disagree. Usually by the time the attackers would have capped the flag area there is only 1-2 defenders left anyway to stop em from extracting. So it wouldnt be "hard." Besides, challenge is always fun.