Official INF 2.9 Bonus pack announcement 2 month old today

[ant75]

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.

Agreed, agreed, and agreed.

 

[zeep]

I just want to add (again) that dtas is a simple and solid gamemode which can best be included in any future inf. No need to make life for mappers more difficult to have them add randomness etc just to make EAS work something-like Dtas when you have dtas as a gamemode to begin with. I'm sorry but i don't see the problem here. Why must EAS 'do' Dtas if it's alread here and finished? Why not just add Dtas to inf's gamemodes?
I'm not saying cancel eas btw!! Maps like mostar kick ass and i can only imagine/hope what great EAS maps will come in the future. I just think there's no need for eas to emulate dtas.

 

[Turin_Turambar]

Generally speaking : DTAS > EAS > ................... > TDM

ymmv

 

[Nukeproof]

Just a sidenote: seems like nobody cosideres SPECALIST worth mentioning at all (DOM neither)

 

[mat69]

The idea of round based (stated elsewhere too, but with respawns I think ) sounds nice.
About EAS I like it. The main problem of EAS are the players, with the right guys it can be a hell of fun while with the false guys it's just frustrating. Our last ILCR match against Weed reminded me of chess, really. We did our moves waited for their moves and I did not move at all as a defender - I only rushed the last guy after I heard him reloading - after I reached my position.
So EAS can be pretty funny, but DTAS is nearly allways funny for me.

 

[Crowze]

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.

Ah, yes, round-based EAS. Another gametype on my to-do list, although I hadn't thought of doing each objective as a separate round. It would get around the problem with larger EAS maps, but I'm not sure how it would work with ones like Iraq.

 

[Psychomorph]

I think they are missions that need separate rounds each objective, while other missions can have just one round for the objective (or objectives).
Both can work fine if done right.
Some missions are harder and more dangerous, other missions are more simple, and can be done fast, probably require a small map at all.

Keep variety, thats the key for great fun. And large maps are not the most important part.

 

[NTKB]

I just want to add (again) that dtas is a simple and solid gamemode which can best be included in any future inf. No need to make life for mappers more difficult to have them add randomness etc just to make EAS work something-like Dtas when you have dtas as a gamemode to begin with. I'm sorry but i don't see the problem here. Why must EAS 'do' Dtas if it's alread here and finished? Why not just add Dtas to inf's gamemodes?
I'm not saying cancel eas btw!! Maps like mostar kick ass and i can only imagine/hope what great EAS maps will come in the future. I just think there's no need for eas to emulate dtas.

Thats just silly zeep. Your not making EAS "like DTAS" rather your making EAS more life like by adding randomness. Rarely does a mission go exactly to plan in real life, and the same should apply to EAS. IF random elements are added to EAS then it just makes it funner. Its been proven time and again that EAS with static objectives is just inferior to EAS with random objectives. If mappers and developers have not learned this lesson than EAS is set for failure. If it has been learned then we are golden. EAS is but a baby at this moment in Infiltration. Like everything new we must learn from any unforseen occurances that arise after release. I hope that we have learned from what has come up so far, cause with the EAS actors and the ability to code an extreme amount of randomness into missions, it would be a shame for a mapper to spend 100+ hours on geometry and texturing but not an additional 10 hours to make the actual mission kick ass.

 

[(SDS)benmcl]

I love DTAS but there is one major problem and that is why I like EAS. It is not just about random spawn locations its about more dynamic MISSIONS. Something DTAS can not do nor is it meant to.

Everyone seems to be fixated on the locations but you need to take inconsideration what is done at that location. Am I sercuring this room or the whole floor? Do I need to capture something and extract? If I am extracting do I need to secure the extraction zone? Do I need to blow something up to cheive my objectives or does it help ie anti-aircraft to move a landing zone in closer.

DTAS can not do any of that while EAS can, or I am lead to believe. As I said before that since some of how to do this for mappers is no explained I believe the best approach is to design a dynamic map, even just on paper, the figure out how to do it by asking questions.

I have a feeling that with EAS we have only seen a small part of what it can do and I hope to see some mappers start to show off what really can be done.

Edit: Actually DOM has come in another thread I believe. Someone was describe another game mode and it actually is DOM with only one place to secure.

I believe the reason Specialist has not come up because it is so closely tied to EAS. Get EAS going therefore Specialist. Although I can see even more things being done with Specialist.

 

[keihaswarrior]

I like EAS better. The new DTAS is buggy and has an unclear capture system that seems to change with each version. There are far fewer captures than with old 2.86 DTAS because no one is sure if and when the flag can be capped.

 

[zeep]

I dont mean to say that mappers shouldn't make EAS maps. Or that EAS isn't good or anything. I only want to have these two gamemodes in the next inf: DTAS and EAS.
Ofcourse mappers should go the extra mile to make a hell of an EAS map. The more the better. EAS can do anything, DTAS only one. I don't even want to mention the two anymore, it feels we're discussing this to death.
Just gimme both.

 

[Beppo]

Well, EAS is mission based. Any type of mission the mapper wants to set up should be possible. So blowing up stuff, capturing this area etc is no problem for it. As some said, EAS played with the right people can be much fun... played with the TDM style folks it will be just frustrating. You need teamwork in EAS on both sides, else the whole mission thing gets boring cause single player running around all alone are too easy targets normally. So, if teams form up and take positions one after another by flanking their enemies etc then it gets really tough and tactical. And there are dozens of ways to ie get into a building... even if it only has one door. Sure most will try the same 'tactic' all the time, but as you guys said, INF is not for the average gamer. So, I would guess that most of you are able to not play a map exactly the same way over and over again.

If you look at TDM then you will see the same moves at startup all the time. Players run left intoo an alley, cock their grenades, throw them over a building into another street and boom, two enemies killed. Just cause all players act exactly the same on startup all the time. That is what I call boring... but it is ONLY based on the players and how they play, not the gametype.

DTAS, well, I haven't played it too often, but for me it is like some sort of random CaptureTheHill mixed with TeamLMS. So it is TeamLMS with the center of the battle randomly placed within the map somewhere. In the end it is TDM in StandOff mode (TeamLMS, only one live) where the stuff I described above for TDM cannot happen anymore due to the random spawning. A good thing but really something that challenging? It is by far no mission, no real definition of defenders and attackers cause all that both sides need to do is to complete one mission objective. All troops concentrate on one spot. No need to secure different parts of the map for example.

Specialist, well, most think it is too hard, especially on publics. Playing EAS with a VIP on one side is hard and highly depends on how the players perform and play together. Definetly no place for solos that do 'their thing' without taking care for the rest of their team. The specialist needs protection normally and cannot do everything alone if he wants to really accomplish a mission objective. So teamplay and tactics need to be on a high standard here to actually have fun. It gets frustrating very easily if noone covers the specialist or the specialist tries to play Rambo.

Well if you guys really prefer the slow paced, team oriented and tactical gameplay, then EAS should fit perfectly... even if played on maps that all players know inside out. The better the maps are known, the harder it gets to play on them. So it should get more challenging... and by far not boring. As said already... you need teams that play as teams, no solos.

Just one more thing about DoD, CoD, DC etc...
the players know the maps inside out normally and still you see new 'tactics' from time to time. Or some try stupid or old tactics at places you do not think about someone trying something as stupid as ie standing 100% visible on a broken wall at the middle of an open place or on a roof top or inside a window. They stand there so obviously sometimes that they manage to get a bunch of kills this way cause all folks look at corners, shadows, the known 'super' spots etc. Those 'vets' need some time to find out how stupid some newbs play sometimes.

So, vary your tactics, change the way you advance to your next objective, flank, do whatever it takes to do something a bit different... and play as teams, do not count your 'personal' kills, think as a team... noone out there gives ya a clap on your shoulder if you kill an enemy but you loose the objective cause you hunted him down and left your defense or attack position open for anyone. The team and the mission is all that counts...

 

[Derelan]

If you look at TDM then you will see the same moves at startup all the time. Players run left intoo an alley, cock their grenades, throw them over a building into another street and boom, two enemies killed. Just cause all players act exactly the same on startup all the time. That is what I call boring... but it is ONLY based on the players and how they play, not the gametype.

Well, i used to see that in 2.86 on maps like Siberia, but i think thats since been changed with random team spawn. I enjoy TDM because it brought out something new and insta-fun in INF.

DTAS, well, I haven't played it too often, but for me it is like some sort of random CaptureTheHill mixed with TeamLMS. So it is TeamLMS with the center of the battle randomly placed within the map somewhere. In the end it is TDM in StandOff mode (TeamLMS, only one live) where the stuff I described above for TDM cannot happen anymore due to the random spawning. A good thing but really something that challenging? It is by far no mission, no real definition of defenders and attackers cause all that both sides need to do is to complete one mission objective. All troops concentrate on one spot. No need to secure different parts of the map for example.

I would agree that DTAS is the most boring game type INF has seen. There is no creativity to objective design, when was the last time you saw a map called "DTAS-INF-Blah" (aside from Blackwater)? It does, however, offer a new alternative to "the same objectives each time". Which brings me to my final point, EAS-Mostar/Bosnia-Herzagovina is my favorite INF map of all time, when played on EAS (and not silly DTAS), because it takes at least a dozen plays to memorize all the 'special' spots, tactics and positions.

So, vary your tactics, change the way you advance to your next objective, flank, do whatever it takes to do something a bit different... and play as teams, do not count your 'personal' kills, think as a team... noone out there gives ya a clap on your shoulder if you kill an enemy but you loose the objective cause you hunted him down and left your defense or attack position open for anyone. The team and the mission is all that counts...

But that can be challenging when EAS maps get too complex. When a player has to walk 300m, capture two points, activate an elevator, ride a helicopter, destroy a door, and capture a cd (no offense ) players can feel daunted and decide on the next funnest thing: hunting. On simpler one-objective or random-single-objective EAS maps, the teamwork is astonishing, even without TS.

Which confuses me, because on DTAS, everyone runs off to play rambo, even though the objective is as simple as possible.

 

[(SDS)benmcl]

There is a very good reason why there were some "TAS" maps. At the point their was no random spawn for the dynamic and on some maps for TAS to work a few changes had to be made. Once the big D came in there was no reason to change some maps. There is no reason to make DTAS maps.

 

[zeep]

DTAS, well, I haven't played it too often, but for me it is like some sort of random CaptureTheHill mixed with TeamLMS. So it is TeamLMS with the center of the battle randomly placed within the map somewhere. In the end it is TDM in StandOff mode (TeamLMS, only one live) where the stuff I described above for TDM cannot happen anymore due to the random spawning. A good thing but really something that challenging? It is by far no mission, no real definition of defenders and attackers cause all that both sides need to do is to complete one mission objective. All troops concentrate on one spot. No need to secure different parts of the map for example.

That sounds very biased Beppo. And saying you haven't played it often with that. Don't forget that the people who like to play DTAS are not tdm minded. Dtas is very challenging. It certainly offers no less tactics than an EAS game. Combined with random team spawn you will need different tactics everytime coming/and going from A to B.
Ofcourse, this shouldn't be played tdm-ish but people have their own will.

Well if you guys really prefer the slow paced, team oriented and tactical gameplay, then EAS should fit perfectly... even if played on maps that all players know inside out. The better the maps are known, the harder it gets to play on them. So it should get more challenging... and by far not boring. As said already... you need teams that play as teams, no solos.

Same with DTAS. But different. Not multiple obj etc. But possible to play slow paced, groups team up, tactical attack/defence.

So, vary your tactics, change the way you advance to your next objective, flank, do whatever it takes to do something a bit different... and play as teams, do not count your 'personal' kills, think as a team... noone out there gives ya a clap on your shoulder if you kill an enemy but you loose the objective cause you hunted him down and left your defense or attack position open for anyone. The team and the mission is all that counts...

Yea, teamplay works.

 

[Logan6]

I like DTAS. Each game is different, and it promotes teamwork.

 

[gal-z]

takes at least a dozen plays to memorize all the 'special' spots, tactics and positions

That's a bad thing. It means bad players who continuously played this map will beat good players who never played it or only played it a little - by having the good players wandering around until they get shot from behind because they don't know where the enemy is supposed to be, or have the attackers capture your objective because you don't know where it is to defend it.
Of course there's compass, but we all know that's often not enough to effectively find the objective, especially if you want to stay alive while going there.

 

[yurch]

DTAS, well, I haven't played it too often, but for me it is like some sort of random CaptureTheHill mixed with TeamLMS. So it is TeamLMS with the center of the battle randomly placed within the map somewhere. In the end it is TDM in StandOff mode (TeamLMS, only one live) where the stuff I described above for TDM cannot happen anymore due to the random spawning. A good thing but really something that challenging? It is by far no mission, no real definition of defenders and attackers cause all that both sides need to do is to complete one mission objective. All troops concentrate on one spot. No need to secure different parts of the map for example.

To be fair, that isn't DTAS.
DTAS has an established attackers and defenders every round, and only the attackers have the physical (hill) objective. Attackers lose if they fail to complete within the time period allotted.

 

[Rasalom]

You really need to play more DTAS before calling it "capture the hill" Beppo, no offence, Yurch knows it better than anyone else .

BTW, just a self note, in my 3 years of Inf, DTAS/TAS has been holding players into Inf, even in the time when most of players just disintall inf...
maybe some of you don't like it, its bugged, its old fashioned... but in 3 years we have a solid Inf community arround it, stronger than TDM or EAS.
Take out his bugs, take some ideas from community members, like Cleeus just said, everyone wants to help...
Maybe most of you from SS don't like it, but its a fact.

DTAS has a special feeling that no other game has. The random thing makes it really dynamic (be smart to place the flag in a place that is good to defence and hard to capture, put in in a place you have your team covered, etc) and its what make , IMO, infiltration the platoon simulator number one.

There is already lots of other games with iron sights, lean, prone, more than 5 types of guns and fixed objectives... and Inf can take the role no other game has taken (yet)... IMO, DTAS + community ideas can do it.

BUT, that is my opinion, so, just don't get pissed at me.

 

[Crowze]

If there are bugs, why haven't you told me about it? The capture system hasn't changed since Cleeus did his overhaul (before version 1.10 I believe), and even that wasn't a significant change from the original. I think there are fewer captures because more people try and play TDM on it.

EDIT: Dammit, missed this page. I was replying to kehias' post on the previous page.