Injured Players Become Slower

[AussieJay]

This has probably been suggested before. Actually I would say it definately has. Basically when a player is low on health, their speed or aiming becomes slower.

It will give them a disadvantage but more realism. Maybe only for advanced mode?

[STM1993]

I'm strongly against this idea. An injured player is already heavily disadvantaged by the fact that they can be killed extremely easily by any weapon with just a few simple shots. There is no need to further disadvantage weakened players.

[Keldorn]

Hmmm... I don't really like this idea much because it would seem to slow down Soldat's fast pace of action. But, perhaps for realistic it might be implemented. But all things considered, F11.

P.S: Do you even know what the function of advanced mode is?

P.S: Add a poll.

STM and I were typing this up at the same time, so I would also like to mention that everything he said is completely true.

[AussieJay]

True. How about slower/poorer aimer as your health decreases? So for example 90% health it would be a little slower then at 40% it would be much slower. 1% would be laying on the ground rotting or something.

EDIT (since I was posting while you replied)

Yes I love the fast pace. I'm not quite up to speed with this "realistic" I hear of, is it a version much like "advanced"? I guess so.

To be honest I haven't been playing for years or anything. However, as soon as I found the switch to advanced mode I've been using it every since. I don't play online by the way *shrugs* so my suggestion should be optional if included.

At first a poll would be worthless since the suggestion was probably already discussed, but heck I'll add one.

[STM1993]

True. How about slower/poorer aimer as your health decreases? So for example 90% health it would be a little slower then at 40% it would be much slower. 1% would be laying on the ground rotting or something.

That's the same kind of thing. Again, as I said, there is no need to disadvantage heavily weakened opponents.

By the way... advanced mode = picking only secondary weapons from your weapon menu until you achieve certain number of kills. Are you sure its advanced mode, or are you talking about Realistic mode?

[AussieJay]

Read my other reply.

Also, I'm all for realism rather than just action. Yes - I could spend money on a more realistic game. I've heard that one before...

[el,goog]

I'm strongly against this idea. An injured player is already heavily disadvantaged by the fact that they can be killed extremely easily by any weapon with just a few simple shots. There is no need to further disadvantage weakened players.

This is very well said.
A couple of sprayed shots from someone far away could kill the injured player.

Read my other reply.

Also, I'm all for realism rather than just action. Yes - I could spend money on a more realistic game. I've heard that one before...

Well, there's realistic mode, why don't you play that?

[STM1993]

Read my other reply.

Also, I'm all for realism rather than just action. Yes - I could spend money on a more realistic game. I've heard that one before...

Well, there's realistic mode, why don't you play that?

I think he's talking about making realistic mode even more realistic.

IMO, any game, no matter how realistic etc, if it doesn't have a proper gameplay/balance, then it fails. Imagine a game whereby it is so realistic that one bullet from any gun would kill you instantly, so everyone would use the fastest-firing weapon with the longest range and accuracy and everything becomes extremely repetitive - where's the fun in that? That's why every game compromises some realism to see that a game has good gameplay.

[Xxypher]

F11, I do not agree with this at all for the same reasons STM posted.

[AussieJay]

I've been misleading you a bit. After starting up Soldat today I realised that realistic mode is what I mean by advanced mode.

After some good replies on my suggestion, I think I would be fine if it were an option. Something you could toggle. Other than that, you guys have made very good points.

[Luke Strife]

Even if it were an option, I still don't see why you should weaken an already disadvantaged player further.

If you lost the use of your legs, you'd hate to lose the ability to move your arms too, wouldn't you? Just as an example.

[AussieJay]

The good thing about leaving it as an option is that it's there for those who want to use it. I would, but some people, such as yourself, would not. That's the beauty of it

Your example is good, however flawed. I'm more for the realism than the fast pace, opting for less players rather than all out brawls. It just seems more real to have an injured player actually move like one - on the ground crawling or whatever.

[Luke Strife]

I know it's a flawed example, it was only meant to be a quick crude one to get my point across.

I'm trying not to assume, but I can't imagine many people F12ing this idea. It sounds a good idea, but in my opinion just doesn't fit the theme of Soldat.

[~Niko~]

No, NEVER. It doesn't fits with soldat at all.

[AussieJay]

Yeah it doesn't fit the fast-paced theme. You might have noted that instead of moving slower, how about poorer accuracy for all weapons?

It would still fit the fast theme, but makes it harder for injured players.

[Demonic]

Why would you want to make it harder for injured players? If anything, dealing with multiple enemies with you already being one leg down the grave is quite a feat. Not to mention escaping with the flag when one stray bullet can send you respawning.

[Luke Strife]

Well that technically wouldn't be logical, to use yet another crude example, if I broke your legs, would your hand-eye coordination be off?

[scarface09]

Well it does sound realistic, although it would slow down soldat's incredibly fast paced gameplay.

[Espadon]

What about the opposite? Injured players getting a very minor accuracy boost after the first 3 seconds so we can have crazy comebacks in Soldat?

[Furai]

I've read the whole topic. It seems that when people dislike the idea they want to "add it only for realistic". In my opinion those lads didn't even played realistic. It's already very hard to play, why are you trying to make it more difficult?
 

What about the opposite? Injured players getting a very minor accuracy boost after the first 3 seconds so we can have crazy comebacks in Soldat?

How do you imagine it? Players with low health would be able to spray with no bink at all?

[Xxypher]

I just don't think it should be added at all.

[STM1993]

I would support neither weakening or strengthening an injured soldier by the game itself, because this is actually a factor made by the human player. If you were low on health, you yourself would probably become more desperate and you get the adrenaline rush. This would either kill your cool and cause you to play worse, or this may somehow make you react faster etc and play better.

Even as an option, how many people would bother to use it?

[adam01526]

Hmmm... I don't really like this idea much because it would seem to slow down Soldat's fast pace of action. But, perhaps for realistic it might be implemented. But all things considered, F11.

P.S: Do you even know what the function of advanced mode is?

P.S: Add a poll.

STM and I were typing this up at the same time, so I would also like to mention that everything he said is completely true.

No let's not add it to realistic, when someone says an idea it always seems to end up with someone saying, "we don't want it in the normal game but get let's puts it in realistic because we don't play it! Realistic isn't meant to be completely like life [the idea of a game is to escape from reality] realistic only means that there is self bink etc not let's add any suggestion into it! I think that there should be a sub forum for realistic mode.

[AussieJay]

STM you have valid reasons, very professional. However I'm still pushing for it be an option. It's a small modification, that should be there for those who might want it.

If it would just be there, then people could use it. That's all there is to it.

[Furai]

(...) that should be there for those who might want it (...)

As you have said...
We don't want it <=> It won't be implemented. F11.

[Dairy]

Soldat is FAST-PACED , how would this improve the playability ? It's nice idea, but I guess not for this game.

[Ervis]

I skipped most of this to type up something. I'm a R/S player and it's crucial to R or R/S that we maintain our soldier's speed to a maximum so we can escape danger at the worst of times which would be when we have low HP. Most of the intense battles in R/S happen when you have less then 50% HP, and something like this would have tremendous and horrible impact on R/S. Especially when in R/S, we die much quicker because of the Realistic game mode. Unlike what most people here (who play normal I assume?) think, R/S isn't about going face to face and trying to fuck with the enemy as soon as possible, we like to stick to our environment and use the terrain to win. Something like less hp=slower aiming and slower speed would destroy aspects of Realistic or Realistic/Survival.

[adam01526]

I skipped most of this to type up something. I'm a R/S player and it's crucial to R or R/S that we maintain our soldier's speed to a maximum so we can escape danger at the worst of times which would be when we have low HP. Most of the intense battles in R/S happen when you have less then 50% HP, and something like this would have tremendous and horrible impact on R/S. Especially when in R/S, we die much quicker because of the Realistic game mode. Unlike what most people here (who play normal I assume?) think, R/S isn't about going face to face and trying to f**k with the enemy as soon as possible, we like to stick to our environment and use the terrain to win. Something like less hp=slower aiming and slower speed would destroy aspects of Realistic or Realistic/Survival.

^^^

[Keldorn]

At first a poll would be worthless since the suggestion was probably already discussed, but heck I'll add one.

I still don't see a poll...

[Platehead]

With original post, there'd be a heavy disadvantage for flagrunners, so it's a nono from me
Espadon's idea would go crazy if they had a minimi, but then it'd be really weird IMO

[AussieJay]

I don't know why everyone is blind. No offense intended, but I've clearly said that this should be an option. You know - a check box. If the user wants it, then it will be used.

Everyone makes very good points, but you're forgetting that features can be toggled on and off. This should be one of them.

EDIT: sorry no poll. Either I've waited too long, or I can't find how to add one.

[STM1993]

EDIT: sorry no poll. Either I've waited too long, or I can't find how to add one.

At the bottom of your own threads, you should see a Poll+ button.

[DarkCrusade]

Name any game where you get more disadvantages for having lowhealth. Soldat is so fastpaced that it would ruin gameplay! Get a shot by ruger on distance as flagger and the guy will reach you easily, same for spraying, RUINS gameplay REALLY!

[-Vis-]

I don't know why everyone is blind. No offense intended, but I've clearly said that this should be an option. You know - a check box. If the user wants it, then it will be used.

Let's just put aside the gameplay aspect for a second. Introducing new features requires time and effort, especially since there is no large team of coders working on the game. Judging by the replies in this thread, almost nobody would use this feature, so it would be a waste of time to add, option or not. That's time better spent on much needed bug fixes.

[AussieJay]

Vis your argument is good. However, I'm still up for this idea.

There are just a handful of people replying to me, next to the hundreds that play it. I just hope the person who makes this game (Michael?) considers this.

[Keldorn]

Now that I think about it, it could easily (depending on your ability level) be scripted (I think), but nevertheless based on the responses from players, I don't think the majority of the players would like it.

[adam01526]

I don't know why everyone is blind. No offense intended, but I've clearly said that this should be an option. You know - a check box. If the user wants it, then it will be used.

Let's just put aside the gameplay aspect for a second. Introducing new features requires time and effort, especially since there is no large team of coders working on the game. Judging by the replies in this thread, almost nobody would use this feature, so it would be a waste of time to add, option or not. That's time better spent on much needed bug fixes.

Thank you :-)

I don't know why everyone is blind. No offense intended, but I've clearly said that this should be an option. You know - a check box. If the user wants it, then it will be used.

Everyone makes very good points, but you're forgetting that features can be toggled on and off. This should be one of them.

EDIT: sorry no poll. Either I've waited too long, or I can't find how to add one.

we are not thick and you have stated that it could be implemented as an option but you would probably be the only one using it.

I've been misleading you a bit. After starting up Soldat today I realised that realistic mode is what I mean by advanced mode.

After some good replies on my suggestion, I think I would be fine if it were an option. Something you could toggle. Other than that, you guys have made very good points.

thats like saying lets have an option to allow us to make paper aeroplanes in soldat. Its pointless and no one would use it.

[Ketchup]

I think Injured players should be able to run away...

[demoniac93]

both ideas are "imo" foolish, making injured players more vulnerable would literally BRAKE the balance of the game action, and making them more accurate, as  wookash said, would mean too much abuse of a bit of a complex feature, and yes, don't ask for putting stuff into realistic just to have more posts on your account and sound clever, i tried realistic and it's already hard enough...try it before saying that crap.

[EnEsCe]

Pretty much any idea that involves the word "Slow" won't get implemented.

[UnknownSniper]

Pretty much any idea that involves the word "Slow" won't get implemented.

Minimized speed?

[Furai]

Pretty much any idea that involves the word "Slow" won't get implemented.

Minimized speed?

To stop bugging...word "slow" and it synonyms.

[demoniac93]

soldat is supposed to be fast, that's why i (again) agree with enesce, the word slow doesn't fit into soldat, unless you're a "newb" and don't know how to skip.

[AussieJay]

I've decided to abandon this idea. You guys obviously don't see my point - the option part - so there's no point pushing for it.

EDIT: oh yeah, you guys are talking about becoming slower? I thought I said that accuracy could be affected instead of speed.

[demoniac93]

aussie, there is no such think as an idea without it's MULTIPLE points of view, so basically proposing this has many other dimensions to it.

[AussieJay]

Yes, I realised this when I posted it. I knew that the majority would say no, but you can't argue that the small guy needs to talk. Or whatever I mean.

[Keldorn]

I've decided to abandon this idea. You guys obviously don't see my point - the option part - so there's no point pushing for it.

EDIT: oh yeah, you guys are talking about becoming slower? I thought I said that accuracy could be affected instead of speed.

I would like to make one final post to end this topic.

The majority of people (I think everyone) disagrees with your idea. Since no one has mentioned it; if your aiming slows down when your injured, which is every 0.26 seconds, you're screwed. Only cheapass players who also have 100% mouse sensitivity would like this idea because it simply gives those with higher mouse sensitivity a massive advantage.

Also, no Admin would click the checkbox on their server. So it's just for people like you.

[demoniac93]

Maybe you're right aussie i myself don't use high sensitivity but play good at times, as in good.
So i guess this ends the discussion since you quit your proposition? if so have an Admin lock this topic.

[AussieJay]

I won't end this topic, I'll just let it remain as a dead thread. Maybe in a few years someone will actually consider this.

[Keldorn]

I won't end this topic, I'll just let it remain as a dead thread. Maybe in a few years someone will actually consider this.

Actually, in a few years time this thread will probably go to like page 100 of Game Improvements / Suggestions so it would be considered (insert a word which is used in this forum a lot, meaning to raise a topic which died a long time ago).

So locking it and keeping it open won't make a difference because people will just make a new thread.

[demoniac93]

Aussie did you just reply to yourself? Admins!!! Lock this topic before more people go crazy! xD (jk)

[AussieJay]

No, I don't believe I did.

Keldorn I also believe it's called gravedigging. Don't worry it's used a lot on heaps of other forums. Very annoying too.

[Zabijaka]

Big f11 this is bad idea even for realistic mode.

[eYe]

This is Soldat, not Counter-Strike. You want gameplay homosexuality, go play CS. Soldat isn't a game for wusses, seriously.

[tehsnipah]

It will DEFINITELY ruin the game. Not even towards the realastic mode this time.

Players will always constantly get slowed down and get killed easily. This is NOT Urban Terror. I still hate the wound feature in that game.

[AussieJay]

You want gameplay homosexuality, go play CS. Soldat isn't a game for wusses, seriously.

Dude calm down. This is just a suggestion, nothing more. I've tried CS, it's an OK game but I don't play it. Settle.

This is NOT Urban Terror. I still hate the wound feature in that game.

I haven't played it. I based my suggestion on a thought so I wanted comments by people. Obviously I got more than I bargained for.

[Keldorn]

This is NOT Urban Terror. I still hate the wound feature in that game.

I haven't played it. I based my suggestion on a thought so I wanted comments by people. Obviously I got more than I bargained for.

 

[jrgp]

Locked by request via PM.