In Response To: Re: Well... (Adam)
> If the problem is "How do we stop people treating a
> teamwork oriented scenario as deathmatch", here are a few
> things off the top of my head. Some of these have already been
> mentioned, and some are based on assumption of how Halo will
> work.
> Weapons and ammo. With any marginally reaslistic carrying
> capacity, you may be able to go on a shooting spree (and even in
> team based games, this may be required), but it will be short
> lived, kind of like your marine after you run out of ammo very
> quickly. It's hard to go around blowing everything up if you
> nothing to do it with. Of course, this only works if weapons
> aren't lying around by the dozen, and respawn almost as soon as
> you pick them up. A limited arsenal will encourage completing
> the objective as efficiently as possible, or risk getting taken
> out quickly due to being unarmed.
Wouldn't it be interesting if the weapons were static items? If your team steals all of the weapons, the other team suddenly has to use their swords to get guns back. I think that if they do the engine right, a player could hide until a group passes by, then slit the throat, and steal the gun of the guy dozing off in the back of the group.
I'd be much more inclined to shoot a rambo teammate, just to keep the weapons on our side.
> Limited lives/realistic damage. This one has been mentioned
> already and would make players rely on their team for force of
> numbers, rather than one marine that could withstand a tac-nuke
> blast at ground zero. My personal preference would be only
> having one life per game, being able to take a moderate amount
> of damage and the ability for some minor healing/repair (time
> out at a remote medic area rather than instantaneous). With the
> chance of being taken down permanently by a sniper with a couple
> of rounds should reduce the number of players wanting to go
> gung-ho more than once ;)
I hope that the life amount is similar to marathon's. It had a good balance. I remember hearing about JJ and someone else battling it out until they both ran out of ammo, and had to use fists.
> Scoring/objectives. Having objectives not based on kills, and
> even leaving number of kills out altogether might have a small
> positive effect. Even if the objective is to eliminate an enemy
> position, just show how team A completed the mission with
> such-and-such percentage losses.
I don't think that'll do anything for deathmatchters.
> Sure, you could still have solo players, who might even manage
> to do well by themselves, but I'm feeling that with the way the
> game is going to work, they will have to develop more subtle
> tactics than the all-guns-blazing frontal charge method. At
> least this way he's a cunning renegade who's managed to pick off
> some of your team rather than a tool who camped a weapon spawn
> point with his finger on the fire button. I think the key to
> Halo being inherently better for team work is realism in places
> where it counts.
I think that the solo players, who take full weapons will find themselves being shot by their teammates, to keep the weapons. Add limited respawns to the mix, and you'll soon find that lemurs will get weeded out very quickly as a necessity.
> Cheers,
> Adam.
> P.S. When I say, "I'm sure there are loads of
> solutions", it means I can't think of any right now, and I
> should be getting back to work ;D
| 
