So how is warfare?

"GTD" <Stooopid.DeleteThis@duuuh.net> wrote in message
news:13llmscidu56272@corp.supernews.com...
> Aaron Lawrence wrote:
>> Can't find much info about the warfare play yet...
> IMO, it's like a dumbed-down version of ONS. I've yet to see any of the
> "assault" element, and I've yet to find any maps that are as big as they
> were boasting, although I admit to not having tried them all.
>
> I for one am not impressed

I think the whole orb thing ruins gameplay myself.
 >> Stay informed about: So how is warfare? 

On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 08:59:41 -0900, GTD <Stooopid DeleteThis @duuuh.net> wrote:

>IMO, it's like a dumbed-down version of ONS. I've yet to see any of the
>"assault" element...

Come again?

Avalanche:
Holding both the East and West nodes causes damage to prime. If enemy
holds your prime, you can start an avalanche by blowing barricades.
The avalanche wipes out the prime and anyone nearby to retake the
node.

Downtown:
No real gimmicks except the ability to blow barricades that allow
better access to the battlefield for vehicles.

Dusk:
Control both Mine nodes to open a pit that contains a Cicada.

Floodgate:
Control the floodgate node for 60 seconds to cause a flood that takes
20 points of the enemy power core.

Islander:
Actually, the whole map layout is a gimmick. Asymmetrical base layout
where one base is all defensive structures and no vehicles and the
other has the only node directly beside it plus two Goliaths, a
Hellbender and a Palladin. Also has barricades that can be blown for
vehicle access to the defensive base.

Onyx Coast:
A bridge activates/deactivates depending on who controls.

And that's only half the maps. You're not really paying attention,
are you?
 >> Stay informed about: So how is warfare? 

Folk wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 08:59:41 -0900, GTD <Stooopid.DeleteThis@duuuh.net> wrote:
>
>> IMO, it's like a dumbed-down version of ONS. I've yet to see any of the
>> "assault" element...
>
> Come again?
>
> Avalanche:
> Holding both the East and West nodes causes damage to prime. If enemy
> holds your prime, you can start an avalanche by blowing barricades.
> The avalanche wipes out the prime and anyone nearby to retake the
> node.
>
> Downtown:
> No real gimmicks except the ability to blow barricades that allow
> better access to the battlefield for vehicles.
>
> Dusk:
> Control both Mine nodes to open a pit that contains a Cicada.
>
> Floodgate:
> Control the floodgate node for 60 seconds to cause a flood that takes
> 20 points of the enemy power core.
>
> Islander:
> Actually, the whole map layout is a gimmick. Asymmetrical base layout
> where one base is all defensive structures and no vehicles and the
> other has the only node directly beside it plus two Goliaths, a
> Hellbender and a Palladin. Also has barricades that can be blown for
> vehicle access to the defensive base.
>
> Onyx Coast:
> A bridge activates/deactivates depending on who controls.
>
> And that's only half the maps. You're not really paying attention,
> are you?

1. You conveniently snipped the portion where I stated: "although I
admit to not having tried them all." Makes for an easy straw-man
argument though, but I'm not impressed.

2. One simple gimmick does not make an assault map. WHO is the one not
paying attention?
 >> Stay informed about: So how is warfare? 

goPostal schreef:
> "GTD" <Stooopid.RemoveThis@duuuh.net> wrote in message
> news:13llmscidu56272@corp.supernews.com...
>> Aaron Lawrence wrote:
>>> Can't find much info about the warfare play yet...
>> IMO, it's like a dumbed-down version of ONS. I've yet to see any of the
>> "assault" element, and I've yet to find any maps that are as big as they
>> were boasting, although I admit to not having tried them all.
>>
>> I for one am not impressed
>
> I think the whole orb thing ruins gameplay myself.
>
>
Why'd you think that?
I thought it was a good improvement to the game.
It makes the game faster and more competitive in my opinion.
The orb's adds a great tactic element to the play as before it was
more a straightforward capture a node, capture the next ... etc.
Now you can do must faster node captures with a bit of teamwork.

--
..~* Then you'll see, *~.
..~* that it is not the spoon that bends, *~.
..~* it is only yourself. *~.
 >> Stay informed about: So how is warfare? 

On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 09:56:48 -0900, GTD <Stooopid RemoveThis @duuuh.net> wrote:

>Folk wrote:
>> On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 08:59:41 -0900, GTD <Stooopid RemoveThis @duuuh.net> wrote:
>>
>>> IMO, it's like a dumbed-down version of ONS. I've yet to see any of the
>>> "assault" element...
>>
>> Come again?
>>
>> Avalanche:
>> Holding both the East and West nodes causes damage to prime. If enemy
>> holds your prime, you can start an avalanche by blowing barricades.
>> The avalanche wipes out the prime and anyone nearby to retake the
>> node.
>>
>> Downtown:
>> No real gimmicks except the ability to blow barricades that allow
>> better access to the battlefield for vehicles.
>>
>> Dusk:
>> Control both Mine nodes to open a pit that contains a Cicada.
>>
>> Floodgate:
>> Control the floodgate node for 60 seconds to cause a flood that takes
>> 20 points of the enemy power core.
>>
>> Islander:
>> Actually, the whole map layout is a gimmick. Asymmetrical base layout
>> where one base is all defensive structures and no vehicles and the
>> other has the only node directly beside it plus two Goliaths, a
>> Hellbender and a Palladin. Also has barricades that can be blown for
>> vehicle access to the defensive base.
>>
>> Onyx Coast:
>> A bridge activates/deactivates depending on who controls.
>>
>> And that's only half the maps. You're not really paying attention,
>> are you?
>
>1. You conveniently snipped the portion where I stated: "although I
>admit to not having tried them all." Makes for an easy straw-man
>argument though, but I'm not impressed.

But they all have Assault elements... I simply stopped at half the
maps. How many did you try? One? Two? And that was enough to make
sweeping generalizations about the gametype?

>2. One simple gimmick does not make an assault map. WHO is the one not
>paying attention?

Assault *is* gimmicks. Pull the lever, lower the bridge, yada yada.

I'm the one providing information. You appear to be the one that's
either whining or trolling.
 >> Stay informed about: So how is warfare? 

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:28:51 -0800 (PST), GTD <toobiep DeleteThis @yahoo.com>
wrote:


>Yes, some maps have some gimmick in
>them, , BFD, , that really doesn't make them anything like assault.

Then what makes it Assault? I dabbled a little bit in Assault and
basically it was gimmicks (pull a lever, press a button, etc.) I'm
not understanding the distinction you're trying to make between
Assault and the objectives found in Warfare.
 >> Stay informed about: So how is warfare? 

Aaron Lawrence wrote:
> Can't find much info about the warfare play yet...

Onslaught with a beachball.
 >> Stay informed about: So how is warfare? 

Folk wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:28:51 -0800 (PST), GTD <toobiep RemoveThis @yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>> Yes, some maps have some gimmick in
>> them, , BFD, , that really doesn't make them anything like assault.
>
> Then what makes it Assault? I dabbled a little bit in Assault and
> basically it was gimmicks (pull a lever, press a button, etc.) I'm
> not understanding the distinction you're trying to make between
> Assault and the objectives found in Warfare.

The part you snipped, , AGAIN. . .go back and read that if you really
want to know.. . .
 >> Stay informed about: So how is warfare? 

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:15:54 -0800 (PST), GTD <toobiep DeleteThis @yahoo.com>
wrote:


>
>One simple gimmick does not make an assault map.
>
>It's that simple. Maybe you've never played assault, , but assault was
>a series (key word there, "SERIES") of sucessive goals, and totally
>one-directional gameplay. You take a goal, and it's taken, period,
>there is no losing it, there is no re-gaining it by the defending
>team. Yes, the gimmicks in Warfare are similar to those in assault,
>and that does not in my opionon as the assault "element" any more than
>saying that UT is just like Zork, because in either game you can pick
>up weapons, kill, and die. You are trying to make this about the
>individual 'gimmicks' (In warfare, they are just that, GIMMICKS, in
>assault they are GOALS, can you appreciate the difference?) and that
>was not the point of my post. You're simply trying to set up a straw-
>man arguement.

First off, I was addressing your statement:

"IMO, it's like a dumbed-down version of ONS. I've yet to see any of
the "assault" element, "

And so I pointed out several "assault elements" to you. I never
claimed, (and Epic never claimed) that Warfare = Assault. You're
reading a lot of stuff into my posts that aren't there. I asked you
what you considered to be Assault elements and after several false
starts (and lot's of unnecessary lip) you finally answered the
question in the post above, although I'm pretty sure there were
Assault maps where you could lose territory that was previously
gained. There are Assault maps where you press a lever or button to
lower a drawbridge. There are Warfare maps where you build a node to
open a bridge. Why do you call one a "gimmick" and the other a
"goal"?

And if Warfare = all the elements from ONS plus additional elements
from Assault, then how can it be "dumbed down"? Something + something
else generally equals more than the original, not less.
 >> Stay informed about: So how is warfare? 

GTD wrote:

> I'm convinced you're just a baby that can't handle another person's
> opion when it differes from yours. You've arlready proved that you
> can't take an honest position in a debate, and have to rely on
> snipping apart and mis-representing what others post to try and get
> your point across. Someone asked "how is warfare", and I gave my
> opinion, don't like it, deal with it you big baby.
>
There seems to be a pattern here

Folk - to me it looks like you hammered home a M O N S T E R K I L L and
it just hasn't sunk in yet at the fragged players end.

Take care
Bruno
 >> Stay informed about: So how is warfare? 

Folk wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:41:30 -0800 (PST), GTD <toobiep DeleteThis @yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Who is the smart-ass that started with the "You're not paying
>> attention"?
>
> So that's what got your knickers in a twist?
No, just pointing out what a hypocrite you are, doesn't surprise me you
can't handle a response. Oh well. .
 >> Stay informed about: So how is warfare?