Would A Cover Mechanic Help Or Hurt?

[RoboDoge]

I dont know before i try it. Should be tested, and if it is bad, remove it.

[NoPainNoSwol]

Who needs cover when one is a badass whirlwind of death?

[whitejackale]

How will this work? I'm just going to quote myself as to why this isn't going to work at all.

The game would not change much by allowing players to press a cover key in order to activate a cover animation. We are already able to take cover behind objects when we want to stop taking damage from projectiles. So why would it be a problem to give people the option to activate a cover animation when they press a key near a solid object?

[MJ12]

The game would not change much by allowing players to press a cover key in order to activate a cover animation. We are already able to take cover behind objects when we want to stop taking damage from projectiles. So why would it be a problem to give people the option to activate a cover animation when they press a key near a solid object?

 

You're missing the point here. Taking soft cover or hard cover in general are both the issue I'm trying to make people think about. As in, "the game cannot be fast-paced and have interesting melee attacks emphasized unless you deemphasize cover and make it much more vulnerable". Additional, having 'cover animations' be optional is bad because soft cover is bad for games and forcing people to use it more is actually sort of an indirect way to nerf cover.

Edited August 7, 2013 by MJ12

[Cabadath5]

Who needs cover when one is a badass whirlwind of death?

Yeah, who needs cover when you can bash the melee key, spray in full auto and ocasionally press 4 to insta-gib the entire room.

[Tempera]

Yeah, who needs cover when you can bash the melee key, spray in full auto and ocasionally press 4 to insta-gib the entire room.

Who needs to explain an argument properly when you can just reduce an opponent's position to absurdity?

[JerichoFayne]

There are a bunch of you who keep insisting that this is a face-paced game, and no cover is required.  What you're forgetting is that the pacing of this game is based purely on the players who are running the missions.  You aren't entitled to tell me how to play my character any more that I'm entitled to tell you what your load-out should be.

 

We already have a cover mechanic, whether you're using it or not.  The fact that objects cover you from fire means that cover is a factor in combat.  There is no discussion regarding cover.  That's academic.  You either make use of the cover currently available to you, or you don't.

 

The discussion is actually about whether or not it would be helpful or harmful to be able to stick to a wall, poke around a corner to take a shot, and then slip back behind cover.  On one hand, it's a great way to present the minimum target, and to more efficiently use cover when your approach to a target is from the left, where it's always harder to cover while firing due to the fact that all characters are right-handed.  On the other hand, the issue I see is those situations where you don't want to stick to a wall - where doing so will actually hinder your ability to move & operate, and potentially lead to mission failure.  THAT is the real topic of discussion here.

[whitejackale]

You're missing the point here. Taking soft cover or hard cover in general are both the issue I'm trying to make people think about. As in, "the game cannot be fast-paced and have interesting melee attacks emphasized unless you deemphasize cover and make it much more vulnerable". Additional, having 'cover animations' be optional is bad because soft cover is bad for games and forcing people to use it more is actually sort of an indirect way to nerf cover.

You have yet to give a reasonable argument for not giving people the option to use a cover mechanic.DE has created stealth mechanics for warframe, and so they have made it clear that warframe will be a game that does not cater specifically to players that want to play a fast paced run and gun shooter. More options for different play styles should be welcome by the warframe community, and anyone that wishes to limit people's options is being quite unreasonable.

Edited August 7, 2013 by whitejackale

[whitejackale]

On the other hand, the issue I see is those situations where you don't want to stick to a wall - where doing so will actually hinder your ability to move & operate, and potentially lead to mission failure.  THAT is the real topic of discussion here.

A well developed cover system will involve pressing a cover key in order to take cover. I believe, or at least hope, that the majority of the gaming community does not wish to have a cover system that forces them to take cover.

[shut]

Mass Effect 3... use/cover/sprint on 1 button. Arg, what a nightmare. >_>

 

PsySnake already said my opinion on this matter.

 

This. I died so many times because of that.

 

In the trial version.

[Tsukinoki]

@whitejackale

And then the question returns to:

What do they balance around?

Do they balance around the people who run and gun, which would make the people who use cover nearly invincible?

Or do they balance around the people who use the cover and make it nearly impossible to do the run up meleeing and parkouring during a fire fight?

If you balance around the people who run and gun, those who use cover will find the game to be an absolute cake-walk, more so than it is.

If you balance around those that use the cover you'll see that enemies have to hit a ton harder, making it suicide to not use the cover.

So its either, you're forced to use cover because of the damage that they can put out, or if you use cover nothing can really ever hurt you.

Thats a huge issue. There really isn't a middle ground for balancing between the two systems.

[krisp]

A cover system would be quite an investment, and would bring some major changes in the game's flow and pacing.

 

Late beta is not the period in which you want to implement a cover system. So it's not a question of if it'll be implemented - it won't.

[JerichoFayne]

A well developed cover system will involve pressing a cover key in order to take cover. I believe, or at least hope, that the majority of the gaming community does not wish to have a cover system that forces them to take cover.

 

I totally agree.  I don't want to be put in a situation where I'm forced to stick to a wall if I don't want to.

[litlit]

Ninja, some of the most feared spies and assassins in all of history. Of these, the fiercest were the Tenno, notorious for their mastery of sticky cover and chest-high walls.

[JerichoFayne]

Ninja, some of the most feared spies and assassins in all of history. Of these, the fiercest were the Tenno, notorious for their mastery of sticky cover and chest-high walls.

 

You might feel differently if you can hang upside down or sideways & take advantage of vertical cover.  Let's not paint ourselves into a corner with preconceived notions.

[Tempera]

The Tenno. Feared for their ability to take so little damage that they have to hide behind boxes and waist-high walls when faced with more than two enemies.

[MJ12]

The game would not change much by allowing players to press a cover key in order to activate a cover animation. We are already able to take cover behind objects when we want to stop taking damage from projectiles. So why would it be a problem to give people the option to activate a cover animation when they press a key near a solid object?

 

Because it's a total and complete waste of time implementing something. This time and money could be far better spent by making cover weaker and evasive/defensive options that don't rely on cover much stronger. Why would it be a problem to waste money prettying up one of the core flaws of Warframe's gameplay when that money would be better spent eliminating such flaws?

 

You ask me.

 

There are a bunch of you who keep insisting that this is a face-paced game, and no cover is required.  What you're forgetting is that the pacing of this game is based purely on the players who are running the missions.  You aren't entitled to tell me how to play my character any more that I'm entitled to tell you what your load-out should be.

 

No, the pacing of the game is based purely on the explicit statements by the developers that this game is a fast-paced shooter/slasher with no emphasis at all on hiding behind walls (which is explicitly why cover animations are basically the lowest of the low, priority-wise). And if you want to claim I'm not entitled to tell you how to 'play your character', maybe you should take that hypocrisy and shove it because you are doing exactly that. Because as I said, cover shooting is incompatible with fast-paced shooter/slasher. If you're saying we should talk about how cover should work in this game besides 'it's too powerful, nerf the crap out of it', you're already telling everyone who enjoys the core mechanics of the game that they should play real shooters like Call of Duty or Gears of War.

 

We already have a cover mechanic, whether you're using it or not.  The fact that objects cover you from fire means that cover is a factor in combat.  There is no discussion regarding cover.  That's academic.  You either make use of the cover currently available to you, or you don't.

 

The discussion is actually about whether or not it would be helpful or harmful to be able to stick to a wall, poke around a corner to take a shot, and then slip back behind cover.  On one hand, it's a great way to present the minimum target, and to more efficiently use cover when your approach to a target is from the left, where it's always harder to cover while firing due to the fact that all characters are right-handed.  On the other hand, the issue I see is those situations where you don't want to stick to a wall - where doing so will actually hinder your ability to move & operate, and potentially lead to mission failure.  THAT is the real topic of discussion here.

 

No, the real topic of discussion is how some people insist, in a game where the FAQ spells out explicitly that this isn't a cover shooter, that they should implement cover shooter mechanics instead of reducing the effectiveness of cover for Tenno (and increasing their ability to evade/deflect/soak attacks without using cover), which coincidentally, because cover means you take way less damage, makes all non-cover shooter playstyles nonviable because ?????

[JerichoFayne]

No, the pacing of the game is based purely on the explicit statements by the developers that this game is a fast-paced shooter/slasher with no emphasis at all on hiding behind walls (which is explicitly why cover animations are basically the lowest of the low, priority-wise). 

 

The developers can post anything they want about this game, but that doesn't necessarily make it so.  They can call it a fast-paced shooter, but I choose the pace at which I plan to go.  Maybe I'll rush through it, or maybe I'll take 3 hours to run a single mission.  They provide the tools & the place to use them.  I decide how to use the tools I've been given.

 

 

And if you want to claim I'm not entitled to tell you how to 'play your character', maybe you should take that hypocrisy and shove it because you are doing exactly that.

 

I'm not doing any such thing.  Having the option of using cover in no way diminishes your ability to play the way that you want to play.  Furthermore, I said earlier on it would be simple enough to have an option to simply disable that feature if you felt strong enough about it.

 

 

cover shooting is incompatible with fast-paced shooter/slasher.

 

I disagree with this statement, because the two combat modes are not mutually exclusive.  Moving between cover positions to make tactical use of the terrain doesn't slow down the pacing of combat.  Popping out of cover to strafe & move to point-bland range for melee, only to fade back to cover doesn't slow down the pacing of combat.  Those are examples of mobile actions that incorporate cover, and we do them all the time in this game.  There are also scenarios in which the pacing of combat can be slowed by hunkering down behind cover for an extended period.  Game features are what you make of them.  Pacing is set by the intensity & number of the forces you're facing, and the decisions you make when dealing with those forces.

 

Being a ninja isn't supposed to just be about bouncing off of walls & expending all your ammunition.  The idea is to utilize a combination of tactics, special abilities, weapons, and discipline to work your way through combat scenarios.  This is especially true if you're soloing, or taking advantage of the game's stealth features.

[Eirshy]

There already is a cover system in this game. It's a very simple, organic, one-size-really-does-fit-all setup: Crouching behind S#&$ and edging over the side.

 

I use it predominantly because I do a lot of tower solo on Banshee (my favorite frame). Banshee can't facetank three or four heavy gunners at once. Hell, Banshee can't really facetank *anything* on T3 except the boxheads (as they fire slow enough for you to effectively dodge).

 

Sticky Cover is a terrible system that should have never been added to ANY game outside of the Arcade machines that invented it. And it's not just because it makes it overly hard to kite pure-melee enemies. It's also because it makes it really hard to dodge grenades- which in this game, is a VERY VERY important thing to do when on a T3 solo.

 

 

As to this being a run'n'gun ONLY game, ya'll are horribly mistaken. Only Ember is able to be tanky enough out in the open to pull that off (up to 91% DR). Early and Infested levels are, and later *Corpus* levels can be (if you're good enough at parkouring off of everything in sight while shooting accurately), but Grineer care not for your dodging shenanigans.

 

The game is balanced like a shooter, not towards one specific style. A fast-paced shooter, to boot. The only "balancing" issues this game has is armor scaling on two enemy types (Med Grineer and Ancients) and enemy accuracy in relation to what you're doing- keep it where it's at for taking cover (low mobility), LOWER it for higher mobility (kinda like the old Battletech board game, where walking, running, and jumping changed everyone's to-hit (both shooting at and shooting from) based on how much movement was happening)

 

 

 

Now for some replies

 

Cover system would be very bad in this kind of game. And beside, right hand advantage is far more efficient than cover is.

 

You can map a button to swap the camera. I forget the default (G or H maybe?), I moved it onto my mouse, directly above my fire button. I don't use it often, only when cover's on my right and enemies are more to the left.

 

Maybe using the roll button, a relatively unused maneuver, into the wall could have you use it as cover, similar to how the Grineer take cover behind pillars and waist high cover. Than right-clicking to aim out of cover, and pressing any of the directional buttons to leave cover.

 

Nonnonono thousand times no.

The maneuver is not even remotely "relatively unused" when the game forces you to do it  whever you...

- Jump through the air while aiming.

- Hold Shift and land out of a jump.

 

Give it its own button, do not add it to anything already in-place.

That and they need to fix how often you roll unintentionally (or set the roll to conserve momentum and absolutely NEVER happen when platforming (if that's even possible)).

 

Yes it was, there is something very freeing about not getting sucked into cover when you try to run. 

 

Technically, there is a cover mechanic in the game, it's called standing, crouching, running to /over / behind obstacles. In a way the system in Warframe is more intuitive and doesn't' rely on a button to get you to cover. If you can't get yourself to break line of sight / fire then it's on you.  

This. I died so many times because of that.

 

In the trial version.

 

@(*()$ ME2 had this issue as well. Wasn't THAT bad until the fight on Horizon. Abarations or w/e the psi-quake-cannon things were actually called would basically oneshot you if you tried to take cover (or the husks would successfully zerg you, one or the other). If you accidentally took cover on a high difficulty at *any* point at that part of the mission, you better have been the infiltrator and immediately hit your cloak.

 

Sticky Cover is a TERRIBLE idea, especially when you can use crouching and stuff- and even shoot *through* your cover if you're using a hitscan weapon (or sufficiently long projectile one; Lanka's usually not long enough D=).

 

 

Except it would. Let me explain this because it's not obvious game design. Games are balanced around their intended playstyle. Cover shooter and Run and Gun are not mutually compatible playstyles.

 

Look at, for example, Mass Effect 3, which illustrates the issue quite nicely. The Geth Juggernaut, a class incapable of taking cover (which isn't a Volus and thus basically given 100% cover by just about anything more than six inches tall) has four times the shields of an average character and twice the health, and their health/shield boosting skill, Hardened Platform, can increase that to 4600 shields/2300 health (while an average character has 825/825 S/H, for over 5.5 times the shields and nearly 3 times the health). It also has a skill that can reduce all incoming damage by up to 40%. This is because all other characters are balanced for cover shooting and thus it needs that much health, shields, and DR to survive in the open.

 

So in this hypothetical Coverframe, Rhino, who isn't going to be taking cover, needs to have 400 shields, 200 health, and 150 armor or so if he wants to survive as long as a cover-taking Volt in combat. This means a hypothetical cover-taking Rhino becomes invulnerable.

 

I think you can see the slight problem here.

 

EDIT: I remembered the Krogan Warlord couldn't take cover either, but the Warlord also has more than 2x the shields/health of the average character, up to 90% DR due to Rage, has health regeneration (giving significantly increased toughness over most characters) and has massive melee damage. Again, even if we use the low-end of the Warlord, your Rhino Warlord needs to have 250 base shields.

 

 

Wrex and then Grunt were seriously my main squadmates for 1 and 2 (respectively; though I did keep calling Grunt "Wrex"). I didn't start out using them (first run, lower difficulty), but once I ramped the difficulty to max, my squad was basically Me, a Krogran, and a Dead Guy. Ashely wasn't that bad in 1, but in 2 it didn't seem like I could put anybody in that second slot and not have them dropping left and right.

 

 

You might feel differently if you can hang upside down or sideways & take advantage of vertical cover.  Let's not paint ourselves into a corner with preconceived notions.

 

Okay see, if we had a "cover" button (IT MUST BE ON ITS OWN BUTTON) that allowed us to do THAT, I might not be against it XD

[MJ12]

The developers can post anything they want about this game, but that doesn't necessarily make it so.  They can call it a fast-paced shooter, but I choose the pace at which I plan to go.  Maybe I'll rush through it, or maybe I'll take 3 hours to run a single mission.  They provide the tools & the place to use them.  I decide how to use the tools I've been given.

 

And none of your ability to take 3 hours to run a single mission changes that the combat itself in the game is fast-paced. I've had configurations for Unreal Tournament and its sequels which meant a match took an hour. Does that make it a slow-paced shooter? If your answer is 'yes', literally anything about game design is irrelevant, since I could call Warframe a tourist game because I can walk around slowly and take screenshots.

 

Your definition of what a 'fast-paced shooter' is is so trivial as to be utterly meaningless.

 

I'm not doing any such thing.  Having the option of using cover in no way diminishes your ability to play the way that you want to play.  Furthermore, I said earlier on it would be simple enough to have an option to simply disable that feature if you felt strong enough about it.

 

Man what. Are you forgetting, um... only the entire history of cover usage in shooters? Wherein the use of cover was put in at the same time as weapons in shooters were made significantly more lethal (because your ability to take cover was supposed to make up for the fact that you could no longer take 2 rockets to the face). Yes, having the 'option' of using cover (and I put 'option' in quotes because by that what it means is 'you must use cover or die') does in fact diminish the ability to play in a way that doesn't use cover. So how is it simple enough to disable that feature if you felt strongly enough about it?

 

Is there a toggle that says "I don't use cover" that gives me 75% damage reduction as well? If not, well, you're forcing me to play in a way that uses cover.

 

I disagree with this statement, because the two combat modes are not mutually exclusive.  Moving between cover positions to make tactical use of the terrain doesn't slow down the pacing of combat.  Popping out of cover to strafe & move to point-bland range for melee, only to fade back to cover doesn't slow down the pacing of combat.  Those are examples of mobile actions that incorporate cover, and we do them all the time in this game.  There are also scenarios in which the pacing of combat can be slowed by hunkering down behind cover for an extended period.  Game features are what you make of them.  Pacing is set by the intensity & number of the forces you're facing, and the decisions you make when dealing with those forces.

 

Notice all of those, however, also make Warframe a cover shooter, which is explicitly what it isn't. Meanwhile, improving evasive moves while giving enemies more methods to attack cover-using Tenno would actually balance cover use with everyone else, which would help everyone in the long run. Look, it turns out that cover in Warframe is too powerful compared to every other defensive move out there and needs to be put in line with them, either by augmenting dodge/block/defensive powers in general or by nerfing the crap out of cover.

[Bakercompany86]

I still don't understand why people think adding cover mechanics to this game will slow down the gameplay....

 

 

There are plenty of areas where I wish I could stick to the cover and stop holding Ctrl.  Every single mission type has a stopping point.  Usually a few, where you are required to fight enemies to pass.  Mobile Defense and Defense scream for this.  With the accuracy of the enemies, you MUST take cover.  You can run and jump all day long, but they won't miss.

 

 

And with a contextual button, it's optional for people who don't want to use it.

 

Whether or not you think it's a waste of time to implement this is completely your opinion and not a fact of any sort.

 

 

EDIT:


"Sticky Cover is a terrible system that should have never been added to ANY game outside of the Arcade machines that invented it."

 

There are millions upon millions of Gears of War and Mass Effect fans that would disagree with you.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Bakercompany86

[MJ12]

I still don't understand why people think adding cover mechanics to this game will slow down the gameplay....

 

There are plenty of areas where I wish I could stick to the cover and stop holding Ctrl.  Every single mission type has a stopping point.  Usually a few, where you are required to fight enemies to pass.  Mobile Defense and Defense scream for this.  With the accuracy of the enemies, you MUST take cover.  You can run and jump all day long, but they won't miss.

 

Yes, and instead of the obvious answer (which is to change it so you can dodge enemy fire effectively) people insist on making the band-aid (hiding behind boxes) bigger, because they're missing the point. Meanwhile, the wound is infected and surgery is necessary. Stop focusing on the symptoms of the problems and insisting that those get treated with bandaids that make the core issue worse.

Edited August 7, 2013 by MJ12

[Tsukinoki]

Here is a very easy demonstration of why adding cover would FORCE you to use cover:
Try to play any cover based shooter and use no cover at all.
Go ahead and try.
See how quickly you die, even in the very beginning of the game.

And why do you die so fast if you dont use cover?
Because, in order to balance around using cover and avoiding nearly all damage they have to make the enemy shots really count.  How do they do that?  By making the enemies hit harder than a freight train.

What would that do?
Force you to use cover.
Good luck running up and using parkour and melee attacks when all the enemies deal 4 to 5 times as much damage to in order to balance around the people that cuddle up to boxes and chest high walls everywhere.

That is why a cover system would be a problem in this game.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Tsukinoki

[Bakercompany86]

Yes, and instead of the obvious answer (which is to change it so you can dodge enemy fire effectively) people insist on making the band-aid (hiding behind boxes) bigger, because they're missing the point. Meanwhile, the wound is infected and surgery is necessary. Stop focusing on the symptoms of the problems and insisting that those get treated with bandaids that make the core issue worse.

 

 

I mean you could make enemies less accurate, sure.

 

As it stands, everyone takes cover whether they realize it or not.  When you're aiming do you strafe from behind objects?  Or do you fling yourself around at fast speeds trying to shoot the enemy while moving?

 

And this is why melee units are in the game, they force you out of the cover.

 

 

I guess my point is, cover wouldn't slow down the pace of this game at all like people think.  People either blaze through the levels with little stopping (and all cover is irrelevant).  Or they run, stop and shoot, run more, stop and shoot more.

 

I personally would love during those stop and shoot moments to be able to stick to some cover.  Especially considering the accuracy of enemies.

 

 

If you want to talk about reworking the entire AI system, that's another topic by itself.  And I do think the AI could use a complete reworking.  Maybe then people would stop talking about cover.

 

For now, I'd love it.

[Bakercompany86]

Here is a very easy demonstration of why adding cover would FORCE you to use cover:

Try to play any cover based shooter and use no cover at all.

Go ahead and try.

See how quickly you die, even in the very beginning of the game.

And why do you die so fast if you dont use cover?

Because, in order to balance around using cover and avoiding nearly all damage they have to make the enemy shots really count.  How do they do that?  By making the enemies hit harder than a freight train.

What would that do?

Force you to use cover.

Good luck running up and using parkour and melee attacks when all the enemies deal 4 to 5 times as much damage to in order to balance around the people that cuddle up to boxes and chest high walls everywhere.

That is why a cover system would be a problem in this game.

 

 

You're also talking about games built around a cover system.  When I speak of cover in Warframe, I'm talking about adding it to Warframe exactly as it is.  No changes.

 

So those who wanted to use the cover could.  Those who didn't, wouldn't.  I don't see how anyone can argue against that.