Would A Cover Mechanic Help Or Hurt?

[Tsukinoki]

@Bakercompany86
The point is, people complain about the lack of difficulty as it is.

You give them an option which makes them 90% immune to all damage and think of the complaints that the game is far to easy will just escalate dramatically.

You *cant* balance around both run and gun and a cover system.

You have to choose one.

So you have two options:
A) Make the game ridicoulsly easy for anyone who uses the cover system
B) Make the game impossible for anyone who doesnt use it, forcing them to use said cover system.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Tsukinoki

[MJ12]

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.

 

Two days later:

 

THIS GAME IS TOO EASY. Thread Started By XxCoverShooterGuyxX29010

 

ENEMIES DO TOO LITTLE DAMAGE. Thread Started By CrateHumperBluntJumper420

 

WE ARE INVINCIBLE WHEN TAKING COVER. NERF SHIELDS/HEALTH. Thread Started By WallHuggingCoward

 

A BABBY GAME FOR BABBY PLAYERS UNLIKE CALL OF DUTY. Thread Started By XxSupaSayian666xX

 

WARFRAME IS A LAME GAME FOR LOSERS WITH EASY ENEMIES. Thread Started By CodRocksAndIDontMeanTheFish

 

MAKE ENEMIES DO MORE DAMAGE. GAME IS TOO EASY. Thread Started By GearsOfWarframe

[Bakercompany86]

@Bakercompany86

The point is, people complain about the lack of difficulty as it is.

You give them an option which makes them 90% immune to all damage and think of the complaints that the game is far to easy will just escalate dramatically.

You *cant* balance around both run and gun and a cover system.

You have to choose one.

So you have two options:

A) Make the game ridicoulsly easy for anyone who uses the cover system

B) Make the game impossible for anyone who doesnt use it, forcing them to use said cover system.

 

 

I do see your point.

 

But I will point this out too.  Almost every mission I play, I have units come in from behind me.  On top of that you have the melee units.  And of course, DE could always implement new units with different abilities/grenades etc to flush you out of cover.  But that goes against what I said about just dropping it into the game as is.

 

I mean, I already take cover.  I abuse it as a matter of fact.  There are angles you can reach where the enemy cannot hit you but you can still hit them.  Look at the Captain Vor fight.  With a box, you can avoid all of his damage when he shoots a beam at you but you can still shoot him.  That is UNTIL he throws the lightning sentries behind you and you're forced to move.

[Bakercompany86]

Two days later:

 

THIS GAME IS TOO EASY. Thread Started By XxCoverShooterGuyxX29010

 

ENEMIES DO TOO LITTLE DAMAGE. Thread Started By CrateHumperBluntJumper420

 

WE ARE INVINCIBLE WHEN TAKING COVER. NERF SHIELDS/HEALTH. Thread Started By WallHuggingCoward

 

A BABBY GAME FOR BABBY PLAYERS UNLIKE CALL OF DUTY. Thread Started By XxSupaSayian666xX

 

WARFRAME IS A LAME GAME FOR LOSERS WITH EASY ENEMIES. Thread Started By CodRocksAndIDontMeanTheFish

 

MAKE ENEMIES DO MORE DAMAGE. GAME IS TOO EASY. Thread Started By GearsOfWarframe

 

 

*see above*

[MJ12]

*see above*

 

Your response isn't a rebuttal. It's just repeating yourself verbatim. If you make the game more about cover, if you do anything but spend resources reducing the effectiveness of cover, you're going to create this level of whining and it's going to be incredibly toxic, because either DE has to stop listening to community feedback (actually I take that back, maybe it should have done it a long time ago) or the first step on the road to covershooterdom becomes an irreversible slide into it.

 

"But the slippery slope fallacy!" you say.

 

Except... have you seen any of the 'this game is too easy' threads? Half the time people say it's too easy because you barely 'have' to take cover in a game which is explicitly not about taking cover. Man What.

 

Cover shooters like CoD/GoW have become so synonymous with shooters in general that lots of people are literally incapable of comprehending that you can have a run and gun shooter.

Edited August 7, 2013 by MJ12

[Bakercompany86]

Your response isn't a rebuttal. It's just repeating yourself verbatim. If you make the game more about cover, if you do anything but spend resources reducing the effectiveness of cover, you're going to create this level of whining and it's going to be incredibly toxic, because either DE has to stop listening to community feedback (actually I take that back, maybe it should have done it a long time ago) or the first step on the road to covershooterdom becomes an irreversible slide into it.

 

"But the slippery slope fallacy!" you say.

 

Except... have you seen any of the 'this game is too easy' threads? Half the time people say it's too easy because you barely 'have' to take cover in a game which is explicitly not about taking cover. Man What.

 

Cover shooters like CoD/GoW have become so synonymous with shooters in general that lots of people are literally incapable of comprehending that you can have a run and gun shooter.

 

 

What about melee units and rear spawns?

 

Also note, CoD is not a cover shooter.  

[Tsukinoki]

@Bakercompany86
And the fact is that rarely do enemies come in from behind you in groups of more than 2 or 3 at the most.  They would still need to *massively* buff the enemy damage to present any form of challenge to people who uses the cover system.

Without that you would see dozens of threads about how easy and boring this game is.

And I would rather not see this game turn into a slow paced, cover to cover shooter where you cant poke your head out for 3 seconds without dying horribly.  And that really is the only way to balance around the cover.  Thats why any cover based game has the enemies hit that hard.  They *need* to in order to balance out the cover in any form.

Further, you talk about melee units...completely disregarding that they aren't that fast and have the lowest armor out of any of the units for their factions, or for the infested are so easily abused by hopping ontop of a box its not funny.

Fact is, there are threads complaining that the game is too easy and doesnt force you to use cover.  We add in cover and dont make it impossible to do any other form of gameplay and then its "The game is too easy when you use cover".

[EarthScorpion]

What about melee units and rear spawns?

 

Also note, CoD is not a cover shooter.  

 

... ha ha ha ha ha.

 

manwhat

 

In Call of Duty, if you charge out in the open hip-firing your weapon, you get cut to shreds.  Call of Duty is basically the epitome of the Modern First Person Cover Shooter. where you crouch (or go prone) behind a box, wall, car, or urban debris of your choice, and kill people in five or fewer bullets.  If you cannot comprehend that CoD is a cover shooter par excellence, you should work on your English comprehension.

[Bakercompany86]

@Bakercompany86

And the fact is that rarely do enemies come in from behind you in groups of more than 2 or 3 at the most.  They would still need to *massively* buff the enemy damage to present any form of challenge to people who uses the cover system.

Without that you would see dozens of threads about how easy and boring this game is.

And I would rather not see this game turn into a slow paced, cover to cover shooter where you cant poke your head out for 3 seconds without dying horribly.  And that really is the only way to balance around the cover.  Thats why any cover based game has the enemies hit that hard.  They *need* to in order to balance out the cover in any form.

Further, you talk about melee units...completely disregarding that they aren't that fast and have the lowest armor out of any of the units for their factions, or for the infested are so easily abused by hopping ontop of a box its not funny.

Fact is, there are threads complaining that the game is too easy and doesnt force you to use cover.  We add in cover and dont make it impossible to do any other form of gameplay and then its "The game is too easy when you use cover".

 

 

I'm not talking about turning this into a cover to cover shooter.  When you think about it, it's already designed to be a mixture.  You spring through hallways and around bends, but then you stop in large rooms for combat, or rooms that contain the objective.

 

And then when it comes time for the objectives, you're not running and jumping, or parkouring.  You're taking cover.  Like you said, you can abuse the infected by hopping on top of a box.

 

There are plenty of areas where the entire group stops to fight.  And then you're hardly moving at all.  You are moving from cover to cover and shooting.  That's where I want the mechanic implemented.  It's really no different then me not being in sticky cover.  I use the cover regardless.  I just think it would be easier on my fingers to have the sticky mechanic.

[Bakercompany86]

... ha ha ha ha ha.

 

manwhat

 

In Call of Duty, if you charge out in the open hip-firing your weapon, you get cut to shreds.  Call of Duty is basically the epitome of the Modern First Person Cover Shooter. where you crouch (or go prone) behind a box, wall, car, or urban debris of your choice, and kill people in five or fewer bullets.  If you cannot comprehend that CoD is a cover shooter par excellence, you should work on your English comprehension.

 

 

When I say cover shooter, I'm referring to games with an actual cover mechanic.  Ala Gears of War, Mass Effect, Ghost Recon, etc.

 

 

You take cover in all shooters....  Thanks for the troll comment though.

 

 

EDIT:  By your definition, Warframe is a cover shooter.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Bakercompany86

[Tsukinoki]

@Bakercompany86
And the "sticky" cover system ruins any sort of parkour action near anything denoted as "cover" by the system implemented.  Thats another drawback of using any sort of automatic/sticky cover.

And that still doesnt answer the difficulty question at all and what you would need to balance it around.  A run and gun and a cover system dont mix with a lot of mechanics, especially the difficulty.

And the people I play with in PUGs and my clanmates are doing more running, jumping, parkouring and melee rather than try to run behind boxes.  The only times we move behind boxes or doors is when our shields run out.  And in those cases the current system is far more than adequate.
And yes, we do this even in T3 missions.

[Bakercompany86]

@Bakercompany86

And the "sticky" cover system ruins any sort of parkour action near anything denoted as "cover" by the system implemented.  Thats another drawback of using any sort of automatic/sticky cover.

And that still doesnt answer the difficulty question at all and what you would need to balance it around.  A run and gun and a cover system dont mix with a lot of mechanics, especially the difficulty.

And the people I play with in PUGs and my clanmates are doing more running, jumping, parkouring and melee rather than try to run behind boxes.  The only times we move behind boxes or doors is when our shields run out.  And in those cases the current system is far more than adequate.

And yes, we do this even in T3 missions.

 

 

No no, never that auto-cover garbage.  I hate that stuff.  Contextual button press only.

 

I don't see how sticky cover would affect difficulty any more than what's in place.  Sticky cover would also alleviate this issue with your warframe not being transparent when you back up against something (although that needs to change, regardless).

[Tsukinoki]

@Bakercompany86
So you honestly wouldn't mind a way to be immune to 75%+ of all damage in the game from 2 of the factions?  You would be ok with that huge drop in difficulty?

I can promise you that most of the community wouldn't be happy at all with a change like that...

[Bakercompany86]

@Bakercompany86

So you honestly wouldn't mind a way to be immune to 75%+ of all damage in the game from 2 of the factions?  You would be ok with that huge drop in difficulty?

I can promise you that most of the community wouldn't be happy at all with a change like that...

 

 

I guess I just don't see that drop in difficulty.

 

Reason being:

 

You have to pop out of cover to shoot, exposing yourself to enemy fire.  They're already ridiculously accurate, so you know they'll immediately pour ammunition into your face.

 

 

As it is now:  You can simply use the cover in a way that they cannot shoot you, but you can still shoot them.  If you angle it right, you can avoid 100% of all damage.  This is in it's current implementation.  I do this every night.

[Tsukinoki]

@Bakercompany86
And the right hand advantage still exists even in cover shooter games.

But the one thing that is easier with a cover system?
You hold aim to pop up, get a few shots, and then release aim and be immeadiently back down behind the wall once again protected from firing before any enemy has *TIME* to actually fire off a few rounds.

The *only* way to combat a cover system and try to keep the damage at the levels that they currently are is to *massively* increase the amount of enemies that spawn directly behind you.  And people complain about that already...

If they dont do something, either make the enemies hit 5 to 6 times harder or make 3 to 4 times the amount of enemies spawn behind you that they currently do, the people using cover will have the game basically on easy mode and able to ignore 75%+ of any fire coming their way.

One of those options would make the game impossible to not use cover, the other would annoy a large amount of players.
Doing nothing would trivialize this game immensely.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Tsukinoki

[Bakercompany86]

@Bakercompany86

And the right hand advantage still exists even in cover shooter games.

But the one thing that is easier with a cover system?

You hold aim to pop up, get a few shots, and then release aim and be immeadiently back down behind the wall once again protected from firing before any enemy has *TIME* to actually fire off a few rounds.

The *only* way to combat a cover system and try to keep the damage at the levels that they currently are is to *massively* increase the amount of enemies that spawn directly behind you.  And people complain about that already...

If they dont do something, either make the enemies hit 5 to 6 times harder or make 3 to 4 times the amount of enemies spawn behind you that they currently do, the people using cover will have the game basically on easy mode and able to ignore 75%+ of any fire coming their way.

One of those options would make the game impossible to not use cover, the other would annoy a large amount of players.

Doing nothing would trivialize this game immensely.

 

 

Also think of the level designs we're presented with.  Less than half the time is damage coming from in front of me.  I find myself constantly readjusting my position to avoid fire and regenerate my shields.

 

And then there's the infected, which completely negate cover anyway.

 

 

I guess I should have been more clear.  I don't really care if cover is ever implemented.  It's fine as is.  I just think for a lot of situations in this game it makes sense.  Plus in every cover shooter I've ever played (Call of Duty lmao!) even when in cover I've still been hit.

 

 

I think this is all a moot point of course.  DE will never implement cover.  Space ninjas...so they say...with LMG's and Battle Axes lol.

[10twenty4]

I think a cover system is the wrong way to go, but more defensive options would certainly be nice.

 

The two things I'd like to see is a more effective block move, and invincibility or reduced damage while rolling.

[Clessiah]

what's wrong with hiding behind a wall manually?

[Tsukinoki]

@10twenty4
Those are two things I would like to see as well.  Block needs to be more useful, besides stopping a disruption effect, and rolling in general needs to be improved, such as being a faster action and providing a few invulnerability frames.

[Bakercompany86]

I think a cover system is the wrong way to go, but more defensive options would certainly be nice.

 

The two things I'd like to see is a more effective block move, and invincibility or reduced damage while rolling.

 

Actually, this is the best of both worlds.  Screw cover, give me a decent block instead.

 

I'd *much* rather have that.

[Mietz]

Actually, this is the best of both worlds.  Screw cover, give me a decent block instead.

 

I'd *much* rather have that.

 

A simple cover system would help immensely in fixing stealth gameplay, it would also not influence the action gameplay at all.

[Bakercompany86]

A simple cover system would help immensely in fixing stealth gameplay, it would also not influence the action gameplay at all.

 

You will have little luck peddling that idea here my friend.

 

Somewhere along the lines "Ninja" became synonymous with "Kenyan Track Athlete".  It doesn't look like many are interested in the stealth mechanics anymore, it's all about the run and gun.

 

Oddly enough, the very basis of this game works against the fast paced gameplay, stopping to open chests, break containers, and collect loot.  But nobody thinks about that.  Cover would break the flow =\

[Tsukinoki]

@Bakercompany86
There is different pacing in and out of battle.
A cover system would slow down the fast paced battle system we have in place, and that is what people are against.

Furthere there is the difficulty and balancing issues brought up which no proponents of the cover system has adequitely addressed.

[Mietz]

You will have little luck peddling that idea here my friend.

 

Somewhere along the lines "Ninja" became synonymous with "Kenyan Track Athlete".  It doesn't look like many are interested in the stealth mechanics anymore, it's all about the run and gun.

 

Oddly enough, the very basis of this game works against the fast paced gameplay, stopping to open chests, break containers, and collect loot.  But nobody thinks about that.  Cover would break the flow =\

 

Yes, but the cover system would not influence the game at all.

If my frame now stuck to the wall with its weapon sheathed when i pressed, idk, G, nothing would be lost, literally, nothing.

Nobody would use that to slow them down or not parkour, its entirely not mandatory in normal action gameplay.

 

It would however immensely help with actually properly hiding in stealth missions instead of being detected because your enormous custom helmet stuck out from behind the crate.

[Bakercompany86]

Yes, but the cover system would not influence the game at all.

If my frame now stuck to the wall with its weapon sheathed when i pressed, idk, G, nothing would be lost, literally, nothing.

Nobody would use that to slow them down or not parkour, its entirely not mandatory in normal action gameplay.

 

It would however immensely help with actually properly hiding in stealth missions instead of being detected because your enormous custom helmet stuck out from behind the crate.

 

 

You should read the past two pages.....