Your Multiplayer thoughts & how you think clan wars would work best

[BLACKCLOUD--]

WiZ ]

How about if you just play the game as is? Its actually pretty fun.

 

I like that idea. NO HOLDS BARD would be a cool name. the fact that the campers dictate where your team respawns holds more stratigy than the actual weapons in my opinion.

[Crusty_Demons]

Where does the MW community stand on riot shields in wars? I'm just curious because the equalizer for shields is 203's.

[Fluid__]

BLACKCLOUD ]

WiZ ]

How about if you just play the game as is? Its actually pretty fun.

 

I like that idea. NO HOLDS BARD would be a cool name. the fact that the campers dictate where your team respawns holds more stratigy than the actual weapons in my opinion.

I agree with both of you. Even with the use of 203's, all they are is a nuance. I am fine without them yet I like to use them. Same on Socom with rpg's. They are the most effective way to remove a camp fest.

[Covert-OPs_]

WiZ ]

How about if you just play the game as is? Its actually pretty fun.

 

I think that's a GREAT IDEA!

[BigMoneyNacku]

Rockets have ALWAYS been in UF Tac-maps. Launchers have ALWAYS been banned. Why complain about them now?

 

You can't have your cake and eat it too. If killstreaks are enabled, rockets MUST stay in the game. As far as killing a player with them. Who cares? Everyone that has played in a prior tac-map has been killed with a rocket. Again, why are people complaining about it now? All this bickering back and forth on parameters is pointless. The Directors will release a tourney and if you don't like it, don't play. If you really believe in the UF credo, then it won't matter what the final decision is. If not, then have fun somewhere else.

 

I honestly don't know how long I will personally play this game. It's still an FPS and grates on my nerves after too long. But with all the possibilities, I'm sure there will be a plethora of tournies offered with different parameters.

 

Chill out and enjoy the game for crying out loud. Hell there probably won't be a tac-map until after the first anyways.

[hitman198309]

Chill out and enjoy the game for crying out loud. Hell there probably won't be a tac-map until after the first anyways

 

Thank you! Enjoy the dang game for a bit worry about wars later!

[Kernel_Mucci]

you guys are crazy lol.... IMO if you team kill someone, then oh well...... thats your loss...

 

However I dont think it would be that fun with only UAV-Counter UAV as the only killstreaks allowed... I think we should allow most of the kill streaks, rocket launchers should be allowed(they are in some of our socom tourneys)...

 

 

no counter to UAV except a killstreak if you take out the rockets.....

 

i think the best analogy to this situation would be like taking a animal out of nature, like wiping it out completely. It throws off everything else in the ecosystem

[Covert-OPs_]

BigMoneyNacku ]

Rockets have ALWAYS been in UF Tac-maps. Launchers have ALWAYS been banned. Why complain about them now?

 

You can't have your cake and eat it too. If killstreaks are enabled, rockets MUST stay in the game. As far as killing a player with them. Who cares? Everyone that has played in a prior tac-map has been killed with a rocket. Again, why are people complaining about it now? All this bickering back and forth on parameters is pointless. The Directors will release a tourney and if you don't like it, don't play. If you really believe in the UF credo, then it won't matter what the final decision is. If not, then have fun somewhere else.

 

I honestly don't know how long I will personally play this game. It's still an FPS and grates on my nerves after too long. But with all the possibilities, I'm sure there will be a plethora of tournies offered with different parameters.

 

Chill out and enjoy the game for crying out loud. Hell there probably won't be a tac-map until after the first anyways.

 

Who's getting excited? And who isn't enjoying the game? This is a discussion, I don't see anything wrong with what is taking place here.

[PSYCHOFACTOR]

We are here to discuss the war settings pros and cons. this is a great read.

[Hellraiser]

i really dont think that rockets or hell even 203's are a big deal in MW2.. the thing with the damn 203's was in search and destroy where the enemy could launch one of those at the beginning of the round from their spawn and take out various teammates but this seems to be pretty much fixed in MW2.. the only problem is that they can still launch them at near beggingin of the round where your teammates are probably headed . but it's almost the same as nades, which i really havent seen a random nade in MW2.

[GOAT]

In testing.. on LAN with exact same gun and distance.

 

There is NO difference between Softcore on MIN health and Hardcore on MIN health. In fact the only thing Hardcore does is change the health to MIN. (besides the other things like no radar, etc.. ) I'm talking only in terms of health and hit detection-hit kill numbers..

 

So basically if you put health at MIN then you are playing at Hardcore health setting. I knew this was the case since Hardcore just places certain settings on other categories but I wanted to be sure and the test was accurate Hardcore/Softcore makes no difference for the amount of hit damage you take.. the health setting changes is all. I'm going to next see and test the differences between MIN health, Normal and Max.

[BLACKCLOUD--]

Maybe we should set up scrimmages to test different rule scenarios. The staff could post up some scenarios if they like. Then the clans can report what good and what was bad and why. Just a thought.

http://www.socom.com/en-us/Blog/Post?id=285