EPTself impulse? you mean thruster pack? i hate that shit
he means disc/nade/nitron jumping. Impulse is explosion knockback.
Tribes: Ascend - FPS announced by Hi-Rez Studios. - Page 121
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Thereisnosaurus
Australia1822 Posts
he means disc/nade/nitron jumping. Impulse is explosion knockback. | ||
|
Southlight
United States11768 Posts
On March 16 2012 06:27 syth99 wrote: I believe toggle zoom is in the Gameplay section under Options towards the bottom. You may need to hit the down arrow to shot it. The interface doesn't do a very good job of telling you there're more options down below, lol. @ outlaw :p | ||
|
ohmkerg
United States102 Posts
On March 16 2012 09:55 Coriolis wrote: Self impulse means disc jumps....You clearly haven't played T1/T2 extensively because you have no idea what I'm talking about. Also the speeds may be the same numerically wise, but in actual movement they are not. Going 300 in tribes 2 is faster than tribes ascend, not to mention much more easily attainable. who uses disc jumps? nitron all the way. i agree disc jumping could use a little boost though the games run under different engines...speed is invariably going to feel different between them, as it does between t1 and t2. you admitted before you're a new T2 player, so it's laughable to hear you chat like you're some kind of old school pro | ||
|
LagT_T
Argentina535 Posts
On March 15 2012 22:35 Coriolis wrote: Honestly its pretty hard to explain why the physics are bad. If you really want to know, go play tribes 2 (classic mod obviously, base is terrible) or tribes 1. You can just go so much faster and higher in the game, and heavies aren't slow as molasses. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un_XAYX9jws I mean theres a video of a capper in Tribes 2, and as you can see he goes much much faster than you can in TA. Oh and self impulse SUCKS so you can't really chase competently. I haven't played T2, but from that video I feel T:A way faster but more floaty, and also T:A maps also seem bigger than that one, less than 10 secs caps wtf. And that's WEIRD, as everyone states the contrary :S | ||
|
Coriolis
United States1152 Posts
On March 16 2012 10:46 LagT_T wrote: I haven't played T2, but from that video I feel T:A way faster but more floaty, and also T:A maps also seem bigger than that one, less than 10 secs caps wtf. And that's WEIRD, as everyone states the contrary :S 10-15 second caps are pretty normal on competition maps  . But believe it or not, you can chase better than in TA due to the power of disc jumps+chaingun. | ||
|
deadjawa
United States179 Posts
On March 16 2012 10:46 LagT_T wrote: I haven't played T2, but from that video I feel T:A way faster but more floaty, and also T:A maps also seem bigger than that one, less than 10 secs caps wtf. And that's WEIRD, as everyone states the contrary :S I played Tribes 1 (played competitively on the ladder) & 2 religiously (classic and normal) and I also played some T:V, and I can say that in all of them the physics felt different. I can also say that in all of them the physics aren't what made any of the Tribes sequels unsuccessful....The problem with Tribes was, and always has been, its relative inaccessibility to new players. People don't play Call of Duty, Mass Effect, Battlefield, or Medal of Honor because those games are balanced perfectly. They play them because they are marketed well, have good single player games, are easy to pick up, and have gimmicks to get people hooked into the game. Even Blizzard games like SC and Warcraft, which have insanely high skill curves, actively have sought out new casual gamers with each expansion and sequel. What "Tribes 1 Snobs" seem to forget is that (even in its prime) as many people played the Renegades mod (a casual friendly mod in which fast skiing was basically useless) as played the base mod. The people who want T:A to cater more to hardcore players need to recognize that a successful casual game is quite possibly the most important aspect of developing a game with a hardcore following. | ||
|
Rostam
United States2552 Posts
![[image loading]](http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/81/vasherickskillcount.jpg) 73 kills o.o | ||
|
Ethenielle
Norway1006 Posts
| ||
|
Aylear
Norway3988 Posts
On March 16 2012 17:30 Ethenielle wrote: 73 kills is pretty impressive although you have 1. no idea how long the game was and 2. what role he played. If you play purely defense and never chase, it's so so easy to rack up kills. 1. The game was 31:52 minutes long, and 2. He was tank in a team scrim against BOSS. Also, 3. It was streamed, and 4. Vash is freaking awesome. | ||
|
Muey
Finland149 Posts
On March 16 2012 03:10 ohmkerg wrote: As I said, I've played t1 and t2 extensively and don't find the physics to be 'awful'...and your terrible explanation of it only continues to show you have no idea what you're talking about. The T:A physics are a grabled mess of special cases and exceptions, instead of following an overall coherent and intuitive model. Here's a quick rundown of some key differencies. I probably forgot many. the trives of ascent:
Tribes 2
TL:DR; Physics in the Tribes series: Tribes 2 : ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/sg9Bf.jpg) T:A: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pkd2o.jpg) | ||
|
Tachion
Canada8573 Posts
| ||
|
Muey
Finland149 Posts
On March 16 2012 10:46 LagT_T wrote: I haven't played T2, but from that video I feel T:A way faster but more floaty, and also T:A maps also seem bigger than that one, less than 10 secs caps wtf. And that's WEIRD, as everyone states the contrary :S It's a map thing. He's running mostly back to front routes. Back to fronts in T:A are not much different in terms of cap speed. In T2 people usually preferred side routes (and many popular comp maps didn't allow back to fronts by design) because they were so much shorter to set up. In T:A the difference isn't as pronounced anymore, mostly because things like air strafing opens up a lot of possibilities for cappers, where as they previously were much more limited by the terrain design. As for map size, Most of the people clamoring for "BIG MAPS!!1" are dudes who spent their time flying around in vehicles on 64 player base servers with retarded maps. I don't think there's really that much difference between T:A maps and T2. Sure Drydock and Xfire are pretty tiny, but what makes them feel so small is more the layout than the actual size - Raindance, Dangerous Crossing, and Stonehenge weren't exactly large maps either, yet they somehow end up feeling much more 'spacious' because of the way the terrain orients the ski routes and gameplay. Wilderzone (the map in video) is probably about the size of Arx or Kata in terms of distance between bases. I suppose the lack of a hard creativity wall and the fact that you could venture outside the OOB grid is also a contributing factor on why T:A maps feel so much smaller when compared to T1/T2. | ||
|
Coriolis
United States1152 Posts
On March 16 2012 19:03 Muey wrote: It's a map thing. He's running mostly back to front routes. Back to fronts in T:A are not much different in terms of cap speed. In T2 people usually preferred side routes (and many popular comp maps didn't allow back to fronts by design) because they were so much shorter to set up. In T:A the difference isn't as pronounced anymore, mostly because things like air strafing opens up a lot of possibilities for cappers, where as they previously were much more limited by the terrain design. As for map size, Most of the people clamoring for "BIG MAPS!!1" are dudes who spent their time flying around in vehicles on 64 player base servers with retarded maps. I don't think there's really that much difference between T:A maps and T2. Sure Drydock and Xfire are pretty tiny, but what makes them feel so small is more the layout than the actual size - Raindance, Dangerous Crossing, and Stonehenge weren't exactly large maps either, yet they somehow end up feeling much more 'spacious' because of the way the terrain orients the ski routes and gameplay. Wilderzone (the map in video) is probably about the size of Arx or Kata in terms of distance between bases. I suppose the lack of a hard creativity wall and the fact that you could venture outside the OOB grid is also a contributing factor on why T:A maps feel so much smaller when compared to T1/T2. Yah, wilderzone is primarily back routes simply because they set up just as quick, cap faster, and have better approaches to the flag stand. | ||
|
Praetorial
United States4241 Posts
On March 16 2012 18:58 Tachion wrote: Haha well written. T2 physics were great. It's now 3 tribes games later (if you count AA) and they still can't even match those physics much less improve on them. If only they were able to get rid of deadstops.... Yeah, I feel like falling is just waay too slow in T:A, and it feels very slow compared to the other games. I wish Hi-Rez just decided to do a remake. | ||
|
HwangjaeTerran
Finland5967 Posts
On March 16 2012 18:38 Muey wrote: [*]After 72 kph, your jetpack essentially stops accelerating you. It mearly continues to cancels gravity, while adding 1 km/h speed in your current direction. This was really easy to demonstrate in the bella omega towers - if you're falling faster than 72 km/h, and tried to use your jetpack, you would actually FALL FASTER (at a rate of 1 km/h), instead of the jetpack slowing down your descent as you'd expect of, well, a real jetpack. [ Falling faster by using jetpack is a pretty good tell that something needs fixin. I'm pretty sure everyone has experienced the wtf moment where you try to control your descent only to make a nice big crater. | ||
|
Razith
Canada431 Posts
Why combat in tribes: ascend is shallow: http://forum.hirezstudios.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=313&t=60883 (Read this and SmoothP's post at the bottom of the page.) Yet another 100% inheritance thread (locked at 179 pages): http://forum.hirezstudios.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=313&t=56496 please address the many CORE PHYSICS ISSUES ASAP: http://forum.hirezstudios.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=313&t=60180 This game is a hackjob; its a complete joke. -The amount of content from T2 to T:A has been reduced by at least 50%. Where are all the vehicles, weapons and deployables? -Physics are not intuitive at all. The cap on jetpack acceleration and the lack of thrust vectoring makes you wonder why you have a jetpack at all. -Bad physics and air control makes chasing impossible. -Same weapon with different velocities and damages (3 different spinfusers?). Who's bright idea was this? -3/4/5 weapon loadout dumbed down to 2 weapons only. Obvious overcompensating is seen with spinfusers with 25+ ammo for this bad design choice -Picking your armor, weapons and gear removed. Now you must play a class. -Destructible bases removed. Generators only power deployables, which are tied to a single class.. -Spawning in loadouts screws the balance of this game. Take a look at a the sentinel class and tell me its not a joke. Kill him, he spawns 5 seconds later across the map from you, and keeps firing; its like he never died! -Call-ins and airstrikes. Its the offense's job, usually the heavy offense, to clear the flag stand. Now you get the unkillable sentinel perched on a hill sniping everything that moves, stacking his 'credits', and clearing the enemy flag stand with air strikes. Why is this even allowed? Any class can now call in an inventory station. -Weapon switch times are slow, and your weapons don't reload while holstered. Why was this awesome feature of the past versions removed which allowed for the insanely fast, skilled combat. | ||
|
Southlight
United States11768 Posts
On March 17 2012 00:54 Razith wrote: -Spawning in loadouts screws the balance of this game. Take a look at a the sentinel class and tell me its not a joke. Kill him, he spawns 5 seconds later across the map from you, and keeps firing; its like he never died! lol I've developed a habit of like, on maps like Crossfire if someone flushes me off the ship, I'll just trek across the map annoying ppl, and the moment anyone makes an effort to go after me I wait until they're close and then suicide. | ||
|
Tehs Tehklz
United States330 Posts
On March 17 2012 00:54 Razith wrote: -Bad physics and air control makes chasing impossible. -Destructible bases removed. Generators only power deployables, which are tied to a single class. These are incorrect. Chasing is definitely harder than capping, but it is far from impossible. Also, the generator powers the turrets and the sensors, which are both destructible, and the inventory and vehicle stations. The game definitely has problems and, honestly, I do not think most of them are going away. At least, not for a long while. Still, it is the best FPS with a healthy population. | ||
|
Razith
Canada431 Posts
On March 17 2012 15:18 Tehs Tehklz wrote: These are incorrect. Chasing is definitely harder than capping, but it is far from impossible. Also, the generator powers the turrets and the sensors, which are both destructible, and the inventory and vehicle stations. The game definitely has problems and, honestly, I do not think most of them are going away. At least, not for a long while. Still, it is the best FPS with a healthy population. Pubs are horrible for capping and chasing. Any time I play in a pub, not a single person can catch me. They either have to stop me on the grab, have a sentinel shoot me down, or in most cases, I end up having to dodge a barrage of nitron grenades as I sit at my base. Destroying the generators is useless. Have 2-3 of your sentinels constantly killing people taking your flag and roaming your map, and have them strike the enemy flag stand. The general skill level isn't high enough yet or the players haven't figured this out, but once people start getting better at this game the flaws are really going to show. That or ranked matches get implemented, and everyone plays pathfinder and sentinel. If this is the best FPS, I don't want to play FPS's.. | ||
|
Coriolis
United States1152 Posts
| ||
| ||
