PDA

View Full Version : Use The Force!


Rockstar
06-05-2003, 07:06 AM
OK WHO THINKS THAT IN THE NEW GAME LIGHT SIDE NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED??

StormHammer
06-05-2003, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by Rockstar
OK WHO THINKS THAT IN THE NEW GAME LIGHT SIDE NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED??

Please don't post in CAPS. It's considered to be SHOUTING. You can use bold or italics just as well for emphasis. Thanks. :cool:

As for the Force powers...I think both Light side and Dark side powers need to be properly balanced with each other. For every light side power there should be a Dark side counter, and vice versa. That's mostly how it is with JO, at the moment, but I would say some powers need to be tweaked a bit more. I wouldn't want to see one set of powers improved at the expense of those playing with another set of force powers, because that wouldn't be fair. My own view is that Force Drain is a little too powerful at the moment - in terms of how fast it can be used to drain a Light-siders Force pool, especially considering you need to have half your Force power to even engage Absorb. I'm sure some people will disagree with that view.

Basically...players will very rarely find common ground in these kind of matters, as the long drawn-out discussions over 'balance' in JO have already proven. I would say that I think the devs need to play-test JA to destruction when it comes to balancing issues.

Rockstar
06-05-2003, 11:27 AM
sorry about the shouting lol

but ALL of the light side powers are COUNTERS!!!! what the hell is the point of being a char that can only make a power useful when the enemy hurts you?? atleast when your dark you can randomly shoot crap and have some whacky chance of hurting the enemy.

i think that the light jedi should have an ability that once they absorb enough dark energy that they should be able to execute a short ranged attack that attacks the enemy. i think that would be veeery cool, and would give some offense to the light side. but its not evil offense... its DEFENSIVE offense ;) just like it should be..... lucas arts should seriously consider that

i also think that the sabre should beable to block force lightning :D
THAT would be ultra cool ;) not unfair either. coz you could still ground and back attack foes with it

anyways..
[U][B] could people plz post their ideas here of what they think would be cool powers or features of powers that would make a cool adition to JKA

StormHammer
06-05-2003, 12:05 PM
The reason why the Light side is full of defensive powers is because you are using the Force for good and not evil. If you had too many aggressive type powers, then really speaking you should not be Light side, in my view. Force Push at least can be used as a short range attack, especially when pushing someone to their doom off a catwalk. Personally, I wouldn't want to see too many aggressive Force powers on the Light side.

As for posting about new Force powers, etc., there is already a thread discussing that. Please keep this one on topic. :)

Prime
06-05-2003, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by Rockstar
but ALL of the light side powers are COUNTERS!!!! what the hell is the point of being a char that can only make a power useful when the enemy hurts you?? "The Force is used for knowledge and defense, never to attack." Of course the lightside powers are all counters. That is what they are supposed to be: defense!

Originally posted by Rockstar
atleast when your dark you can randomly shoot crap and have some whacky chance of hurting the enemy. If this is what you like, then play with Dark Side powers. But don't try to apply this strategy to light sided powers, because that is not what they are for.

Originally posted by Rockstar
i think that the light jedi should have an ability that once they absorb enough dark energy that they should be able to execute a short ranged attack that attacks the enemy. i think that would be veeery cool... It may be "kewl", but attacks of any sort are not what the light side is about. Again, "The Force is used for knowledge and defense, never to attack."

Originally posted by Rockstar
and would give some offense to the light side. but its not evil offense... its DEFENSIVE offense ;) just like it should be..... Not like it should be. :) The light side jedi does not need or want offensive powers. Offense with the Force is, by definition, evil.

Originally posted by Rockstar
lucas arts should seriously consider that I don't think they should, and I doubt they will :)

jesseg88
06-05-2003, 12:24 PM
Well, in JK, a light side guy could unleash a very bright light to blind people by using force blinding.

StormHammer
06-05-2003, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by jesseg88
Well, in JK, a light side guy could unleash a very bright light to blind people by using force blinding.

So could the Dark siders, in SP at least. Remember Yun used Force Blind on Kyle.

Anyway, Force Blind did nothing but blind your opponent...it didn't strip them of health. So in a way, it was a defensive, semi-offensive power.

Prime
06-05-2003, 01:06 PM
Keep in mind that Kyle is not totally a light sider. He has used both light and dark powers in the past. So I don't think he can be used as an example of a what powers a light side Jedi would use :)

Spider AL
06-05-2003, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by Prime:

Keep in mind that Kyle is not totally a light sider. He has used both light and dark powers in the past. So I don't think he can be used as an example of a what powers a light side Jedi would use

Nor can Luke, by the same rationale. Because in movie canon, it's not what powers you use that makes you light or dark, it's how you use them. Think MotS. That system was the most accurate in terms of canon... it was quite good fun, too. When I think of gameplay though, I don't mind too much. There's always one or two powers that end up being the most effective, so it doesn't matter which side contains them, or if there are sides at all.

Rockstar
06-06-2003, 07:29 AM
ok ok about my idea how i think a light jedi should beable to place points a new move and when absorb is equiped you could "store up" dark energy and use it against the enemy. i know what the light side of the force is about, and i know that yoda said that the force should only ever be used in defense. but if one could absorb dark energy IN defense and send it back in the form on an enhansed force push (powerful enough to hurt the enemy on impact and ground them) then that would be cool and still light side ethicle

you say you want realism but in the movies do you see people using force lightning every 3 seconds in a battle, force powers are used very rarely, yet in mp mode there may be a micro stint where people are not using them? im not complaining. im just saying that if the force wasn't used so much it wouldn't be a problem, but it IS and the light powers.... well SUCK!! i knwo you can still win with them .. but ....... yeah.... u get the drift

Spider AL
06-06-2003, 09:10 AM
im just saying that if the force wasn't used so much it wouldn't be a problem, but it IS and the light powers.... well SUCK!! i knwo you can still win with them .. but ....... yeah.... u get the driftI get the drift, for one. Sorry, but the Light powers have been the same since JK1, and I really like them. I hope they don't change them much at all. :)

Prime
06-06-2003, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
I get the drift, for one. Sorry, but the Light powers have been the same since JK1, and I really like them. I hope they don't change them much at all. :) I agree. I also would prefer that they went back to handling the Force in a more MOTS style, because it is closer to the movies. Oops, I might be exposing myself as a fanboy :)

I like the Light Side powers, because I don't think they "suck" and because I think they are more effective than Dark Side powers (for me). I can counter just about anything a Dark Sider can throw at me, and since another Light Sider isn't going to throw anything at me, I'm well protected. The crappy thing about Dark Side powers is that you can be vulnerable to other Dark Siders, since you have little direct protection (although there are things you can do, obviously). It is just my preference to use the Light Side, because I find I last longer with them. In any case, Raven has made it so in reality you can counter anything anyone throws at you, regardless of what side of the Force you use.

Rockstar, why do you really want to change the Light Side powers? If you hate Light Side powers so much, and love offensive stuff, why not just use Dark Side powers? Then you can play the way you want. JO is great that way :)

shock ~ unnamed
06-06-2003, 01:12 PM
I don't see much wrong with the powers, sure a little tweaking here and there but no major over haul is needed.

People tend to forget that what sucks in one game type, owns in others.

Light is great for gunning and CTF but useless in 1v1 full force dueling.

Drain is king in 1v1 FF dueling but a waste of time in CTF/guns.

Making everything “perfectly balanced” so everything is of equal use in every situation kind of defeats the purpose of even having different powers to begin with.

Prime
06-06-2003, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by shock ~ unnamed
I don't see much wrong with the powers, sure a little tweaking here and there but no major over haul is needed. I'm also pretty happy the way they are. I say leave them be.

Originally posted by shock ~ unnamed
Making everything ?perfectly balanced? so everything is of equal use in every situation kind of defeats the purpose of even having different powers to begin with. They only way to make the Force "perfectly balanced" in every situation is to turn it off. :)

Spider AL
06-06-2003, 02:18 PM
They only way to make the Force "perfectly balanced" in every situation is to turn it off. Gameplay balance is a contradiction in terms. Fun gameplay is made up of many levels of imbalance.

babywax
06-06-2003, 03:16 PM
Not if you look at the entire picture, you're just looking at small isolated parts. Look at the whole thing and then you can tell if it is balanced.

Solbe M'ko
06-06-2003, 10:55 PM
Balance can be acheived without making each side exactly the same. Balance, by definition, is two forces working oppositely, neither one being stronger (don't quote me on that). If Dark and Light have different, but equal powers, there is no problem. Some of the forces work better for certain situations, so the trick is to shift the gameplay to fit your choice. For example, if you keep losing in a duel to a guy using drain, mind trick him and give him a DFA from behind, even if he uses seeing, he is still at a disadvantage, because his force is being channeled to seeing instead of drain. As long as all the force powers have an equal amount of value (damage, force drain, protection, etc.) and the player's character has equal (or selectable) values (health, armor, force power, etc.), the game is balanced, without having every force power be an exact replica of the other one.

In saber only duels, some situations call for red stance, others for blue. Good players can use any one effectivly, while bad players use one move over and over, then call it's counter-move cheap. If a guy lunges, I hit him on the butt with a yellow, if he DFAs, I lunge. In this way, the stances are balanced, but each one is better for a certain situation.

So there.

Taran'atar
06-07-2003, 03:54 AM
Only if the dark side is improved as well.

Spider AL
06-07-2003, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by babywax:

you look at the entire picture, you're just looking at small isolated parts. Look at the whole thing and then you can tell if it is balanced.No offence, but this seems to be nonsense to me. Please elaborate, babywax.

Anyway, balance is a myth. In every multiplayer game ever made, there are less powerful weapons, and more powerful weapons. Less powerful abilities, and more powerful abilities. There are some weapons that never get used, and some weapons that always get used. That's not balanced, but it's not undesirable. Weapons of different power levels promote flow to a multiplayer match, area control for instance.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

If Dark and Light have different, but equal powers, there is no problem.Sure, that works in theory... try making it a reality though. ;) Much too difficult to be done intentionally.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

In saber only duels, some situations call for red stance, others for blue. Good players can use any one effectivly, while bad players use one move over and over, then call it's counter-move cheap. If a guy lunges, I hit him on the butt with a yellow, if he DFAs, I lunge. In this way, the stances are balanced, but each one is better for a certain situation.Not true. If they were all equally useful in an equal number of situations, they'd be balanced. They're patently not. One stance is most useful, the other stances are less useful. They require special circumstances to be useful. The same goes for guns, and force powers.

Solbe M'ko
06-07-2003, 03:51 PM
Look at CS. At first, you buy the MP5, because it's cheap and does more damage than the pistol, which is free. Later you buy the M16, because it's "the best". Hardly anyone buys shotguns, but the guy who is "good" with shotguns, can own everybody else. That game IS balanced very well, it just depends on the types of players.

As long as no particular gun is statistically better than another one, the game will be balanced. Just because players favor a certain weapon, doesn't mean that the others are not as good. The play style is a big factor on the methods you use. Campers use sniper rifles and gunners use repeaters.

And yes, certain techniques do require special circumstances, Al. That's the whole point of having more than one weapon; the good players know when to use a certain gun, and their prey do not.

Spider AL
06-07-2003, 05:18 PM
Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Look at CS. At first, you buy the MP5, because it's cheap and does more damage than the pistol, which is free. Later you buy the M16, because it's "the best". Hardly anyone buys shotguns, but the guy who is "good" with shotguns, can own everybody else. That game IS balanced very well, it just depends on the types of players.There's a fundamental flaw in your reasoning, Solbe, you assert that shotguns match rifles in balance because a person of exceptional skill can use that shotgun to win. Well of course they will! Because people of exceptional skill do exceptional things; things that other people can't do. They win using bad weapons DESPITE the drawbacks inherent in the use of those weapons, not because those weapons match all the others for usefulness.

CS is NOT balanced, and I will explain why: Two players of equal skill fight. One has a shotgun, the other a colt. Or an AK. Or a scout. The man who is not using the shotgun is guaranteed to win at almost any range. Furthermore have you ever seen a serious match demo, a tournament demo, in which the dual berrettas were used regularly to great success? What about the TMP? or the UMP? How about the Sig 550? Those weapons are rubbish. People use them to kill other people once in a blue moon, such kills are so exceptional that it's a badge of honour to have accomplished them! Call that balance?

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

And yes, certain techniques do require special circumstances, Al. That's the whole point of having more than one weapon; the good players know when to use a certain gun, and their prey do not.That is the point, my friend. If you use a flechette in 9 out of 10 situations and the disruptor in the tenth, because it's the only weapon to use, that means the two are NOT equally useful, and therefore are not balanced. IF the game was TRULY balanced, with EVERY weapon doing equal damage for equal ammo costs with exactly equal trajectories of fire, there would BE no game. It's that simple, balance is a myth.

You stated above that your definition of balance was two equal forces working against each other. Can you truly sit there and say to me that two CS players of equal skill, one with a SIG-550, or a scout, the other with an awp, would be evenly matched? Of course the weapons in CS aren't "balanced".

How about gameplay. Perhaps CS is popular because it's GAMEPLAY is so balanced. Let's examine it:

One team wins the first round by the BAREST of margins, their last surviving member kills the last surviving member of the opposing team with a lucky shot. He has one point of health left. The next round, his team starts with enough money to buy a fully automatic rifle each. Is that balanced gameplay? In tournament games, people strive beyond all reason to win the pistol round, because that one round can define the course of the rest of the game. Is that balance? Of course it isn't, it's just the way the game is, and it's a richer game for the imbalances.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

As long as no particular gun is statistically better than another one, the game will be balanced.So what you're saying here is, no multiplayer game ever made has ever been balanced? That's what you're saying, frankly. Quake: Rocket Launcher. Quake 3: Railgun. UT: Shock combo. UT2k3: Biogun, shield gun combo. CS: Awp. JK: Conky. JO: Golan/Heavy Rep.

There is always one gun that is MOST useful for the MOST people in the MOST situations. And that's what provides flow to the game. Ammo hunts and timing. Area control. Shield timing.

People throw the word "balance" around as if it's the panacea for all gaming woes. The truth is, not only is it a figment, a myth, but it also means different things to different people. You obviously have your own... unique definition of "balance", and other people have theirs. Few versions match, so all should be discarded with the realisation that "balance" has become an insubstantial buzz-word used to rationalise a gut-feeling about whether one enjoys a game or not. You can't quantify "fun", and it's futile to try.

Solbe M'ko
06-07-2003, 07:32 PM
You're not listening.

If a guy is good with a shotgun and his opponent is good with a rifle, either one can win, there is no need for one of them to be a "better" player overall. And if there was a god-like player who found that dual berettas fit his play style, he very well could win tourneys with them; they are not worse, they are just specialized to certain situations. In DOD for example, a grenadier can make just as many kills with his rifle as with the bayonet, it just depends on which he like to use.

If every gun did the same damage (which you keep bringing up for some reason) the game would be less balanced because certain play types would be excluded. If the only gun was an Uzi, then people who prefer to snipe would be left out, and so on. If all of the guns have different but equal parameters, no such problem arises. If the sniper rifle has range and damage, it also has long reloads and cost lots of ammo. If the MG can spit out thousands of rounds a minute, it has shorter range and ammo problems, etc.

Your idea that a lucky kill at the end of CS match disrupts balance is just wrong. I've been on the team that loses the opening "pistols round" and still come out on top in the end. If one team has all AKs and the other has all pistols, the pistols hide behind boxes and pick up the AKs. Now the momentum has shifted greatly...

Scout vs. AWP? The better sniper would win. Either one would need a headshot right off, because if they didn't get one, the other guy could win in one shot as they reloaded.

I played Quake 2 about a month ago online (against people who have played only Quake 2 since its release. Many of them used Railguns and Rockets, but others used Uzis and still could win. When the rocketeer fires, the uzi moves, and while the rocketeer reloads, the Uzi gets 5 headsots in a row. Balance.

There should be one gun that works best in most situations, but it can't work in all situations. If say, the "best" gun is the MG, a sniper can still own the map, a knifer can still own the map. I play DOD and usually use the "newb cannon" people say it's cheap. Look at the actual stats and it's just a good all around gun that works well in most situations. that doesn't mean I have a better chance of winning than the sniper in the window...

Sure we all have different definitions of balance, but as long as the game is technically and statistically balanced, it's all BS.

Spider AL
06-07-2003, 08:51 PM
Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

You're not listening.You're right. I'm reading. ;)

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

If a guy is good with a shotgun and his opponent is good with a rifle, either one can win, there is no need for one of them to be a "better" player overall.Oh don't be silly, of course the shotgunner would have to be better to make more kills. The rifleman can kill at any range, the shotgunner only at close range. It's the same as a knife vs. a glock. Sure, the knife man may win, POSSIBLY, but only if he closes the distance. That means he has more work to do, thus he's at a disadvantage, thus the knife is inferior to the glock. Thus the sabre is inferior to guns. Thus the impact-hammer is inferior to the guns in UT. Thus no game is balanced, and thank goodness for that.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

And if there was a god-like player who found that dual berettas fit his play style, he very well could win tourneys with them; they are not worse, they are just specialized to certain situations.He'd have to be pretty godlike to consistently prevail with dual berettas, and his play-style would have to be particularly strange. They ARE worse than say... a USP or a deagle. Less reliable, wider spread, inaccurate and HUGE reload time. They're rubbish! You'd have to be an enormous muppet to use the berettas! And you think they're balanced when compared to other guns?

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

If every gun did the same damage (which you keep bringing up for some reason) the game would be less balanced because certain play types would be excluded. If the only gun was an Uzi, then people who prefer to snipe would be left out, and so on.Nonsense, the game would be PERFECTLY balanced, it just wouldn't be any fun. You yourself defined balance as equal forces opposing each other. The only way to obtain that, is to have one weapon for everyone. Thus, "balance" is undesirable and unattainable.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

If all of the guns have different but equal parameters, no such problem arises. If the sniper rifle has range and damage, it also has long reloads and cost lots of ammo. If the MG can spit out thousands of rounds a minute, it has shorter range and ammo problems, etc.Oh, it's the "inherent disadvantages" argument. Won't wash I'm afraid. Players learn to compensate for any disadvantages that accompany a powerful weapon. You might say that since the AWP has such a low rate of fire, it should be no more or less effective than the... say, the SIG commando. Wrong. People compensate through different patterns of movement, and use of cover.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Your idea that a lucky kill at the end of CS match disrupts balance is just wrong. I've been on the team that loses the opening "pistols round" and still come out on top in the end.Lol, of course it's possible to come out on top. But is the playing field BALANCED? No. Are you at a disadvantage? Yes. Either skill or luck causes one to win when one is at a disadvantage like that, that doesn't mean for one MOMENT that the two equally skilled teams- one team armed with pistols and one team armed with fully automatic rifles- have an equal chance of winning. Of COURSE the team with rifles will win more often. One would have to be deranged to bet otherwise.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Scout vs. AWP? The better sniper would win. Either one would need a headshot right off, because if they didn't get one, the other guy could win in one shot as they reloaded.No offence, but that's just laughable. First, you still can't get by without putting the word "better" in your description of one of the hypothetical players. The whole point of that analogy was that the two players are of EXACTLY EQUAL SKILL. And I made that clear.

Secondly, the Awp not only has higher penetration than the scout (so cover is less useful), but one torso shot will dispatch the opponent in question. The scout takes two torso shots. So the Awper can afford to be MUCH less accurate, and even if the scouter hits him square in the chest, he could afford to miss once. THAT's an advantage. THAT's what tips the balance in close games. THAT's why CS is totally imbalanced in almost every respect, and that's why it's such a good game.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

There should be one gun that works best in most situations, but it can't work in all situations. There is NO gun that works better than ALL other guns, in ALL situations. You're just describing every gun in every multiplayer game ever.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Sure we all have different definitions of balance, but as long as the game is technically and statistically balanced, it's all BS.You want statistics? Check This (http://www.cs-sxe.com.ar/estadisticas1/server.html) out. And This (http://www.nomanzlan.com/stats/server.html). Now tell me all those weapons are equally useful.

Frankly as far as I can tell, your definition of "balance" is sometimes so flimsy that it could apply to any contemporary multiplayer game, and sometimes so unattainable that nobody will ever make a game that satisfies its requirements. Changeable. That's a microcosm of the whole gamut of definitions that everyone flings around. Nobody has a definitive idea of what "gameplay balance" means, and oftentimes they don't even know what their OWN idea of "balance" is.

The Count
06-07-2003, 09:03 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
You're right. I'm reading. ;)

Oh don't be silly, of course the shotgunner would have to be better to make more kills. The rifleman can kill at any range, the shotgunner only at close range. It's the same as a knife vs. a glock. Sure, the knife man may win, POSSIBLY, but only if he closes the distance. That means he has more work to do, thus he's at a disadvantage, thus the knife is inferior to the glock. Thus the sabre is inferior to guns. Thus the impact-hammer is inferior to the guns in UT. Thus no game is balanced, and thank goodness for that.

He'd have to be pretty godlike to consistently prevail with dual berettas, and his play-style would have to be particularly strange. They ARE worse than say... a USP or a deagle. Less reliable, wider spread, inaccurate and HUGE reload time. They're rubbish! You'd have to be an enormous muppet to use the berettas! And you think they're balanced when compared to other guns?

Nonsense, the game would be PERFECTLY balanced, it just wouldn't be any fun. You yourself defined balance as equal forces opposing each other. The only way to obtain that, is to have one weapon for everyone. Thus, "balance" is undesirable and unattainable.

Oh, it's the "inherent disadvantages" argument. Won't wash I'm afraid. Players learn to compensate for any disadvantages that accompany a powerful weapon. You might say that since the AWP has such a low rate of fire, it should be no more or less effective than the... say, the SIG commando. Wrong. People compensate through different patterns of movement, and use of cover.

Lol, of course it's possible to come out on top. But is the playing field BALANCED? No. Are you at a disadvantage? Yes. Either skill or luck causes one to win when one is at a disadvantage like that, that doesn't mean for one MOMENT that the two equally skilled teams- one team armed with pistols and one team armed with fully automatic rifles- have an equal chance of winning. Of COURSE the team with rifles will win more often. One would have to be deranged to bet otherwise.

No offence, but that's just laughable. First, you still can't get by without putting the word "better" in your description of one of the hypothetical players. The whole point of that analogy was that the two players are of EXACTLY EQUAL SKILL. And I made that clear.

Secondly, the Awp not only has higher penetration than the scout (so cover is less useful), but one torso shot will dispatch the opponent in question. The scout takes two torso shots. So the Awper can afford to be MUCH less accurate, and even if the scouter hits him square in the chest, he could afford to miss once. THAT's an advantage. THAT's what tips the balance in close games. THAT's why CS is totally imbalanced in almost every respect, and that's why it's such a good game.

There is NO gun that works better than ALL other guns, in ALL situations. You're just describing every gun in every multiplayer game ever.

You want statistics? Check This (http://www.cs-sxe.com.ar/estadisticas1/server.html) out. And This (http://www.nomanzlan.com/stats/server.html). Now tell me all those weapons are equally useful.

Frankly as far as I can tell, your definition of "balance" is sometimes so flimsy that it could apply to any contemporary multiplayer game, and sometimes so unattainable that nobody will ever make a game that satisfies its requirements. Changeable. That's a microcosm of the whole gamut of definitions that everyone flings around. Nobody has a definitive idea of what "gameplay balance" means, and oftentimes they don't even know what their OWN idea of "balance" is.

My aren't you passionate and consice?

Solbe M'ko
06-08-2003, 01:21 AM
Knife vs. Glock- Knifer hides behind box and takes out glock from behind. Glock would have to watch his back the whole time because the knifer would be more cautious. You can win with anything. The glocker would have to worry about reloading and wouldn't kill as quickly at close range, so the odds are pretty much even, anyway, if both players are of equal skill with their respective weapons.

AWP's damage has been reduced recently, so I'm still right. :D

If an AWPer engaged a Commando in an open area with no cover (in a big cube map) the odds would be exactly equal. The maps are made so that certain places favor certain players. Snipers have camping spots, gunners have wide open areas.

Okay, if the players were of exactly equal skill and luck was not a factor, both the AWP and the Scout would die at the same time, because they would both fire simultaneously and get head shots.

You gave me a bunch of stats for some server. that just shows who uses which guns the most, not the actual parameters for the guns. Plus, those stats most likely include all of the shots fired at teammates during the buying round by idiots, so the results are both inaccurate and useless.

Finally, what tips the balance in close games is skill. No two players are exactly the same.

yolkboy
06-08-2003, 07:14 AM
whoa..... lots of reading... my eyes hurt :D anyways....

Originally posted by shock ~ unnamed
I don't see much wrong with the powers, sure a little tweaking here and there but no major over haul is needed.

People tend to forget that what sucks in one game type, owns in others.

Light is great for gunning and CTF but useless in 1v1 full force dueling.

Drain is king in 1v1 FF dueling but a waste of time in CTF/guns.

Making everything “perfectly balanced” so everything is of equal use in every situation kind of defeats the purpose of even having different powers to begin with.

Drain can be useful in CTF. I dunno about guns... well maybe. :)

Spider AL
06-08-2003, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Knife vs. Glock- Knifer hides behind box and takes out glock from behind. Glock would have to watch his back the whole time because the knifer would be more cautious.You still can't seem to construct an argument without altering the analogy. They're both equal in skill. They both know the map equally well. Neither is better.

I feel I have to repeat that, just to make sure it's clear: They're both possess equal skill at all weapons, and equal skill at the map. So the glocker wins, because he can kill at any range. It's obvious. It's clear. There is no room for debate.

The question is not "is it possible to win using a knife". Of COURSE it's possible, for a player of greater skill, or extreme luck. It's not possible under statistically normal circumstances. THAT's why the knife is inferior to the glock, and that's why the weapons are not balanced.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

so the odds are pretty much even, anyway, if both players are of equal skill with their respective weapons.You're still going wrong: They're equal in skill with ALL weapons. They both know how to use the knife equally well. They both know how to use the glock equally well. The AWP equally well. So the glocker will win, because the knife is inferior.

It could be tested. Set up two bots of equal skill. Give one bot a melee weapon, and the other, a gun. (a gun that isn't blocked by the melee weapon.) It's simple. It's obvious. It's incontrivertable. Ranged defeats melee, power defeats weakness.


Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

AWP's damage has been reduced recently, so I'm still right. :DPresumably you're referring to 1.6. Not only do you have to resort to references to an unfinished, beta test version to support your non-starter argument, but you're bringing the debate down to an infantile level. I'm right. No, I'm right. No, I'm right. :p

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Finally, what tips the balance in close games is skill. No two players are exactly the same.Bots all have the same skill. Try it out. ;) Your argument is fatally flawed, because you ignore the inherent value (or lack of value) of weapons. You can't even apply your OWN criteria to balance a game, because you have no solid base on which to measure the values of weapons. Of course there are players so close in skill that only the acquisition of a powerful gun will tip the match one way or another. Of COURSE there are players so close in skill that a moment's lag can cost either one the match.

Let me draw it out another way: In the same situation, are all guns equally useful? Of course not, that's obvious. So whichever gun is most useful in the most different situations is the most USEFUL. In JO it was the Flechette/Heavy Rep. In Quake, the RL. In CS, it's arguably the AK/Colt/AWP. That is inherent imbalance. It's unavoidable when making a game, and any concept of balance is mythic at best.

By your rationale, ALL games are totally balanced. Well obviously that's meaningless, because anyone can make up a hypothetical situation in which even the most feeble and useless of weapons could be employed to aid victory. Just as senseless as the idea of "balance" itself, in fact.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

If an AWPer engaged a Commando in an open area with no cover (in a big cube map) the odds would be exactly equal.Ohhh so you can hit someone once in the torso with a SIG commando and kill them? Of course you can't! Of course the AWP has an advantage. Of course they're not equally powerful. Of course they're not balanced.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Okay, if the players were of exactly equal skill and luck was not a factor, both the AWP and the Scout would die at the same time, because they would both fire simultaneously and get head shots.Bahaha! Wrong. And who said anything about luck? Just because they're EQUALLY skilled, doesn't mean their skill level is superhumanly high. They might both hit each other in the torso. In which case, the AWP would win. Thus, the AWPer has the advantage. Thus, at the end of the match, the AWP player would have more kills. Thus, the two weapons are not equally powerful, not even statistically, thus they're not balanced. Quod Erat... Etcetera.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

You gave me a bunch of stats for some server. that just shows who uses which guns the most, not the actual parameters for the guns. Plus, those stats most likely include all of the shots fired at teammates during the buying round by idiots, so the results are both inaccurate and useless.You ask for statistics. I give you statistics. You then try to massage them so that they don't blow a hole in your argument. :rolleyes:

Those statistics (from TWO different servers) show that the highest numbers of kills by a LONG chalk were made with five or six guns. And five or six guns at the bottom of the scale made no kills, or hardly any kills at all. Of course the guns at the top of the scale are more effective, easier to use and totally, unutterably imbalanced. Thank god for imbalances.

Solbe M'ko
06-08-2003, 04:05 PM
DAMMIT! I wrote a lengthy response to Spider AL, and then my post never got through. Anyway, here's the gist of it:

Bots are not people so they are no gauge of the games guns. 2 bots are exactly the same, so it defeats the purpose of this argument.

Range is not the only factor that determines a guns usefulness. In a tight map with sharp corners, the short range weapons will dominate every time, because they are designed to have high damage or rate of fire, so they can kill guys that use RLs and sniper rifles.

The AWP is your weapon of choice for "most situations", but if a guy used the Commando for most situations, he would alter his play stlye and, in fact, alter those situations to fit his needs. For exmple, he would rush or use grenades or do something to surprise the sniper.

Your stats are for players, not the guns. If you looks at the values for all the guns (damage, cost, ammo, accuracy, etc.) I reckon you would get pretty close values, hence balance. Just because the AWP can kill a guy in one shot, doesn't mean it's the best. What if 2 guys with glocks show up at once?

I never said every game is balanced, nor will I ever say that. I said that some good games get close to balance by making their guns have equal strengths and weaknesses.

Spider AL
06-08-2003, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

DAMMIT! I wrote a lengthy response to Spider AL, and then my post never got through.Tee hee! :D

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Bots are not people so they are no gauge of the games guns. 2 bots are exactly the same, so it defeats the purpose of this argument.:rolleyes: That's drivel tbh. The whole point of the argument was that some guns are better than others. Give a rocket launcher to one of those bots, a pistol to the other, and let them fight. That way, you can't say that the rocket launching bot won because of his greater skill.

QED. ;)

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Range is not the only factor that determines a guns usefulness.Nobody ever said that range was the only factor that determines a gun's usefulness. Please read more carefully.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

The AWP is your weapon of choice for "most situations", but if a guy used the Commando for most situations, he would alter his play stlye and, in fact, alter those situations to fit his needs. For exmple, he would rush or use grenades or do something to surprise the sniper.In which case he would no longer "just be using the commando". He would have grenades as well. You're still giving extra skills to your hypothetical little man, aren't you! :p Well, you're not going to get away with it, no matter how hard you try. They both have one gun, no other weapons, full armour and the same training with each gun that the game has to offer. The AWPer will win, because the AWP is the most powerful weapon. One shot stop, anywhere from the bellybutton to the scalp. That's not a matter for debate, Solbe. Everyone who has eyes and a brain, knows it.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Your stats are for players, not the guns.If you read the pages more carefully than you obviously have done, you'd have seen that the stats are for the guns, and not the players.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

If you looks at the values for all the guns (damage, cost, ammo, accuracy, etc.) I reckon you would get pretty close values, hence balance.The fact that you firmly believe that all the guns in counter-strike even out is a testament to the fact that your understanding of the game is limited. It was bad enough that you were comparing the dual berettas to all the other weapons earlier, now you want to compare the glock to the AWP? Pfft. The knife doesn't cost anything, does that make it infinitely better than the AWP? What nonsense.

You obviously believe that all games are totally balanced.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Just because the AWP can kill a guy in one shot, doesn't mean it's the best. What if 2 guys with glocks show up at onceYou're giving your little hypothetical man re-enforcements now? You claim that if two guys gang up on a lone sniper that makes their measly little popguns EQUAL to his weapon? Spare me.

Frankly I'm growing more and more astonished with each successive post. :eyeraise:

StormHammer
06-08-2003, 05:04 PM
Okay, how about we balance this thread, and get back on topic? It's about balancing force powers in JA, not balancing guns in CS. Thanks. :cool:

Solbe M'ko
06-09-2003, 01:39 AM
*Grumble grumble*

Your moderater friends can't protect you forever!

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree... for now.

Anyway, the light side of the force should be improved, relative to the dark side. Light powers should serve to block/reflect the powers of the dark side, but to give light siders powers that damage or otherwise hurt the enemy wouldn't fit. If the light side was made to be mostly defensive, and the dark side made to be mostly offensive (ie. No dark rage style invulnerability), the force powers would seem far more accurate to the whole SW theme. Mixes of the 2 sides would be interesting, but impractical, as players would use one great dark side power, augmented by a light side power.

I would like to see more servers (particularly duel) that give you a force level like "jedi" instead of "Jedi master" or none at all. This way people would have to learn to use just a few force powers, and the actual physical combat would remain the most important part of the match. That is one of my major problems with the current system; if I play a duel with no powers, I can't use the occasional push, and if I play on a push server, it gets spammed. I think that a mod where the server can select the amount of force a power drains would be nice...

Rockstar
06-09-2003, 08:14 AM
IT SEEMS SOME PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CS FORUM & A JK FORUM!!!


it seems this vote is in high majority. i would think it so cool if the makers of JKA actually read this board and come accross this thread

well 2 bad darkies but it seems taht the light side needs SOME offense to hurt the enemy as it was SOOO accurately

[Anyway, the light side of the force should be improved, relative to the dark side. Light powers should serve to block/reflect the powers of the dark side, but to give light siders powers that damage or otherwise hurt the enemy wouldn't fit.]

i agree. for those FOOLS that say get rid of heal!! (idiots!) tell me, what else force wise can a light sider to to another light sider??

thankyou :).

the lightsiders need some offensive attack, i still think it would be cool if it were in the form of an "seperate", ENHANCED force push attack which hurt the enemy on impact aswell as knock back. and that if the jedi had force absorb that once their force pool was near full that bonus energy could store and be used to make the 'enhanced force push' more powerful and maybe work on a small group of enemies.

maybe ontop of that, when executing this attack the light jedi would have to drop his guard for about a *real* half second leaving him open to lightning (before his enemy was knocked back)

StormHammer
06-09-2003, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by Rockstar
IT SEEMS SOME PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CS FORUM & A JK FORUM!!!

Really, there's no need to SHOUT. You can use bold and italics just as well for emphasis. Thanks. :cool:


well 2 bad darkies but it seems taht the light side needs SOME offense to hurt the enemy as it was SOOO accurately

Er, what? Sorry, but I don't understand this sentence at all. Can you please clarify this sentence?

i agree. for those FOOLS that say get rid of heal!! (idiots!) tell me, what else force wise can a light sider to to another light sider??

Will you please stop calling everyone FOOLS and IDIOTS just for stating their opinions? You don't have to insult others to get your point across. Thanks. :cool:

the lightsiders need some offensive attack, i still think it would be cool if it were in the form of an "seperate", ENHANCED force push attack which hurt the enemy on impact aswell as knock back.

I agree that an enhanced push that can cause some damage to an opponent might be useful, especially if they are pushed into a wall or some other object. After all, this is how some of the battle droids were dealt with in TPM. The damage would be more a secondary effect of an enhanced push. But I still don't think there should be a direct offensive attack for Light siders.

boinga1
06-09-2003, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by Rockstar
the lightsiders need some offensive attack,

You may have heard of the lightsaber? :saberb:


Originally posted by Rockstar
i still think it would be cool if it were in the form of an "seperate", ENHANCED force push attack which hurt the enemy on impact aswell as knock back. and that if the jedi had force absorb that once their force pool was near full that bonus energy could store and be used to make the 'enhanced force push' more powerful and maybe work on a small group of enemies.

maybe ontop of that, when executing this attack the light jedi would have to drop his guard for about a *real* half second leaving him open to lightning (before his enemy was knocked back)

Look...maybe if, say, level 3 absorb could redirect lightning or drain back at the opponent, sure. Maybe it could actually HEAL the user, when absorbing dark powers. But Jedi DON'T USE THE FORCE FOR OFFENSE. The force is "for knowledge and defense" said by the greatest Jedi of them.

Anyway, Jedi don't really NEED offense, since they can essentially render the dark siders useless with level 3 absorb. At that point, it's a saber fight. I sugest if what you really want to do if run around hurting people with the force, but want the pretese of being a Jedi, that you say, "Screw morals; time for darkness!" because....morals aren't really that important in a COMPUTER GAME!

Prime
06-09-2003, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by Rockstar
it seems this vote is in high majority. i would think it so cool if the makers of JKA actually read this board and come accross this thread

well 2 bad darkies but it seems taht the light side needs SOME offense to hurt the enemy as it was SOOO accurately First of all, the question for the poll is "do you think that in JKA the light side be improved?". This is not asking whether the light side should have offensive powers. So the poll does not indicate that people want an offensive light side. If you really want to find out what people think of that idea, I suggest you start a new poll asking that specific question.

Originally posted by Rockstar
i agree. for those FOOLS that say get rid of heal!! (idiots!) tell me, what else force wise can a light sider to to another light sider??

thankyou :). You can mind trick them, push them, and pull them.

Originally posted by Rockstar
the lightsiders need some offensive attack... They do not need them, and should not have them. The light side is not offensive in nature. That "strategy" is reserved for the dark side. The light side's usefulness lies in defending against those darkside powers. If you like dark side powers, use the darkside. Don't ask that the light side be altered just to fit your playing style.

Spider AL
06-09-2003, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by StormHammer:

Okay, how about we balance this thread, and get back on topic? It's about balancing force powers in JA, not balancing guns in CS. Thanks.I understand your concern that we keep on-topic, but since JA hasn't been released yet, how are we supposed to discuss the (flawed and mythic) concept of "balance" without referring to other games as being analagous to our points of view? We can't really discuss JA specifically, since it doesn't exist yet!

Naturally I'll refrain from discussing CS in accordance with the moderator's judgement, but hopefully the moderator will lift this injunction.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree... for now.There is nothing more agreeable to me than disagreeing with you, Solbe. But since both our arguments speak for themselves, (those who know and play the game we were discussing will see the obviousness of the one-sidedness) there is little more to say. ;)

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Anyway, the light side of the force should be improved, relative to the dark side. Light powers should serve to block/reflect the powers of the dark side, but to give light siders powers that damage or otherwise hurt the enemy wouldn't fit. If the light side was made to be mostly defensive, and the dark side made to be mostly offensive (ie. No dark rage style invulnerability), the force powers would seem far more accurate to the whole SW theme. Oh who cares about accuracy to the "theme". 1.02 was a good example of force powers which were... well, powerful. The Dark Side wasn't dwarfed by the light, heal was not weak, etcetera.

1.02 force powers, plus the addition of a meditative healing stance and level-per-level matching of mind-trick and sight would be the ideal JO powers in my view,.. but JA powers will be a different kettle of fish. All I want to see from them is that they are all powerful. No weedy useless powers, in other words. I want to be part of a clash of titans, not a squeaky impact between mice.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

I would like to see more servers (particularly duel) that give you a force level like "jedi" instead of "Jedi master" or none at all. There are plenty of duel servers like that around my neck of the woods already. :D

Prime
06-09-2003, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Oh who cares about accuracy to the "theme". I do! Sorry, Al. I coudn't resist. :D

Originally posted by Spider AL
1.02 was a good example of force powers which were... well, powerful. The Dark Side wasn't dwarfed by the light, heal was not weak, etcetera.

1.02 force powers, plus the addition of a meditative healing stance and level-per-level matching of mind-trick and sight would be the ideal JO powers in my view,.. but JA powers will be a different kettle of fish. All I want to see from them is that they are all powerful. No weedy useless powers, in other words. I want to be part of a clash of titans, not a squeaky impact between mice. This is what I would like to see as well. I want powerful force powers that have powerful counters. Nerfing force powers isn't necessary, if there are opposing powers that are just as powerful. I'd rather Raven had gone that route when trying to tweek the gameplay balance.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko
I would like to see more servers (particularly duel) that give you a force level like "jedi" instead of "Jedi master" or none at all. This way people would have to learn to use just a few force powers, and the actual physical combat would remain the most important part of the match. Personally, I wouldn't like to see more servers with a lower force level. If you are going to have a force server, why not give the players all the tools? One of the great things about this game is the Force. To many people, the physical combat isn't the most important part. Anyone who spams something should be easily defeated. In any event, there are lots of servers out there that cater to the style you're looking for. :)

Luc Solar
06-09-2003, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by Rockstar
[B]it seems this vote is in high majority. i would think it so cool if the makers of JKA actually read this board and come accross this thread

The poll kinda sucks. We don't know what the force powers will be in JA. And *if* there will be drain and heal exactly like they are now, your poll makes no sense. Improve light side? In what way? In what game type? Make it better than dark? Why?

Everyone and their dog has commented on "light side offensive powers", so I won't go there.

for those FOOLS that say get rid of heal!! (idiots!) tell me, what else force wise can a light sider to to another light sider??

I suppose that idiot would be me. :D Actually, I didn't vote for getting rid of them altogether, but whatever..

I don't understand what you mean. What *else* can a light sider do to another? Is heal something you do to another player? :confused:
One addition to Prime's list: Force Seeing is one of the best light side powers imho.

As for the name calling... dude, you're the one who has major problems with grasping the very basics of gameplay or Star Wars. Try to behave. :)

HertogJan
06-09-2003, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by Luc Solar
One addition to Prime's list: Force Seeing is one of the best light side powers imho.

Oh... I thought force seeing was a neutral forcepower?? At least I have been using it when playing as a darksider ;) I have level 1 mostly, so I can see annoying mindtrickers... Even darksiders have counters you know :D

Prime
06-09-2003, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by Luc Solar
One addition to Prime's list: Force Seeing is one of the best light side powers imho. I agree completely. I didn't include it because you can't really use it against another player directly.

In any case, I find seeing extremely useful, and I usually have it on level 2 at least. Then you can see people before they come around corners and so on. Then you time your shots to reach the corner when they just come around it. :)

Luc Solar
06-09-2003, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by HertogJan
Oh... I thought force seeing was a neutral forcepower??

DUH! :o

Umm... I knew that! I was just testing you guys! :rolleyes: :D

yolkboy
06-09-2003, 07:27 PM
My eyes hurt from using seeing... :cool: Must put on the shades.

Solbe M'ko
06-09-2003, 07:59 PM
I won't go into any further argument with Al on this thread, because he's obviously going to hold his own views quite stubbornly, so I'll leave it to forum surfers to decide what balance is to their mind.

Anyway, I don't like the idea of giving a hurtful push to light siders, that would be just the same as giving them lighning or any other offensive move. I think that lightsiders should have, say, better acrobatics or dodging techniques or something (although that wouldn't be fair to darkies, so just something similar). Anakin Solo went into a sort of super force mode in one of the EU novels (and believe it or not, if you play this game, you will be endorsing the EU.). That could be a neat addition, maybe. How 'bout a stun move like Obi Wan used to kill Maul. You could turn it on, and the enemy's defence would lower for a few seconds. I really can't offer a solution to the light side problem, but that's what I've got add for right now.

yolkboy
06-10-2003, 03:57 AM
Originally posted by Solbe M'ko
How 'bout a stun move like Obi Wan used to kill Maul. You could turn it on, and the enemy's defence would lower for a few seconds.
Stun Move? I thought Obi flipped himself up out of the pit and used the force to pull Qui-gon's lightsaber to him. I think that caught Maul off guard which gave Obi the opportunity to slice Maul in half.

Spider AL
06-10-2003, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

I won't go into any further argument with Al on this thread, because he's obviously going to hold his own views quite stubbornly, so I'll leave it to forum surfers to decide what balance is to their mind.And replying at the same level of maturity:

I win. :D

Originally posted by yolkboy:

Stun Move? I thought Obi flipped himself up out of the pit and used the force to pull Qui-gon's lightsaber to him. I think that caught Maul off guard which gave Obi the opportunity to slice Maul in half.Yeah, that was what he did. Trouble was, it was filmed and cut so slowly that there's no explanation for Maul's lack of reaction. This uber-martial-artist has a full second and a half to react, to do SOMETHING. But he doesn't. Bleh.

In order to explain the shoddy, feeble direction away, some assert that Obi used a "special mind-trick". In the screenplay released at the time however, there's no mention of any such thing.

Prime
06-10-2003, 01:34 PM
Originally posted by Solbe M'ko
I won't go into any further argument with Al on this thread, because he's obviously going to hold his own views quite stubbornly, so I'll leave it to forum surfers to decide what balance is to their mind. I ended up disagreeing with you in this case. It seemed that most of your examples involved external influences that made up for the inherent disadvantages of the smaller weapons. :(

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko
Anyway, I don't like the idea of giving a hurtful push to light siders, that would be just the same as giving them lighning or any other offensive move. I do agree with this though :)

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko
and believe it or not, if you play this game, you will be endorsing the EU. Or I'll just be playing this Star Wars game because it has lightsabers in it. I'm pretty indifferent to the EU, but I don't see how me buying this game makes a statement on how I see the validity of the EU.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko
How 'bout a stun move like Obi Wan used to kill Maul. You could turn it on, and the enemy's defence would lower for a few seconds. As others have stated, this simply didn't happen.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko
I really can't offer a solution to the light side problem... I'm not convinced that there is a problem with the light side that needs fixing.

StormHammer
06-10-2003, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
I understand your concern that we keep on-topic, but since JA hasn't been released yet, how are we supposed to discuss the (flawed and mythic) concept of "balance" without referring to other games as being analagous to our points of view? We can't really discuss JA specifically, since it doesn't exist yet!

I understand your argument, and if this game was the first in a series and focused on guns alone, of course your debate over balancing guns would be very relevant. However, I think you've taken my comment too literally. Of course there is a frame of reference for JA...Jedi Outcast. It is the closest to JA in terms of the gameplay style, Force powers, etc. We know there will be differences - as you rightly say, until JA arrives we cannot discuss in any detail specific points of balance until we know what they are. But in this thread you're free to discuss how the mechanics of JA (specifically regarding Force powers) might be improved in relation to JO, and even JK. Sorry my previous post lacked clarity. :)

yolkboy
06-10-2003, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Yeah, that was what he did. Trouble was, it was filmed and cut so slowly that there's no explanation for Maul's lack of reaction. This uber-martial-artist has a full second and a half to react, to do SOMETHING. But he doesn't. Bleh.

In order to explain the shoddy, feeble direction away, some assert that Obi used a "special mind-trick". In the screenplay released at the time however, there's no mention of any such thing.
Heh... Poor editing/filming tsk tsk. Thanks for clearing it up.

Solbe M'ko
06-10-2003, 08:11 PM
"Deep breaths, man, just deep breaths..." :o

:rolleyes: I didn't say that Obi Wan used force blind, or something to that extent, nor did I say that he should. I just think that there should maybe be a move that lowers the enemy's defence, perhaps in the form of psyching him out. If you could use "Force Determination" or "Force Growl" or something like that, your enemy would be stunned for a critical moment. Anyway, the fact is, to my mind, the light side powers should give the player passive defensive abilities, beyond those of the dark-siders.

Spider AL
06-10-2003, 09:20 PM
Originally posted by StormHammer:

I understand your argument, and if this game was the first in a series and focused on guns alone, of course your debate over balancing guns would be very relevant. However, I think you've taken my comment too literally. Of course there is a frame of reference for JA...Jedi Outcast. It is the closest to JA in terms of the gameplay style, Force powers, etc. We know there will be differences - as you rightly say, until JA arrives we cannot discuss in any detail specific points of balance until we know what they are. But in this thread you're free to discuss how the mechanics of JA (specifically regarding Force powers) might be improved in relation to JO, and even JK. Sorry my previous post lacked clarity. :)Ah, I understand. Though I feel that using only analogies related to the three JK games is kind of limiting to the evolution of a discussion, I'm aware that a thread can go off-topic rather badly in the wrong direction and that you're just trying to keep it on the straight and narrow. And civil, more importantly. I empathise.

"Balance" doesn't exist though. :D

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

I didn't say that Obi Wan used force blind, or something to that extent, nor did I say that he should.Actually you said this: "How 'bout a stun move like Obi Wan used to kill Maul. You could turn it on, and the enemy's defence would lower for a few seconds." And I pointed out that Obi used no such move, nor did he stun the Sith in any other way according to the screenplay. Your idea for a stun move is workable though, despite the illegitimacy of its conception. :)

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko:

Anyway, the fact is, to my mind, the light side powers should give the player passive defensive abilities, beyond those of the dark-siders."Passive"? If by "passive" you mean "always on" then such things are tedious and unneccesary. Perhaps those who are too lazy to click the absorb button once every half a minute or so would benefit from such things, but I can't see who else would. One's ability to choose where and when to use all one's Force Powers (and the ability to turn them off to produce certain effects) is the key to playing well, and the key to winning matches. Taking powers out of players' control and/or adding new powers that players can't control is asking for trouble.

BloodRiot
06-10-2003, 11:47 PM
Well i'm not too keen of making up new force powers that we havent had the chance of seeing either in the movies or the many forms of EU...

But for all that want to enable the light side to give a few bites of it's own without getting into a more dark sidish MO i think we have a very good reference i nthe past jedi knights that is pretty damn well good in my opnion which is Force Blind.

Also, Movie Battles Mod presented a version of Persuation that I find much more true to the name. If you persuade someone (must be targeted) that persona cannot attack for the duration of the power or until it is attacked first by the force user... I was never too keen of force power being a name for invisibility.
I think Force Persuation is a power that could have several uses and it's really poor to reduce it to invisibility. Maybe making it random effects when used, all of them to confuse or other wise difficulting the attack of the opponent. Something like what i wrote above seen in movie battles, a temporary "dizzyness" effect that makes the character less responsive to the players controls or even creating mirror images of the force persuation user... ("I'm not here... I'm actually THERE!" ;p)

I DO agree that the light side is too based on counters and it's always more fun to have one or two powers that dont depend on the opponent's action to work.

Rockstar
06-12-2003, 06:51 AM
right on blood riot

i do agree the light side isn't necessarily weak, but it does need to be less counter based. i still think even just having an attack which was in the form of an enhanced push which could be used when enough energy from force absorb had been obtained.

i think that blinding should be re-introduced :)

also i think that force drain shouldn't have anywhere near the fan it has, i think that it should be targeted like push and pull.

i agree also that both sides should have force 'telekinesis' where they can lift up enemies and objects and throw them around..... why should only the dark side have it?? lol telekinesis is the force in its [U]PURIST[U] form. not darkest lol

but darkies should still get the move around grip ability when on lvl 3

BloodRiot
06-12-2003, 11:20 AM
Force Telekenisis as u put it should even be a neutral power... the distinction between telekenisis and grip is that while holding a person with telekenisis it doesnt cause damage.

And grip should not have the move around ability but since JA allows power combinning it COULD be combined with telekenisis for move action.

The new force powers that were reported in the articles sound like a good addition to me. the force sense or something like that appealed to me.

Force drain should be removed in my opinion or at least be really weak in comparison to force heal. and Lightning should be the cream of the crop dark side power that costs big time to have it. Maybe spamming can be controlled likethat.

But to be honest wether its neutral, light or dark side powers... i would prefer to have utilitary powers rather tha offensive/defensive powers.

Prime
06-12-2003, 01:07 PM
Originally posted by Rockstar
i do agree the light side isn't necessarily weak, but it does need to be less counter based. How are you going to change it so that it isn't counter-based but not an attack?

Originally posted by Rockstar
i agree also that both sides should have force 'telekinesis' where they can lift up enemies and objects and throw them around..... why should only the dark side have it?? lol telekinesis is the force in its [U]PURIST[U] form. not darkest lol Force Push and Pull are telekenisis, and both sides have that now. Lifting someone and throwing them around to hurt them is using the Force for offensive purposes, which is, of course, the dark side.

Spider AL
06-12-2003, 02:01 PM
Force Push and Pull are telekenisis, and both sides have that now. Lifting someone and throwing them around to hurt them is using the Force for offensive purposes, which is, of course, the dark side.Hmmmm, one could grip someone in self-defence. Luke used it in RotJ on a gammorean or two, too.

Hey, this canon stuff is fun! :D

Solbe M'ko
06-13-2003, 01:44 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember anyone in the movies being choked and lifted off the ground by the force alone. DV lifted that guy in ANH with his hands, and all of his other chokes didn't move anyone, just made them cough and hack and so on. I don't think choke would work against a jedi, personally. Those really powerful, insta-kill moves would only work on "the weak minded". In my own personal opinion, I think that those sorts of moves should be taken out of MP and reserved for SP, where they make more sense. The MP force powers should be little momentum shifters, as well a few lightnings and pushes.

Spider AL
06-13-2003, 11:56 AM
I think that those sorts of moves should be taken out of MP and reserved for SP, where they make more sense. Grip's been a part of the series from the beginning... I see no reason to remove it.

Prime
06-13-2003, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by Spider AL
Hmmmm, one could grip someone in self-defence. Luke used it in RotJ on a gammorean or two, too.

Hey, this canon stuff is fun! :D All the more reason to follow the MOTS system of the Force. :)

I was refering, however, to the comment by Rockstar:

both sides should have force 'telekinesis' where they can lift up enemies and objects and throw them around..... why should only the dark side have it?? lol telekinesis is the force in its [U]PURIST[U] form. not darkest lol

Lifting someone up and throwing them around, all the while gripping them, sounds pretty "dark side" to me :D

Rockstar
06-16-2003, 07:42 AM
umm prime.... i mean no offense when i say you seem to be a stubborn dark sider

in episode 1 qui-gon !PUSHED! the droids to the ground and DAMAGED Them......... he used the force to HURT!!! OMG!!!! ..... OOOMMMMMGGGGGG!!!!!!!! all im saying is allow for a nastier push so the light side aint just a sitting duck who just has a counter button for everything.

in Ep 2 anikin levitates balls in the air, although he shouldn't use the force for leasure (as he saids) it is still in the light side's range and even LUKE!! lifts things like rocks

i was refering to the ability to lift someone up and throw them about in to obsticles, force push can send people frontward into walls, telekinesis would allow more 3d movement

you seem to think that the light side is only capable of creating shields and healing which is just not correct. im sorry.

the dark side however, has grip on the otherhad which is dark due to the fact it kills the victim offensively and painfully (due to stragulation) and a dark one can enjoy watching his victim choke to death .... muhahahaha (gotta love it) :cool:

toms
06-16-2003, 12:46 PM
if you accept that lightside powers aren't usually offensive, then they have to be fairly defensive. You can then make these defensive powers either passive or active.

Personally, i really dislike the idea of passive defensive powers, it often seems as if people just turn on their defensive powers and then forget about them (until they have to turn them on again), almost rurning them into some form of permanent shield.

To my mind that doesn't seem as fun as the darkside powers, where you have to actively aim, time and unleash a lot of the attacks. (rather than just turning the attack on and then it automatically attacking anyone coming into range... the game wouldn't be much fun if it worked that way. )

So, if the developers wanted to make the light side more fun for me then they would need to make the light side powers into much more active, focused defensive powers.

Good examples might be Absorb or Protect, i would rather that these had to be aimed, much like offensive powers, so that to get the most from them you would have to keep the attacker under the crosshairs and have the button depressed.

This might mean you would have to re-balance some of the offensive powers, slightly reducing their damage, but make the defensive powers more efficient (once the defender manages to target their attacker) and make defending more skill based and less passive.

---

Other possible lightside powers might be Slow (reduces the target to walking pace, no jumping), or Shield from Force (prevents the user using force powers while under crosshair)

---

Persuasion (at least in team games) should make you appear as if you are on the other team (model and colour).

----

I liked the MotS system too, although maybe they could combine it with the JO one, and then factor in weapons, so maybe if you pick more powerful force powers you loose weapon skills, and picking higher level lightside powers might close off opposite darkside powers (and visa versa)

eg: player can put one star into grip ok, 2 stars and he can't pick the opposite lightside power, but if he puts all three stars into grip then he looses the opportunity to pick any lightside powers.

This allows jedi to experiment with opposite powers at low levels, but if they truely master the full power of a power on one side then they are tied to that side. (Luke only does small chokes as threats, not full on vader death chokes) :D

HertogJan
06-16-2003, 01:36 PM
Great post toms :) Although I don't agree with you on all points, you have some very good ideas!

Personally, i really dislike the idea of passive defensive powers, it often seems as if people just turn on their defensive powers and then forget about them (until they have to turn them on again), almost rurning them into some form of permanent shield.


Yup, I already find most lightside powers too passive anyway, this would even increase that feeling!! Maybe light and dark side could both have some sort of passive ability, but it shouldn't be too powerfull.

So, if the developers wanted to make the light side more fun for me then they would need to make the light side powers into much more active, focused defensive powers.


I agree, that's why the lightside never appealed to me!

liked the MotS system too, although maybe they could combine it with the JO one, and then factor in weapons, so maybe if you pick more powerful force powers you loose weapon skills, and picking higher level lightside powers might close off opposite darkside powers (and visa versa)

eg: player can put one star into grip ok, 2 stars and he can't pick the opposite lightside power, but if he puts all three stars into grip then he looses the opportunity to pick any lightside powers.


Great!! Although the lower levels of most powers mean nothing :) Except maybe lvl 1 seeing, I use that a lot :)

Rockstar
06-20-2003, 07:10 AM
as people say:

the lightside is dull

and in my opinion, in JKII was made unfaithful to SW when compared to the dark side.

i agree toms made some valid points, tho i disagree that you think that the shields should be aimed because that would be VEEERRY arkward and make the lightside even less appealing lol

i did like your ideas on force powers tho like:

- force slow (decreasing the speed of your target)

- force lightning should DEFINATELY BE BLOCKABLE WITH THE SABRE

- force lightning should be changed so it is not like a fan but like a concentrated stream (like in the movies) and does more damage and pushes enemies back

- imo i also think the idea of light jedi having a new power which once absorbed enough lightning and/or grip to make a small offensive force attack (eg an enhanced push which does damage on impact) would make the light side much cooler

- force conviction: can slow down the enemy targeted and possible null the effect of dark rage

Prime
06-20-2003, 05:12 PM
Originally posted by Rockstar
umm prime.... i mean no offense when i say you seem to be a stubborn dark siderActually, I only play using the lightside. Just my opinion, but I find it to be more powerful than the dark side. It provides everything I need to be effective.

Originally posted by Rockstar
in episode 1 qui-gon !PUSHED! the droids to the ground and DAMAGED Them......... he used the force to HURT!!! OMG!!!! ..... OOOMMMMMGGGGGG!!!!!!!! all im saying is allow for a nastier push so the light side aint just a sitting duck who just has a counter button for everything. Note that he pushed a droid. Droids are not living things. Its just like pushing a toaster, blender, or TV. To my knowledge, I don't think we ever see a good guy force pushing another living person. But, this is a game, not a movie, and force push is equally useful for both sides.

Originally posted by Rockstar
in Ep 2 anikin levitates balls in the air, although he shouldn't use the force for leasure (as he saids) it is still in the light side's range and even LUKE!! lifts things like rocks Sure they lift things. And this ability is used when you force push/pull (i.e. moving things with your mind). I am not arguing that lifting things is bad. But you are not talking about lifting people up and throwing them around. A bit different, no? But if you really want to do it, it is already available. Just play using the dark side.

Originally posted by Rockstar
i was refering to the ability to lift someone up and throw them about in to obsticles, force push can send people frontward into walls, telekinesis would allow more 3d movement Once again, the dark side can already do this, so if you like this idea, you are certainly able to use it.

Originally posted by Rockstar
you seem to think that the light side is only capable of creating shields and healing which is just not correct. im sorry. When I did I say that? The light side can also push and pull, mind trick people, see others behind walls, and so on. Add on top of that the ability to absorb and heal, and the light side becomes very powerful. But note that powerful != attacking someone with the Force.

Originally posted by Rockstar
the dark side however, has grip on the otherhad which is dark due to the fact it kills the victim offensively and painfully (due to stragulation) and a dark one can enjoy watching his victim choke to death .... muhahahaha (gotta love it) :cool: If you think the dark side is so cool (which it is), why don't you play that way? Why do you feel the need to have offensive powers added to the light side?

Rockstar
06-20-2003, 09:46 PM
umm prime....... the light side can already PUSH enemies and harm them by slamming them into obsticles. you seem to think that push and pull can move sideways, when ofcoarse you can't. in ROTJ luke levitates C3PO?? he doesn't do this to anyone else because he never has the need (nor did they have the specs to do it without it coming off lame). i really do go the light side but the fact is the light side is DULL

the dark side has the character it should, the light side needs a 'force reflect' to send back lightning and drain LIKE YODA (THE JEDI MASTER HIMSELF!!!) DOES IN EP2!!!!!

you CANNOT counter that arguement
Yoda is the lightest and most powerful lightsider. so! the light side can REFLECT in DEFENSE which still keeps the "only when attacked" attire of the lightside

this move would give the lightside some cool character too
i explained this move in another thread

also blinding and other "mind tricks" would also be cool to the light side

Rockstar
06-21-2003, 04:19 AM
in ROTJ we see luke use grip?? imo that is more dark than pushing or pulling, yet he is a light jedi??

hmmm

i think that it should be made that the neutral force powers are the most used... maybe thats an answer?

Luc Solar
06-21-2003, 05:45 AM
Arg.

Whether or not something happens in teh moviez, doesn't mean that it should be in the game.

In the game we have (atm) two sides of the force. You can not "fall to the dark side" suddenly...you choose your side and stick with it.

If we didn't have two sides of the force (which we do have in JO) THEN we might think about having offensive powers for "almost light siders". But with the system we got (Dark OR Light), these powers would not only unbalance the game but also make it much more compicated to light siders (darkies would still have their simple controls) and require a whole lot of additional programming.

If the power would work as desribed in some other thread it would make no difference in MP. And if it actually made a difference somehow, then light side would become overpowered and no-one would want to play dark anymore.

As for "storing" dark side power >> who would keep spamming lightning on someone who has their absorb-like "taking all your lightning and shooting it back in your face later"-power on?

Answer: only those people who waste their entire flechette's ammo on two guys who are in dueling mode and yells "cheat!! U LAMER Y dont U DIE!!1". :D

Solbe M'ko
06-21-2003, 04:51 PM
This isn't quite on topic, but in one of the books, Tales From the Empire, I think, force choke isn't described so much as a physical choke, but more like a force acting on the respiratory system in general.

Um... also, personally, I don't think of Luke as a "light" jedi in the sense of the prequel movies. He is a little more flexible than, say, Qui Gon Jin. He is like the new breed of jedi. He only choked those Gamorreans to get past them, not to kill them. That's just my opinion.


I think the force powers need to be reworked so that they cannot overshadow the saber combat. They should offer slight shifts in the gameplay, not make or break a match, like grip and heal can right now.

Rockstar
06-22-2003, 11:27 AM
i strongly agree with you there

the powers should be reworked so that they should not overshaddow sabre combat. i think that the neutral powers should dominate the game rather than the side specific powers.

think about it, you can't actually gain THAT much advantage by using jump, push or pull, when compared to say... protect or lightning??

you never see the jedi in the movies zap each other etc when they have actually enguaged in a sabre fight

they need to make the force powers slower paced in mp so that they are not so dominating, they should be extra's to aid you in combat but should not decide a battles outcome. to do this they should be slowed down in pace eg one must walk to use lightning, and lightning should affect a single target with a single stream of lightning, the light can counter this with absorb, which is changed so that the jedi can only walk, but with his hand infront of him with a shield infront of him.

also the force reflect idea would be cool (i mentioned in another thread)

drain should be removed all together, not just because of its annoyance, but because i could never really see a sith really using it in the movie :rolleyes:

Prime
06-22-2003, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by Rockstar
umm prime....... the light side can already PUSH enemies and harm them by slamming them into obsticles. Not in MP they can't. You can't get hurt by being pushed into something. They can be pushed off a cliff though. :)

Originally posted by Rockstar
you seem to think that push and pull can move sideways, when ofcoarse you can't. in ROTJ luke levitates C3PO?? he doesn't do this to anyone else because he never has the need (nor did they have the specs to do it without it coming off lame). When exactly did I say that? I was saying that the power of moving things with your mind is what gives a Jedi both his ability to push someone, and his ability to lift someone. So, the fact that everyone in the game can push/pull, this represents that everyone can move things with your mind. The point is, the game does not need to allow lightsiders to lift people up and throw them around into things to show they can move things with their minds.

Originally posted by Rockstar
i really do go the light side but the fact is the light side is DULL And here, once again, is the problem. You complain all about how the light side is "lamerz" and "not kewl", and how the dark side is "l33t" and "ownz". Yet you say you play the light side. Why? Why do you insist on playing the light side when it is "dull" and the dark side has the abilities that you want to use?

Originally posted by Rockstar
the dark side has the character it should, the light side needs a 'force reflect' to send back lightning and drain LIKE YODA (THE JEDI MASTER HIMSELF!!!) DOES IN EP2!!!!! Luc has said this best. This is a game, not a movie. Adding something like this would give an unfair advantage to the light side. Just because Yoda does it, who as you say is "JEDI MASTER HIMSELF!!!", does that mean every Jedi can do it? I would say that he is probably a special case. Should every player be able to lift up things the size of X-Wings and move them around too?

Originally posted by Rockstar
you CANNOT counter that arguement. Yoda is the lightest and most powerful lightsider. so! the light side can REFLECT in DEFENSE which still keeps the "only when attacked" attire of the lightside I just did. :D

Originally posted by Rockstar
this move would give the lightside some cool character too
i explained this move in another thread The light side does not need "cool character". It has all the "character" is needs now. Those of us to play using the light side do so because it has all the abilities we want right now. If I wanted dark side powers, I would play using the dark side. Why don't you do the same?

Originally posted by Rockstar
in ROTJ we see luke use grip?? imo that is more dark than pushing or pulling, yet he is a light jedi?? Of course, he does also almost decend to the dark side at the end of the movie. :)

Originally posted by Luc Solar
Whether or not something happens in teh moviez, doesn't mean that it should be in the game.

In the game we have (atm) two sides of the force. You can not "fall to the dark side" suddenly...you choose your side and stick with it. Exactly. Gameplay is key here.

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko
I think the force powers need to be reworked so that they cannot overshadow the saber combat. They should offer slight shifts in the gameplay, not make or break a match, like grip and heal can right now. I disagree. Being powerful with the Force defines the Jedi. Besides, there are many players who do not play the JK series just because of lightsabers. People want to be able to have lots of force powers. Why limit this? This is the thing that lead to nerfed powers in 1.03 and 1.04. Why is it bad that the Force can help decide the outcome of a battle. If you don't like to play this way, you can certainly play on a NF server.

Originally posted by Rockstar
i think that the neutral powers should dominate the game rather than the side specific powers.

think about it, you can't actually gain THAT much advantage by using jump, push or pull, when compared to say... protect or lightning?? Why should neutral powers dominate? Why have light and dark if they aren't going to be as effective anyway? All powers should be equally useful.

Originally posted by Rockstar
you never see the jedi in the movies zap each other etc when they have actually enguaged in a sabre fight Probably because, just like JO, the zapping done by the dark side can be countered by the light side. And so, it is not as effective at that point. The game does this now anyway.

Originally posted by Rockstar
they need to make the force powers slower paced in mp so that they are not so dominating, they should be extra's to aid you in combat but should not decide a battles outcome. to do this they should be slowed down in pace eg one must walk to use lightning, and lightning should affect a single target with a single stream of lightning, the light can counter this with absorb, which is changed so that the jedi can only walk, but with his hand infront of him with a shield infront of him. Slower? Why? What purpose would it serve? Why should it not have the ability to decide a battle's outcome? This is the kind of thing that lead to the dreaded 1.03 patch. I get the impression that you have a hard time countering some of the attacks people do against you. Instead of learning how to defeat these attacks, you want to have them limited or removed from the game all together. You just want the game changed around just to fit how you want to play.

Originally posted by Rockstar
also the force reflect idea would be cool (i mentioned in another thread) Luc has explained why this would not work.

Originally posted by Rockstar
drain should be removed all together, not just because of its annoyance, but because i could never really see a sith really using it in the movie Well, there you have it. You can't counter drain, so you want it removed. Just because we don't see it in the movie, does that mean the power does not exist?

Rockstar
06-23-2003, 11:17 AM
ummm prime

i think you've misinterpreted some facts here

i DON'T want the game changed to fit around ME! i find the light side quite easy to use. its just a simple case of having your absorb and heal keys hotkeyed easily.

i have not trouble at all countering any dark attacks.

its just i like the good guys for some reason in most things. but this isn't a case about ME. i want the light side to appeal more to OTHER people. they gave the darkside grip and lightning which look very cool, its just the lightside imho (which may not be yours) does not compete with the "coolness" of the darkside because its powers all do pretty much the same thing

i don't see what the harm in a "force reflect" would do if LIGHTNING WAS REWORKED. i said that! the current lightning would not work for it. read my description CAREFULLY...

i simply said the game should be slowed to give a more 'cool' and 'realisitic' feeling to the game. you don't see jedis running around in circles swinging sabers wilding with one hand and shooting confetti with the other. i was just SUGGESTING something that might hype up the atmosphere so it would feel more starwarsy and less "quake 3 frag festy" .... if you kinda follow?? i do love the frag festivity for guns, but sabers only it might've been a change of pace.

i just simply want the light side to have more of a definate characteristical feeling, and just suggested some ways... the addition of force blinding and other such powers would also aid this.

anyways, my 2 cents. catcya:D

Rockstar
06-23-2003, 11:27 AM
to reply to luc solars arguement

one could already argue that the light controls are harder than the dark, but are still quite easy once mastered.

wtf is difficult about having absorbed hotkeyed (lets say "KEY A") and reflect hotkeyed (KEY B). someone uses lightning. press key A. you watch a tiny bar on the side of your screen. then you can press key B when you want and send it back.

as i said DARKIES COULD COUNTER REFLECTED LIGHTNING WITH THEIR OWN! (eg DOOKU & obi wan) and this is NOT unfair as the darkies would have much more mana than the jedi's reflected energy. and if lucas arts made it so the red stance could block lightning at the expense of force, then there is nothing to loose??

and you make it sound like someone could just reflect lightning all day. .... remember you have to absorb the lightning first. and if nobody uses it on you then you are just weaker as u've put points on a non-used move (like absorb when light vs light)

also to make it fair the absorbed energy bar would slowly begin to go down immediately after dark energy and stopped being absorbed.

Prime
06-23-2003, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by Rockstar
ummm prime

i think you've misinterpreted some facts here

i DON'T want the game changed to fit around ME! But to me, this is how it comes across. You want to pretend that you are a good Jedi, but want to be able to use attacking powers, like the dark side. This is how you want the game to be. I haven't seen many other people complain that the light side does not have enough offensive attacks. You seem to have decided how you want to play, and want the game system changed accordingly.

Originally posted by Rockstar
i find the light side quite easy to use. its just a simple case of having your absorb and heal keys hotkeyed easily.

i have not trouble at all countering any dark attacks. Fair enough.

Originally posted by Rockstar
its just i like the good guys for some reason in most things. but this isn't a case about ME. i want the light side to appeal more to OTHER people. Again, you are the one that has complained that the dark side has all the cool powers and that the light side is boring. You are the one that thinks that the light side should have offensive attacks. This isn't about other people wanting these changes, this is about you wanting these changes.

Originally posted by Rockstar
they gave the darkside grip and lightning which look very cool, its just the lightside imho (which may not be yours) does not compete with the "coolness" of the darkside because its powers all do pretty much the same thing Your opinion that the light side isn't cool is fine. You are entitled to feel that way. Where I take issue is that you want the game changed to reflect your opinion. This is because I and others feel that the light side powers do not do pretty much the same thing, and that it is fun to play as it is.

Originally posted by Rockstar
i don't see what the harm in a "force reflect" would do if LIGHTNING WAS REWORKED. i said that! the current lightning would not work for it. read my description CAREFULLY... Luc has already explained what the harm is. It would likely cause nobody to use the dark side, because the lightside would have both offensive and defensive powers, and the dark side would only have offensive. This would make the light side inherently more powerful.

Originally posted by Rockstar
i simply said the game should be slowed to give a more 'cool' and 'realisitic' feeling to the game. you don't see jedis running around in circles swinging sabers wilding with one hand and shooting confetti with the other. i was just SUGGESTING something that might hype up the atmosphere so it would feel more starwarsy and less "quake 3 frag festy" .... if you kinda follow?? i do love the frag festivity for guns, but sabers only it might've been a change of pace. I don't see how slowing stuff down makes it more star wars. The lightsaber duels in the movies are fast an furious, with lots of moves and quick counter moves. This is reflected with the fast pace of JO. Slowing it down would make it less like the movies.

And keep in mind, many people play this game because it is a quake 3 frag fest. Raven has to cater to those players as well. Personally, I think they have a good balance between the two.

Originally posted by Rockstar
i just simply want the light side to have more of a definate characteristical feeling, and just suggested some ways... the addition of force blinding and other such powers would also aid this. The game has been designed so that both sides do have a characteristic feeling. The light side is defensive, and the dark side is offensive. Suggestions on how to improve things is great. But I disagree with the suggestions you have given, because I feel that they do not fit into the system in place, and that they would adversely affect the gameplay.


Originally posted by Rockstar
anyways, my 2 cents. catcya:D And your two cents is certainly welcome :) I'm not trying to dump on your ideas, but I do disagree with most of them, and I state why. I'm not trying to make it a personal attack. :)

Rockstar
06-24-2003, 02:24 AM
thats all cool man

Another thing u misinterpreted was the fact that i just wanted the use of !force powers! slowed down. NOT saber combat. the saber engine was by far the greatest enhancement of JO. if you think about it if force powers were slowed down, and the saber combat remained the same, then the battles would be much more saber based.

i have no beef with force powers, however i know for a fact i am not alone when i say that there are many people who wish to keep the force powers but at the same time without them overshaddowing saber combat. this is a long arguement and i simply think that that is a POSSIBLE fix, that is all.

i think the speed of saber fights is great personally. this was just a suggestion to the problem that hundreds complain about

Prime
06-24-2003, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by Rockstar
thats all cool man

Another thing u misinterpreted was the fact that i just wanted the use of !force powers! slowed down. NOT saber combat. the saber engine was by far the greatest enhancement of JO. I stand corrected. Sorry about that :D

BloodRiot
06-25-2003, 10:21 AM
I think the MOTS system would be great. Maybe not imposed but at least as an option.

Using the argument that the force is equal to both sides and it's a matter of HOW you use them that separates the 2 sides of the force... one could easily pick what one considers to be the best force configuration.

Rockstar
06-27-2003, 06:32 AM
yes i agree with you entirely.

the force isn't distinguished as many think it is "dark jedi shoots, light blocks".

its how you USE it. yoda said "you must never use the force to attack, only defend". this is a statement that imho people have interpreted the wrong way.

lets think hypothetically here. if i had a gun and a murderer ran at me and i shot him, i killed in defense. being the defender does not imply anything pacifistic, simply that you are the subject to an aggresser. we've seen light siders use dark powers and dark siders use light powers (Vader uses protect in Ep 5)

..... so i say GO the MOTS system :cool:

yolkboy
06-27-2003, 06:44 AM
I want to play mots :( I don't have it though. But from what you guys describe, it sounds good. Another vote for MOTS.

Rockstar
06-28-2003, 12:19 PM
hello again

i guess the main thing i feel is wrong with the mp mode atm is the that they achive balance in CERTAIN MODES!. this i think is the incorrect means of doing it. they make each side stronger in different game modes, like light is renoun for sucking in duels, yet is good for CTF.

imho i think that if they achieved balance so both sides were equal in just the duel and FFA and TDM modes, then i think that everything else would fall into place. I think trying to suit all modes really just makes it too hard for the makers.

and example is a TDM or DM, when saber only is on. if you happen to get gripped with guns around its kinda funny pulling out a gun and shooting em (hehehe). but if you get drained, or are just low on force (maybe from healing) then you get gripped, you have no way of fighting back as you don't have enough force for absorb or saber throw, and you remain helpless to be chopped or run out of hp. there is probably a counter to this specific eg, that i probably know about, however one does learn not to get into the situation where you are low on force, just comes with practise. but the eg reflects a one sided advantage. this was just a simple eg that bothered me as a newbie (which was LONG ago before you gob off again prime ;) hehhe jk mate)

and before you say so, yes there are such eg's for the darkside, however, i find them slightly less severe.

JediLurker
07-03-2003, 08:33 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but on the issue of light siders never using offensive powers, the whole 'knowledge and defense' deal, doesn't Luke force choke two of Jabba's guards on his way into the palace in Return of the Jedi? If not, he definitely did something that at least seemed like some sort of attack. I could be mistaken.

txa1265
07-03-2003, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by JediLurker
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but on the issue of light siders never using offensive powers, the whole 'knowledge and defense' deal, doesn't Luke force choke two of Jabba's guards on his way into the palace in Return of the Jedi? If not, he definitely did something that at least seemed like some sort of attack. I could be mistaken.

No offense intended, JediLurker, but have you heard the expression 'RTFM'? Change the M to a T for thread, and then say 'aahhhh!' Then do it ;) There was a lot of discussion of that earlier on. You just need the patience to work through the thread.

Yolkboy - if you don't have MotS - GET IT!!! You can get it off eBay for a few dollars. What, you want my copy? NFW!!! :)

[edit] Here's a link I just found - http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3532722875&category=11047 ends Friday afternoon (July 4th). Gets you JK & MotS and TPM game.

Mike

JediLurker
07-03-2003, 11:29 AM
My bad. I overlooked that part, and I did read the thread. Just missed some of it. No need to get worked up about it. Here, have a cookie. :p

txa1265
07-03-2003, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by JediLurker
My bad. I overlooked that part, and I did read the thread. Just missed some of it. No need to get worked up about it. Here, have a cookie. :p

Not worked up at all. Just that RTFM has been so commonly used in the groups I've dealt with through the years, but I've also people use it like a hammer, and others take it badly, so I wanted to provide some context so you would know I wasn't being irritable (even putting a smiley there). Oops ... didn't work ...

Thanks for the cookie ... urp ... excuse me.

Mike

yolkboy
07-03-2003, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by txa1265
No offense intended, JediLurker, but have you heard the expression 'RTFM'? Change the M to a T for thread, and then say 'aahhhh!' Then do it ;) There was a lot of discussion of that earlier on. You just need the patience to work through the thread.

Yolkboy - if you don't have MotS - GET IT!!! You can get it off eBay for a few dollars. What, you want my copy? NFW!!! :)

Hehe... I guess I have to look around. What does RTFM mean? and RTFT?

txa1265
07-03-2003, 02:28 PM
Originally posted by yolkboy
Hehe... I guess I have to look around. What does RTFM mean? and RTFT?

Read The ... errm ... Manual

and

Read The ... errm ... Thread.

And, in case you were wondering, NFW is not Northen Fort Worth in Texas, it is No ... errm ... Way.

;)

Mike

Rockstar
07-04-2003, 09:35 AM
but if he missed the first half of the thread he is still entitled to state his opinion.

and yes, i agree with you man, the lightside defensiveness is very twisted, despite evidence of jedi using dark powers...

all i really want is "force reflect", coz i think light jedi using grip and sith using protect in mp is a bit far, but reflect may as well be in there. peeps say only yoda has been seen to use reflect, however, in mp EVERY player who uses lightning can eminate a fan as LARGE AS THE EMPIRORS!!! while we are on the topic of rediculasness, we saw dooku, the APPRENTICE of the sithlord, and a jedi for many years (who is FAAAAR from weak and unknowledgable of the force) used lightning and it was a single stream. it doesn't BOTHER me that in mp all have an Sideous style lightning! im just saying, who cares if it aint 100% movies, its just cool and gives character ;)

Crow_Nest
03-26-2004, 01:37 PM
Nahs, it doesnt really needs improvment, i like it, and its way better than the dark side which has an "in-complete" ending. If you know what i mean.

Prime
03-26-2004, 03:18 PM
Wow, talk about reviving and old thread...

JediLiberator
03-26-2004, 03:40 PM
I think that certain powers should be usless against jedi, grip and mind trick namely. It makes no sense that powers used on the "weak and weak-minded" should affect fully trained force users. As for there being an absorb and reflect power I think that should be an expensive thing to have because you are walking the edge between dark and light. Also rage should not make people invinsible and the light side should have a power that boosts their sabering ability. Also I think you should be able to hold down the button on push or pull and have a continuous affect, like dragging someone backward a ways or holding someone against a wall. Just my two cents.

Sam Fisher
03-26-2004, 05:44 PM
MM..... I dunno... was thinking of a type of freeze force power >.< Or a reflect force power... that would be cool... but I don't know..

Radd
03-26-2004, 11:27 PM
Here's an idea. How about if players could pick to be either lightside or darkside, but could still pick powers from the other side at an increased cost?

Just an idea.

To the basics of it, I like using Lightside powers just fine as they are. It does seem like mindtrick still works on lightsiders using Force Absorb, and that does not make any sense, though maybe I'm mistaken and it doesn't work when Force Absorb is being used.

As for grip, well I'm certain that does not work while Force Absorb is in effect, much to the chagrin of many darkside players. Force Absorb seems to be the Great Equalizer of Force Powers, though there are a bunch of ideas well worth considering in this thread.

I've never played MoTS, I'd like to see how Force Powers were handled there. I've got the game now, and plan to play it as soon as I finish DFII:JK. Maybe that'll show me some better ideas.

A Jedi
03-27-2004, 06:21 AM
Ya it would be cool if you could combine light and dark powers, like in single player.

Anyway, i think light and dark are prety balanced, no need for changing that, unless some NEW powers are add =) .................................................. ....... =( jk4