As you know I have my own suggestions on how the whole Weaver situation should've gone down, which I discussed at length in an old thread of mine. Not out of any investment on the character on my part, as soon as GR became more about developing attachments to set characters through personal stories, banter and unique looks, and less about said attachment coming from experience and developing a soldier through actual gameplay; a soldier that mind you, could be wounded and/or killed, I began losing interest in that particular aspect of the narrative, which was never necessary back in the day: the job should be paramount in these games, not cheesy B-movie plots and warrior platitudes.Originally Posted by Steven527 Go to original post
Not only was Weaver's death terribly handled but, not even Nomad could be asked to care about it either; not even after dealing with every Wolf on site, does Nomad have the common decency of kneeling over his fallen comrade's corpse or comment anything in relation to it, at all. Baffling couldn't even begin to describe it.
When talking about bringing back team management, are you referring to OGR where you actually picked members out of a pool of Ghosts to run the missions? If so, I think that would be a very good way of getting players to once again have a desire to succeed and some kind of fear of failure. As much as I hate the whole skill points thing, I do believe there would be a need to somehow increase the lethality and skillset of the ai teammates as well to give further reason to play tactfully. Do you or others have any thoughts on how you would go about promoting such a playstyle?Originally Posted by AI BLUEFOX Go to original post
I would much rather have this than these "permanent" characters that (quite honestly) I could really care less about. As it is, there is no incentive to save them given that they will simply respawn again outside of a certain range, etc.Originally Posted by Church367A Go to original post
I liked the character pool in the original GR and the R6 series not to mention H&D, XCOM, etc. ....so there is precedence for the mechanic even within the franchise. The death of a teammate had more meaning given that they would improve over time as they were utilized, etc. I actually gave strong consideration before placing my team in harms way and in contrast to the current design, it would make rescuing downed mates all the more relevant and immersive.
I can actually recall starting a mission over due to a teammate getting killed. You may consider this a bit cheating the system, but I always felt it was worth the time to try again than proceed and have to build up another Ghost. That said, can anyone remember if some of the specialized characters you eventually obtained already had higher stats? I want to say there was one with the OICW and for some reason I want to say there was a german machine gunner? That last may just be a false memory though.Originally Posted by Kean_1 Go to original post
I'd absolutely agree with @Kean.
Ideally I'd adopt the structure of an ODA for the Ghosts; that is to say up to 12 operators with a roster of 3 times that or so, plus support personnel, whom would constitute the fixed part of the team (medics, intel analysts, pilots and quartermaster) as hinted at in one of the slides displayed during WL's installation process https://forums.ubisoft.com/showthrea...ure-GR-titltes
I'd have specializations (with their own set of upgradable skills), which wouldn't preclude characters from performing in other tactical fields or roles, however taking advantage of these skills or "talents" and focussing on them for a particular character would surely be the better approach when faced with a mission demanding a very specialized ability (ie a highly proficient breacher or interpreter ala SOCOM).
As @Kean said, nothing we suggest for these games is new to tactical shooters; these, same as most advanced mechanics discussed on this forum were more or less the norm back in the heyday of the genre.
I hated the idea of classes in Breakpoint (one of the many reasons I didn't buy the game and why I liked WL) but I like the idea in an AI roster. .....provided they are simple as you outlined El_Cuervacho.
This would also promote the use of other operatives from the pool rather than simply sticking with the same group throughout the game. It would give the system more depth. You as the player would feel more in control of your team and they would become valuable as assets given their specializations, skills, experience, etc.
Quoted for posterity.Originally Posted by AI BLUEFOX Go to original post
*chants*
Perma-Death
Perma-Death
![]()
Definitely. It pains me to see that a console game from 11 years ago (OFP) not only did it* better than a current day one but any other title to this day and NO GAME since has built up on it.Originally Posted by AI BLUEFOX Go to original post
* referring mainly to team mate commands.