not distinctive enough for the grid and kilo to be separate. If for example rebels can combine (as in mix, not as in faction) both roles and are well accepted, why have it separate on the combine side, it would make it way more fun than just one shiny combine with a shotgun that can deploy useless roller mine and situational vehicles that they get to enjoy if their team is losing.
Not to drag away from the point; but any CO can spawn an APC and go on missions. So in theory, you dont even need to be in kilo/engineer just to use a vital land vehicle.
Overall, i do agree about how classes/jobs should be more niche, and to be more unique. And i'd say; more well defined.
Thing is the grid and OVA roles are separate on rebels. Engis dont deploy every vehicle that rebels have, only being able to deploy rocket trucks and Shermans, same as grid. Techs take the role of OVA for rebels, being able to deploy the heavy vehicles such as T90, Ka, TC, etc. Techs and Engs are in the same battalion but are not a shared class.
Unless something has changed significantly to how Grid/Engineer operates, I'm pretty sure they still have specific processes to train people to use build tools, which is why they aren't just rolled into their vehicle divisions.
Also I am admittedly skimming through alot of these but your criteria for what is considered distinctive doesn't seem to be much more than 'cause I think so'.
Also I don't think a division/sub-division/classes popularity should be a major reason to just roll it into another because those things are temporary trends at the end of the day.
I can see where he comes from cause some classes aren't fun to fight. But yeah they all have their own little gimmick as Komodo have Heavy (Big boom of group), Medic (LVET can only heal, Medic can heal and revive AND place down a health dispenser) and Fighter (A class that new people play on to get accustomed to the server and the gun is actually goated, giving them a fighting chance.). Grid and Engineers have a similar kit but they do different things with it. Engineers build shit like air prop flying things more often while grid fortifies places. The classes in the server may look the same but actually have different ways of doing it. Remember that you are not limited to doing one thing
You make a lot of comparisons that are just… wrong.
Sword is not an equivalent to RU, the closest the Combine have to RU is NPU Riot. A better comparison to Sword would be LVET Assault. As for how RU performs, I can’t speak to that since I’ve never played that subdivision.
Also comparing LVET and Komodo Corps is odd to say the least. They have virtually no overlap with each other. LVET has a “fighter”, “heavy”, and “medic”, but they play nothing like the Komodo Corps subdivisions that share those names and dont really have similar loadouts.
OL sniper is faster with longer range and higher damage than LVET sniper. LVET sniper gets slightly better mobility through climbswep and the Dragunov that performs better in medium-close range than the HDR. KC and Outlanders are by no means useless.
I don’t even know what your point with Ballista is besides not making lore sense (even though it does). Do you expect them to just make Ballista an OTA subdivision? What does that change?
A lot of your frustration seems to stem from your own false assumptions of how each class performs and how they should work.
(19 Aug 24 at 10:22pm)M4 Sherman Wrote: I don’t even know what your point with Ballista is besides not making lore sense (even though it does). Do you expect them to just make Ballista an OTA subdivision? What does that change?
Yeah, I'm really not sure why Ballista would be the division receiving this kind of criticism when you have another Metro subdivision called MACE. You would think that cloaking technology would be incredibly sensitive and kept an utmost secret by the Combine, meaning that any class that has that sort of technology should ideally be a part of EOW. They wouldn't want any blueprints falling into rebel hands, so why give it to a non-transhuman subdivision that has the potential to defect (as has happened before with Razor)?
As far as the point about LVETs, there's not much I can say that hasn't already been said. The LVET classes are simply reinterpretations of what it means to be a "heavy," or a "medic," or a "sniper," and so on.
I feel like your class perception doesn't match the server's class perception, from what I've read, you want the server's classes to look like Overwatch2's heroes.
Some classes aren't like this because "they ran out of ideas on what new to add", some classes weren't even made by the owner himself.
For me, some classes do not exist simply for combat, sure, combat is also a reason to develop a class under, but not all of the time.
Some classes exist because they HAVE TO counter X class, some classes exist simply because they were part of the lore, some classes exist just to add that one more infantry soldier, some classes exist because many HL2RP servers use it, some classes exist because a close friend of the owner proposed them, hell, maybe some classes even exist just because a certain model pack simply gave them inspiration.
You know, in the past we had way more classes than we have right now, ECHO included, the concept between classes was very simple back then: "Everything is the mirror of everything", too simple, many would say.
Classes are like this because they work.
Most of the times it's not the class' fault if something doesn't work, if there is no harmony, no teamwork; it's the fault of the players who use it.
Maybe what you're looking for is, in fact, actually in the members, or the COs, of those classes.
This post is definitely uhh very interesting, the biggest problem I have though is the first part
As someone who currently plays RU (is a CO) almost exclusively on the server, in my opinion, Sword is absolutely NOT our counterpart or "counter", Ive never really had a problem with a Sword unit ever. I would say that both classes as of now are in a pretty comfy spot in terms of balance.
I understand the frustration though of CqC classes being much weaker on more long ranged focused maps, But at the same time almost all the maps on the server do at least have some portion of them that is very CqC friendly. almost all the points on every map are inside of buildings or small structures which allows CqC classes to be relevant even on more long ranged maps, Are some maps better when it comes to CqC than others, in my opinion Yes. But still I think whoever designed the maps and sentinel himself has done a pretty good job at making sure that players who play CqC can still play the video game even if there at a disadvantage
I don't think the problem is bad game design or Shitty map design, I just don't think your playing the game as intended
most of my other opinions other people have already said here
One thing I would like to mention is how the rebel medic is a pathetic version of the helix, sure they have more CW but that won't be enough for less speed and health than the basic RF, along with ic rules on combat rezzing, and on top of that the uzi is just inferior to the MP5 in CQC due to the heavy trigger the uzi has
Helix is in every way better than rebel medic and it's not even close.
Overall, i do agree about how classes/jobs should be more niche, and to be more unique. And i'd say; more well defined.
Also I am admittedly skimming through alot of these but your criteria for what is considered distinctive doesn't seem to be much more than 'cause I think so'.
Also I don't think a division/sub-division/classes popularity should be a major reason to just roll it into another because those things are temporary trends at the end of the day.
Sword is not an equivalent to RU, the closest the Combine have to RU is NPU Riot. A better comparison to Sword would be LVET Assault. As for how RU performs, I can’t speak to that since I’ve never played that subdivision.
Also comparing LVET and Komodo Corps is odd to say the least. They have virtually no overlap with each other. LVET has a “fighter”, “heavy”, and “medic”, but they play nothing like the Komodo Corps subdivisions that share those names and dont really have similar loadouts.
OL sniper is faster with longer range and higher damage than LVET sniper. LVET sniper gets slightly better mobility through climbswep and the Dragunov that performs better in medium-close range than the HDR. KC and Outlanders are by no means useless.
I don’t even know what your point with Ballista is besides not making lore sense (even though it does). Do you expect them to just make Ballista an OTA subdivision? What does that change?
A lot of your frustration seems to stem from your own false assumptions of how each class performs and how they should work.
Yeah, I'm really not sure why Ballista would be the division receiving this kind of criticism when you have another Metro subdivision called MACE. You would think that cloaking technology would be incredibly sensitive and kept an utmost secret by the Combine, meaning that any class that has that sort of technology should ideally be a part of EOW. They wouldn't want any blueprints falling into rebel hands, so why give it to a non-transhuman subdivision that has the potential to defect (as has happened before with Razor)?
As far as the point about LVETs, there's not much I can say that hasn't already been said. The LVET classes are simply reinterpretations of what it means to be a "heavy," or a "medic," or a "sniper," and so on.
Some classes aren't like this because "they ran out of ideas on what new to add", some classes weren't even made by the owner himself.
For me, some classes do not exist simply for combat, sure, combat is also a reason to develop a class under, but not all of the time.
Some classes exist because they HAVE TO counter X class, some classes exist simply because they were part of the lore, some classes exist just to add that one more infantry soldier, some classes exist because many HL2RP servers use it, some classes exist because a close friend of the owner proposed them, hell, maybe some classes even exist just because a certain model pack simply gave them inspiration.
You know, in the past we had way more classes than we have right now, ECHO included, the concept between classes was very simple back then: "Everything is the mirror of everything", too simple, many would say.
Classes are like this because they work.
Most of the times it's not the class' fault if something doesn't work, if there is no harmony, no teamwork; it's the fault of the players who use it.
Maybe what you're looking for is, in fact, actually in the members, or the COs, of those classes.
As someone who currently plays RU (is a CO) almost exclusively on the server, in my opinion, Sword is absolutely NOT our counterpart or "counter", Ive never really had a problem with a Sword unit ever. I would say that both classes as of now are in a pretty comfy spot in terms of balance.
I understand the frustration though of CqC classes being much weaker on more long ranged focused maps, But at the same time almost all the maps on the server do at least have some portion of them that is very CqC friendly. almost all the points on every map are inside of buildings or small structures which allows CqC classes to be relevant even on more long ranged maps, Are some maps better when it comes to CqC than others, in my opinion Yes. But still I think whoever designed the maps and sentinel himself has done a pretty good job at making sure that players who play CqC can still play the video game even if there at a disadvantage
I don't think the problem is bad game design or Shitty map design, I just don't think your playing the game as intended
most of my other opinions other people have already said here
Helix is in every way better than rebel medic and it's not even close.