I'm still not seeing why people should be punished for trying to play as team (Aka few bullets to kill someone).
Many bullets may be bad for COD gameplay or anything else if you want, but not when you actually have to help your team. If you can't jump in, jump out, you will not be able to give ammo during a firefight or to heal/revive. And that's what THIS game is about.

a few bullets to kill some one doesnt punish team work it encourages it, with volume of fire and lanes of fire, once again with supression fire to deny acess of an area

You're a typical case ( no offense) of a gamer that isn't familiar with SD games. You may not get the whole picture and others' point , but I'm sure that once you play the game all the above will become clear to you.

would you be kind enough to make comparisons to some thing i might be familiar with, like battlefield bc2 cod games, halo, flash point and arma. id be very apreciative and would like to learn about the concepts and "rules" Brink may be built around based on the past of splash damage

you seem to be unclear on the game being played

it's is not a series of hallway defence rooms, objectives in brink are about planting bombs...then defending said planted bomb so enemy teams dont disarm it. escorting, interogation, capping command posts, collecting intel, opening paths for faster travel.....and parkour. suppresive fire wont happen too often when the lights and mediums can hop over some shipping containers and get past you while your focused on a door.

more bullets to kill is to assist in objective completions. if you can kill the bomb planter too easily they'll never plant the bomb, if it were a deathmatch style game then maybe less bullets would be better. but as long as objectives need completing it's open to stalemates way too often if people can snipe or suppress hallways.

whats the point of loading up the players on health and then giving them things like the soldiers shield ability iv heard of, am i just worry too much or...

So people have a health buff when going into firefights... cause they will be firefights and not corner camper 2 shots you and soldier shield is an ever bigger health buff possibly situation based. The teamplay encouraged by this type of high health and buffing is to set up crossfire, where multiple people can fire on one target. And it seems thats exactly how the maps are laid out from the videos. I'm sure you'll love it and agree it's way better

If you say so, i just hope it has a good balance of both, maby alot of health will be the right amount and in the end it will come down to both personal skill and team play so that there arent any lone wolf rambos running around but that the same time it doesnt punish people who are familiar with FPS games and it doesnt take away from that "in the moment" fire fight that really draws out the excitement of who will come out alive

That's exactly the point

And its exactly that excitement that is to be has when you don't have a 0.5 second firefight. And lone wolf rambo's (such as myself in recent games ) get punished by not getting much xp anyways.

being literal though how long should a firefight be, how deadly in your opinion should bullets be so that it stays exciting and an action game with out becoming a strategy game

I'd say 5 - 15 seconds, depending on player skill, bodytypes, distance, current health and ammo levels, pure 1v1, ...

It's hard to say. In previous SD titles, it sometimes took only 5 bullets with good aim and some luck, while other times it took one and a half clip because it was noob v noob or pro v pro (the latter rarely occured since they aim for the head at all times) sometimes firefights ended almost instanty (for ET veterans: ding ding ding death), while others involved some nice dancing moves and a lot of bad aiming. (dancing like strafin around and randomly crouching, start/stop sprinting)

On of the most popular competitbe games of the early 2000's was the Unreal series (much like Quake), in which it could take multiple magazines of certain guns to kill people. It's not a problem.

lol, akimbo pistol pros would ruin your day.

so if i dont dance ina fire fight ill most likely loose, say if i were to pick cover over starfing?

The smart system is going to take dancing to the next level. Only lights and debatably mediums will be able to do this. Heavy and mediums however have more health and bigger guns.

Depends on the situation I guess. Having cover cancels out the need for strafing, unless it's close to mid range or if the other guy has good aim.

The scariest problem I see with combat in this game is if someone lag dodges and you get mobbed. I have slower internet so if I'm fighting I have to stay in cover just for a chance to survive. Locking down a tactical position isn't cheap or wrong that is how the Military does it. No free lance heroics like so many games support. My Uncle was in charge of desert combat in Urban environments. I've seen how team work is achieved in the US Army and I will be damned if it doesn't work. I've also seen someone walk with their leg torn off at the knee and still function (As well as someone in a critical state of shock, having massive blood loss, and only one leg can do) So I don't agree with less bullets one bullet can kill someone but it can sometimes take 10 or so to do the same thing. Has anyone ever seen someone peppered by shrapnel? They don't always die right away and their chest could look like hamburger. Just saying. Also I would like to point out that the devs specifically expressed that this game is not meant to be realistic. Just fun where people can work as a team/

ah I dislike dancing personally....will this game be less tactical and more strategic?

Tactics require a strategy, eh? :confused:

I work at a gas station that is really busy... and dudes come in and buy armfuls of monster energy drinks as they talk to their buddies about how drinking these things is gonna help them raise their K/D ratio on CoD. I don't even comment. But it's a daily event. I don't really get it honestly.

But when I think of CoD and the standard shooter I think of redneck truckers buying 1 liter cans of monster energy drinks and going home to run in circles on their small maps with their aim assist and use about 1 or 2 bullets to kill someone and then the other guy kills him and then another and another and so on.

Tactics require strategy yeah but an over empahsis on strategy in the form of rock paper scissors can eliminate tactics

Wait a minutes, how does rock paper scissors=strategy?

idk how the game works but say a light isnt good against a heavy in closed spaces....the heavy represents rock and the light represents sicsors...if you saw a light in that situation youd think to your self I'll ask my heavy friend to go kill him since hes the best match

The game will still be predominantly skill based. The two extremes (light and heavy) just require different strategies, with medium somewhere in the middle.

fragile but agile builds in game usually require what I call "flawless gameplay"; dodging, using tactical advantages, reacting quickly. Basically you need to hit hard and fast, while doing everything you can to stay alive. Staying alive is somewhat of a main focus.

Hard-hitting but slow builds on the other hand tend to require more calculated gameplay. You need to be aware of everything going on since you cant take cover very quickly, you need to prioritize targets, plan your movements a bit, have retreat routes planned.

If a light gets in close and starts spraying a heavy with his SMG, the heavy will go down. If the heavy keeps an eye on everything and is ready for an ambush, the heavy may win. These are both skills.

Brink is anything but rock paper scissors, if heavy is the rock, who's the paper? Medium? I don't see why they would be the best class against heavies or the worst against lights. The three bodytypes are more about choosing a weakness and having the skill to manage it.