We've hard hardcoe mode discussions before and the majority believes that it would simply not work in Brink. At least, not a hardcoe mode like CoD's hardcoe mode. Increasing bullet damage or decreasing health throws off all sorts of balance within the game.

Also there is health regen, but it's different than CoD or Halo. Your health bar is split into sections, with one long section for your main health and a few chunks after that. Only sections that are partially gone will regenerate. So if you lose, for example, 2.5 chunks of health, the half-empty chunk will regenerate, but the two empty ones will not.

EDIT: Nin-I mean Wraithed.

oh okay good I was hoping for this or something similar

I'm all 4 it. In fact, I'd love hardcoe-mode as long as the respawn timer isn't fixed and can be changed by server owners.
Other than that, I'd play the hell out of it in this game.




- :flame:

Let's also remember here that from the get go the dev's have said that iron sights are more for personal preference then actual necessity, this game was and has been tested with people firing from the hip (cite dev diary video here), which they want to bring back into the shooter genre with BRINK in addition to the combined smooth movement. I do not doubt many of us who are so used to having to aim down sights will be spray prayed by people taking advantage of this system early on while all of the people who have played BLOPS for a lack of other options will still be aiming down our sights for every shot.

Remember that this is a game that is trying to take away all or most of the unbalancing in shooters and fix it. That means the skills and habits we have all developed to counter these "imbalances" will be moot and ultimately counter productive.
I personally know I will have a hard time when BRINK first launches because I rarely if ever play with friends and in BLOPS that usually means your on your own.

Its the price that must be paid.

From gameplay videos, even keeping a brief but consistent stream of SMG bullets on an enemy will whittle their health down quick enough. You only have to worry if you're a CoD really devoted fan really.

Lame
Lamer
Lamest

It is beyond logic that you shouldn't need to aim down a gun's sights to steady your aim. Anything not including this is arcardy and infantile in the spectrum of FPS games.

LAME!!! Seriously alters my thoughts on this game.

The spray all day situation is kind of somewhat eliminated by the low amounts of ammo given to each player, I realize engineers can give ammo and stuff, but the fact of the matter is when it comes down to somebody flanking you, you wont want to be killed with one hit of a gun, just as much as the person next to you. You want a chance to show your skill and ridicule the player flanking you. The more team play the better.

God...stop it...the last two posts in this thread have seriously changed my opinion on this game. If this game is going to turn into a noob handicap by avoiding such technics as aiming down your sights and good solid tactics of flanking (I.e I flank him but he still has a chane to kill me even though I shot first) I'm not going to get this game.

I'm voting for a Demo now. I know it wasn't meant to be a Military shooter but dammit I don't want another Halo Noob Tasitc jump twist and turn fest.

Why would you want to go off on your own creating your own fun, while destroying others? This game is MEANT to be a team orientated game. Not so that someone can turn around and have a better gun so they > you. Not what I mean. I mean it should revolve around teamwork more. And I don't like the whole jump twist 1 BR to the face bs either, so I must have been unclear with what I had said.

So you would rather have a game that isn't balanced at all and gives the person in the worse of situation no hope?

Sure you can turn around and say "oh well yeah but i want to be able to win when i shoot a guy"

If you get the jump on a guy and you are a better player you will win. Balancing brings skill into factor, The more skilled players will win majority of the time.

I feel like it encourgaes teamwork and going around with buddy, would be for once in multiplayer games (at least the ones I play) a good thing. Also if you are above average at shooter games then finishing someone can't be that hard. But i see your concern. Can't wait for brink this forum has been one of the most chill and nice ones I have ever been on. (first post btw)

I love you.

Haha, i love you too internet stranger :turtle:

You explained my enitre point here. If I get the jump on a guy, I am the better player, period. Skill is not a quick turn and lucky headshot while I'm pounding away at you from your flank.

Skill is having my team suppress an enemy ("gives the person in the worse of situation no hope") Having me flank around him and pump him full of lead. Basically I SHOULD win cus I shot the guy using superior skill.

Seriously...I hate games that simply tell kids that guns don't kill. If I hit you first, I should have a 90% chance of winning the fire fight with the exceptions being armor (body type) and luck...only a 2% factor of luck that is.

Not,"Oh, I got flanked, this guy is shooting me, I should turn and shoot him *Jump jump, slide*, Oh look I win cus he was shooting my body and I hit his head with a lucky shot." It should be "OH S_IT I'm getting shot at!!! IF I don't bail I'm...." He died cus he took far too long to think.

I really don't think it will be an issue. Some people are worried that it will ruin the game, and I have to wonder how many of them have played Team Fortress 2. They sound very similar in this aspect and it never really took away from the experience.

No, flanking a player is not a skill. Well it is but not the skills that actually mean anything.

Brink is designed to be a fun game, all players want to have fun right, well if you are getting shot at and get killed before you even have a chance to think about doing anything about it, thats no fun. If you however, get shot and then spin get a couple of bullets off and still die (inevitable if you are looking the wrong way) then hell, at least you had the chance, and you now don't feel so bad about just being killed. Its part of the way the human brain works, it subconsciously says "well hey, at least i gave it my best chance" and you move on still happy.

Your point is invalid for this game anyway as headshots don't kill in one shot. So if you flank a guy and get the jump on him and get half a clip off before he turns you will win, inevitable. Your whole argument is void because you are ignoring some crutial gameplay mechanics used in brink and basing it more off of past experience in other games which do not share the same mechanics.

Brink is a game built on skill but likes to give everybody a CHANCE, note i said chance, not surefire kills. If you get jumped on hell you have the chance, but unless you get some serious luck or help from somebody else you are dead. In brink, the only way i would imagine you would die if you did flank a guy and get the jump on him is if your aim svcks,

Either you are saying "well yeah i'm amazing but i still died due to luck" or oh, wait no that's all your saying.

Your whole argument can be summed up into "I'm really good and i don't like it when people kill me through luck because i flanked a guy and that means i should automatically win".

Sorry if i'm coming across as a [censored] but, NEWSFLASH, anybody can flank a person.

So where's the other 8% gone?

In Brink, if you flank someone, it's not necessarily because you're more skilled.

You may have come into the room he's in while he's facing the wrong way because of dumb luck.

If he's a great player, when you open fire, he'll slide into cover, and turn, lining you up and firing at you. If he gets a lucky headshot on you, that's not going to kill you, so if you've been unloading into his head even while he tries to dodge your bullets, congratulations, you're a skilled player, and the element of surprise worked in your favour. if you get a couple of body shots before losing track of the guy, then he unloads half a clip into your face because you're too slow re-aiming, then yeah, you svck, and deserve to die. You walked into a situation where you had the upper hand (flanking/element of surprise) and you squandered it by not hitting hard and fast before your advantage was countered.

+rep for oblivion, this guy understands skill and how it works.

Yes anarchy you are absolutely right, IF we are talking about the real world not the wonderful world of brink, real world physics/ laws of nature don't always apply here.

Good god...its Medal of Honor all over again.

I'm not talking about randomly bumping into someone, in that case, yes, it should be up to the quickest draw and the steadiest shot. But if you geniuly have a guy in a screwed situation, that means you used a decent amount of skill to get him there.

And no, I don't believe that he SHOULD have an equal chance. This isn't little league, we're not 9...not everyone should get a stupid particapation trophy, a slice of pizza and a warm ride home with their mom. Thats fine for games aimed at kids but I don't think its right when dealling with the subject matter of guns and harming people.

Now, I agree if he's sitting in his screwed position waiting for me, fine, have him blast away at me. I'll call him a camper and move on. But if I have him pinned by my team, he has no idea I'm there, I should have the best and ulitmately final chance of offing him.

Frankly, kids need to grow up around gun games. You get good or go home. "Pity Chance" is nothing more but a handicap. :::More Below Quote:::



The other 8% was the armor. And I think you can be a medium for this hay-wire thread. Yes. If I cross a guy and he's able to avoid my fire, come around blasting and kill me, fine. What I'm trying to avoid is the halo effect. I get the complete drop on a guy, blast him to an inch of his life but he has his dandy time to jump around and pops a lucky headshot. Its the time to death I'm worried about, again the bullet damage issue. You shouldn't more than a second or two to react to connecting fire.

You need to stop contradicting yourself. You pin a guy into a certain area, make it to where he's certainly dead if he tries to move from said area, and you're going to call him a camper if he has more skill and kills you as you try and sneak up on him? And THEN you try telling other people to grow up around FPS games? You just lost all credibility with me.

The # of bullets required to down someone will be fine, or at least mostly so, when BRINK is shipped - They didn't delay the game all this time just for craps and giggles. If you can kill someone with 5 or 6 bullets using an SMG, then there will really be no reason to have soldiers in the game, will there? You might as well toss the satchel and HE charges to the operative.

"Camper" as I persoanlly put it is nothing more than a nickname to describe a tactical postion. I play a lot of BFBC2 and thats where most of my referance comes from. SO, let me put this another way. In BC, its often common to find someone sitting up in a house shooting down at folks. I tend to call this person a camper cus he has little intention of moving. Now, if I get my squad to pin him in the building and I find him sitting in a corner waiting for me, again I shall call him a camper as he blasts my body. Its not as derogetory as you make think it is.

The situation I'm describing is having a guy completely busy with my squad, he doesn't know I'm there and I essentially have him dead to rights. He should only have a small to zero chance (the 2% I mentioned earlier) of being able to turn and hit me if that at all. I don't like games that give a screwed or oblivious player too much of a chance. Halo does this, Medal of Honor does this(sometimes) and BC2 softcoe does this. Its a handicap for inexperienced players and has little to do with skill, espeically in a game we dont have to even aim apparently.

So... You come around the corner, have the guy's head in your sights, keep tracking his head as he moves, planting most of your bullets right, you WILL drop him faster than he can kill you. I agree that's important.

That lack of one-shots in Brink means you have to have a measure of skill to maintain that against a highly-skilled player though, because of the example I gave previously. Targets taking fire WILL try to evade, and if you don't track effectively, you WILL lose sight of your target, then THEY have the upper hand instead.

It's not all about "I had the first shot, I win" - even if the other guy hits first, you have a chance (slim though it may be) to turn things around.

If I come up behind you with a Long Rifle, headshot you from behind at point-blank, I'll be close enough to rush in, melee you (knockdown), then melee incap while you're still wondering where I'm coming from, then melee finish once you're incapped.

Brutal, fast, and nobody's countering that without knowing you're there in advance. Even if they see you coming at the last second, you know what the deal is, it'll take some serious skill, and a bit of luck, to turn that around when you're prepared for CQC and they've only just starting thinking the "oh" that comes before "*#%$!!!!"

i think if i have skill and intelligence to get behind u unseen i shud be rewarded imagine how pissed ppl wud be if u shoot someone first and they still kill u its lik fighting a guy with an aim bot they always beat u in a gun fight even if u hve upper hand

You are rewarded for this.

You're not rewarded with a guaranteed kill, but you're rewarded with a chance to hit hard before the target knows you're there. If you take the opportunity and use it, then you have the advantage as soon as you open fire. It's up to your skill and your opponent's to determine whether you can hold onto that advantage for the few short seconds required to finish the job.