Re: A message for everyone...........

**Trooper** · 02-06-2009, 07:10 PM

Originally Posted by birdie_in_Texas

You cannot please everyone all of the time. Please think about this the next time. The rules for CoD4 are what they are because without them, the server is a COMPLETE DISASTER. The only way to make "you" happy is to have it passworded to where only "we" can play on it. My suggestion? Rent you a server..then you can make it exactly what you want..I would definately spend time playing on it, as I enjoy playing against SOG guys..

On CoD4, it seems that we get this enormous influx of pubby players that could care less about any rules other than start chucking nades towards the opposing spawn as soon as the round starts. As an example, late last year the admins "took a breather" and let things progress as we knew it would. A lot of the regular player base left to find other places to play because we did just what you are asking..we let it go "hands off" for the most part. Apparently no one remembers this...so again, we get another of these "negative" type of posts..which is fine, you are free to post your opinion...all respect to you Vir2ual, as you are always welcome to play here..you make the game more enjoyable, and we do care what you have to say sir..

I never played CoD2 in its "hey day". I installed it months after I was an Admin for CoD4, and I see why it totally died. It is apples to oranges in comparison. IMHO, the CoD2 server more fairly compares with ArmA in a lot of ways.

You cannot compare BFx games to CoD 4 at all. Teeny Tiny maps (the stock locations), no armor, I mean, the only thing they have in common is that there are weapons involved.

The comment about your perceived view of the IHS's is, to be quite honest, way off base. I have heard these same arguments about fraternities way back when I was in college. The IHS's have done nothing but improve each and every game they are involved with at TG. Again, you are entiltled to your opinio, no matter how "flawed" it is to me.

You have trooper bashing them and he is/was in one..absolutely ridiculous, but again, opinions.

There seems to be this thought that since several of the CoD4 admins are all in the 13th, that this somehow has "ruined" things. That is pretty much the dumbest thing I have read in a while. That is basically calling Bubba a bad name, as this is imparting doubt on his judgement of picking the admin team. Would people still say the same thing if I had stayed in the 12th instead of coming to the 13th? I was in the 13th before I was an admin, yet Bubba still picked me. Hazzy was already in the 13th, so was Mediator, Bronco, Size, and Killdaddy, although I think for KD it might have happened on the same day. We were a HUGE part of the daily player base for CoD4..

Also remember..the servers for CoD4 are only 22 players. The BF2/PR server is what 60?

Anyway, in response to the complaints, Server 1 is now turned into what we HOPE will satisfy the LARGEST majority of the player base. There are going to be some that think it to slow, and move on and you Vir2ual, may decide that it is still "too fast" and also move on, although I for one would hate to see you go.

But back to my opening remark..You Cannot please everyone, all of the time.

Originally Posted by birdie_in_Texas

I get his point..I played on our Cod2 server just so I would know what everyone had been discussing. It was dulld down to where everyone quit playing. The game died because the "next generation" wants RNG.

In its "hey day" there was no CoD4 to go and try..there was 2142, and that is where a lot of us come from. Large scale tactical combat is a blast, and now we play a smller scale "tactical" game in CoD4 , but it was never meant for "us" here at TG. While coD4 has a similar name, it is a different game. We are imposing this ruleset on a game that was NEVER intended to be played this way, in order to be played in a TG fashion. It was designed with 12-16 year old kids that want hard fast action and that is who they tailored the engine and gameplay to. They probably only ported it to PC to get extra money to fund further console expansions.

the mod had no reason at all why COD2 died out. COD2 was more tactical and enjoyable because it was required to be that way to complete the objective. More attention was put on COD4 when it came out so more players moved to that side of things. Many attempts have been tried to get COD2 back to where it once was, and most the old regulars show up for them. But most of those players, myself included have moved on to other areas where they can find the type of game play they/we can enjoy and are welcome.

When i compare COD to BFx im talking the style of play, not game mechanics. The running all over just shooting and capping stuff. Once objectives are relized in any game at TG the game completely changes. And i understand its hard to explain objectives to most play, which is why boundaries and rules are put in place. But at some point those things need to be removed and start kicking people.

Using map size as a reason why a game cant be tactical is kind of lame. Look at most CSS maps, those arent big by any means. Its all in the players.

**asch** · 02-06-2009, 07:44 PM

This topic often comes up with certain types of games, especially those that are a sequel. There's no easy answer to change.

CoD2 (modded) had a great little group playing a realism mod with much success for them. So let me speak to a couple of points about that game and time period.

* A mod was being utilized which confined a user to a certain play-style. Rules were not necessarily in place to handle this. Players joined the group looking for this particular style of play.

* The number of players was quite a bit smaller. They were familiar with each other and pretty much on the same page when it came to game play. However there was little growth so long-term sustainability was going to be difficult.

Fast forward to CoD4...

* The vanilla game is quite a bit different than CoD2 (modded). We shouldn't expect the game play to be the same. It is comparing apples and oranges.

* There are players looking to TG to provide them a teamwork oriented, objective based server on vanilla CoD4. There are also players looking to a more realistic / simulation heavy experience. Both sides point to the other as causing issues.

* There are a lot of new faces and a few old faces. The comfort level and experience with each other is not up to speed as it was with CoD2, especially now that there are varying preferred play-styles.

So where does that leave us?

* We need to stop blaming other groups. Battlefield 2 was around before CoD2. They are not the cause. The in-house squad (IHS) system is not at fault either. They were around before both BF2 and CoD2.

Folks need to learn to stop and listen to each other. Try to understand the other player's point of view. We have different groups converging here and it's not a BF2 / CoD2 convergence... it's a CoD2 (modded) / CoD4 (vanilla) convergence.

I'm really tired of hearing the battlefield or IHS crowd as the culprit for players not getting what they want or how the game play has changed. Those groups could easily fault others for ruining their game play. Neither is correct.

* We need to quit trying to make every game the same. We need to accept that the game play in one game will not be the same as another. Rules shouldn't exist to determine a play-style. Play within the confines of the game. Simulation is playing within the environment the game creates.

CoD2 has past. CoD4 is a different game. We need to find the play-style that works for the various configured / modded versions of CoD4 we run. That doesn't mean we won't find a mod that is similar to what we ran with CoD2... but until then it shouldn't be expected that the game play will be like CoD2. The fault is with the game in this case, not necessarily the players.

* We need to understand the terms we use better.

Simulation does not equal realism. (simulation != realism)
Slow play does not equal tactical. (slow != tactical)
Fast play does not equal run-n-gun. (fast != run-n-gun)

Because some players prefer things at a faster or slower pace does not make one more or less tactical or realistic. The only difference may be the effectiveness of that style in a particular game. For instance, players that move with great speed in a game like Armed Assault may quickly find themselves dead due to the lethality of the weapons. On the opposite side of the coin players that attempt to use strict squad formations and slow movement in a game like battlefield may find themselves out of the action quite often because the action moves faster. The game/mod dictates quite a bit of the play-style.

---

Tactical Gamer attempts to provide servers for the multitude of player preferences we have out there. It's not always perfect and we don't always get it right the first (or second, third, fourth...) times. There's no reason that we can't attempt to satisfy the various CoD4 players with multiple servers. We're working toward that end.

What I won't put up for however is the whining, crying, blame-game, finger-pointing that is happening. (I don't mean this thread in particular... rather the various groups as a whole). We shouldn't be complaining about how some other group is changing the way I want to play a game.

Rather... we should be talking about what we each prefer. We need to accept that others will have different opinions. We need to work with the admins, GOs, Site administrators to understand how we can provide the desired servers. That's the chain of command for the players to work through. When there are issues, move to the next step.

Now providing servers doesn't come without a cost. The players need to be willing to educate others on the style of play for that game/mod. The players need to listen to new comers to understand other points of view. The players need to get out and help grow the server so it can sustain itself.

The various levels of TG leadership are here to help but we expect the players to demonstrate maturity and respect.

**Gogeta** · 02-06-2009, 07:54 PM

Was CoD2 modded to be walk/crouch only at all times ?

**Melee** · 02-06-2009, 07:55 PM

I think asch summed it up very well. I have nothing to add.

**Trooper** · 02-06-2009, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by Gogeta

Was CoD2 modded to be walk/crouch only at all times ?

i dont remember but i know the run was really slow and made shorter. You could only run for a few seconds and then you where out of breath

**Bubba** · 02-06-2009, 08:14 PM

Originally Posted by Gogeta

Was CoD2 modded to be walk/crouch only at all times ?

The WRM mod we are running does away with the run, you only have walking capabilities. It is really fun and tactical and calls for a lot of teamwork.

Also, well said asch.

**Hawk201** · 02-06-2009, 10:11 PM

I agree with this but the new server 1 is better. You really cant rush the sites now cause they are moved as well as the spawnpoints. About the mod maps and "boundaries" I agree with you there. On Matroska I have seen SMs go further than that middle building. And of course what can I do bout that they are the admin. I never liked boundaries mostly cause telling a new guy he is too far is just plain boring. But frankly I have seen admins and SMs break rules and prob know what they are doing is wrong but honestly what can I say? Plus most new people dont check the website before playing. Before TG I rarely even looked at the server names when I joined ,new guys break rules and get bashed for it and when a SM or admin hunts or ledges or whatever we do nothing? Not like we are going to accuse them of breaking rules. That's likes telling the boss at work he is breaking a company rule. What can you do? I still play because the people on here are fun and I think any game is better when you play with someone you know. TG can't be perfect nothing can. There will always be a rule breaker or two or prob more lol but the only way to stop that is to throw up a password. Even then a rule can be broken. The admins job isn't easy and I am glad to see when an admin is making sure everything is going ok during the game. Also the mod is fun (except for "lines" issue) and the new server 1 pretty much eliminates rushing. Even if the defense was allowed anywhere I would still stick to the bombsites cause the last thing I want is to work my way to there spawn and then they plant across the map and then I am pretty much dead. That is just my two cents worth.

**Trooper** · 02-06-2009, 10:20 PM

Originally Posted by Hawk201

I agree with this but the new server 1 is better. You really cant rush the sites now cause they are moved as well as the spawnpoints. About the mod maps and "boundaries" I agree with you there. On Matroska I have seen SMs go further than that middle building. And of course what can I do bout that they are the admin. I never liked boundaries mostly cause telling a new guy he is too far is just plain boring. But frankly I have seen admins and SMs break rules and prob know what they are doing is wrong but honestly what can I say? Plus most new people dont check the website before playing. Before TG I rarely even looked at the server names when I joined ,new guys break rules and get bashed for it and when a SM or admin hunts or ledges or whatever we do nothing? Not like we are going to accuse them of breaking rules. That's likes telling the boss at work he is breaking a company rule. What can you do? I still play because the people on here are fun and I think any game is better when you play with someone you know. TG can't be perfect nothing can. There will always be a rule breaker or two or prob more lol but the only way to stop that is to throw up a password. Even then a rule can be broken. The admins job isn't easy and I am glad to see when an admin is making sure everything is going ok during the game. Also the mod is fun (except for "lines" issue) and the new server 1 pretty much eliminates rushing. Even if the defense was allowed anywhere I would still stick to the bombsites cause the last thing I want is to work my way to there spawn and then they plant across the map and then I am pretty much dead. That is just my two cents worth.

actually regardless of position at TG, all charges are taken seriously. Be them admins or SMs or Pubs....Report them all.

**|SOG| Vir2L** · 02-06-2009, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by Trooper

actually regardless of position at TG, all charges are taken seriously. Be them admins or SMs or Pubs....Report them all.

I will next time, and also take demo's and record the sound of some of the uninspiring stuff I've heard.

I want/always have wanted TG to be THE place to play.

Like I said, we never wanted each game in the CoD series to be the same... it's just some of the new rules that were formed because a bunch of players unfamiliar with the gameplay which we all desired, all of a sudden had rules that even familiar players didn't know what to do.

I'm not blaming inhouse squads or BF players entirely.... the fact of the matter is, if you're in a squad, the majority tends to agree on certain rules. I know this, I've been a clan leader for a "tactical clan" for over 5 years. I know that not all agree everything. I know I can't please all the members in my squad. I know from experience.

I'm glad some of you didn't see this as a bash thread.... it's a thread of opinions that have been expressed to me since CoD4 came out, from my fellow TGer's and former TGer's. It's good to hear other people here constructivly understand my, and many others, point of view.

I will still be around. I will still play here. My team is going to participate in the upcoming Tg scrims. This isn't a threat thread. This is an ongoing conversation that everyone here should read and understand, to enjoy their experience here at TG.

Thank you for listening, participating and possibly undewrstanding where some of us are coming from.

Originally Posted by birdie_in_Texas

My suggestion? Rent you a server..then you can make it exactly what you want..I would definately spend time playing on it, as I enjoy playing against SOG guys...

BTW we do.

**SmokingTarpan** · 02-06-2009, 11:22 PM

Originally Posted by asch

* We need to understand the terms we use better.

Simulation does not equal realism. (simulation != realism)
Slow play does not equal tactical. (slow != tactical)
Fast play does not equal run-n-gun. (fast != run-n-gun)

Because some players prefer things at a faster or slower pace does not make one more or less tactical or realistic. The only difference may be the effectiveness of that style in a particular game. For instance, players that move with great speed in a game like Armed Assault may quickly find themselves dead due to the lethality of the weapons. On the opposite side of the coin players that attempt to use strict squad formations and slow movement in a game like battlefield may find themselves out of the action quite often because the action moves faster. The game/mod dictates quite a bit of the play-style.

I've tried to make this point several times over the years here, but I have yet to be successful with the idea gaining traction. It's seems that there is a driving desire to make every (at least shooter/military) game at TG "tactical" by means of forcing the game to adapt to the playstyle rather than adapting the playstyle to the game.

To me tactical is about teamwork and communication, not about taking 5 real minutes to cross a street or making sure we use up all 15 minutes we are given each round. I'm of the opinion that if we can work together and accomplish an objective, we can make a 2 minute round just as exciting as a 10 minute one- maybe even moreso.

You have to think of how to apply what TG has (teamwork, intelligence, maturity, experience) to each new venue instead of trying to make everything that comes our way a clone of what we already have. If a successful corn farmer is given a soy field, he has to ask the question, "How do I apply my success with corn to make my soy crop equally successful?" If all the farmer does is think, "How can I make this soy more like corn?" then he's going to run into tons of problems.

Why this concept has never gained ground here, I can't say for sure.

**|SOG| Vir2L** · 02-06-2009, 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by asch

Because some players prefer things at a faster or slower pace does not make one more or less tactical or realistic.

I believe it does. That is my opinion.

**asch** · 02-07-2009, 01:39 AM

Originally Posted by |SOG| Vir2L

I believe it does. That is my opinion.

Fair enough. I can respect that.

I believe that the situation can dictate speed. For example, here is the wikipedia article on CQB. One of the key components is speed.

Speed

Once the assault begins, the team must gain control before the target understands what is happening and can prepare an effective defense or mount a counterattack. The defenders sometimes have a contingency plan that could cause the attack to fail instantly, such as killing hostages, detonating bombs, or destroying evidence. If they can execute an organized plan, such as falling back into a prepared stronghold, or breaking through the perimeter, the possibility of friendly casualties increases. Speed is achieved through well-designed tactics, such as gaining proximity with an undetected approach, the use of multiple entry points, and explosive breaching. Note that the need for speed does not necessarily translate to individual operators choosing to run in these situations.

Now this doesn't mean that the only way to accomplish the goal is through speed.... or that everything has to go fast. But it does show that well-designed tactics do include moving fast.

I guess my point is that there isn't always a right or wrong way to accomplish something. We should be exploring different tactics as a team to see what is effective. It also breaks up the monotony. Hopefully it leads to players coming back to the forums and discussing (AARs???) on how things went.

We need to get back to being a community working together instead of at each other.

**Krag** · 02-07-2009, 03:59 AM

Originally Posted by asch

Now this doesn't mean that the only way to accomplish the goal is through speed.... or that everything has to go fast. But it does show that well-designed tactics do include moving fast.

Yes well-designed tactics include rapid movement. The last time I played on the
server my team was one round from the win. I was acting as the leader and called a blizt
on the OBJ. We planted and won the match. So at the end of the match what happens,
some one complains saying it felt like "RnG". What it seems is that some things are ok for some people to do but not others. Its really easy to slow game play down, just turn of bomd sqaud . Then people would need to play a little more cautious cause they dont know whats around the corner.

on another note OW can be setup just like WRM. Since TR/OW was modled after WRM it can be done

**Extinct** · 02-07-2009, 01:34 PM

We'll said Asch, you really hit the nail on the head there. I implore all of you too check out the new mod on any day regardless of the players playing on it and see how well of a job Drona and a couple others have done with the place.

**HAZMAT** · 02-08-2009, 06:09 PM

+ Rep on several posts...

Great thoughts, comments and ideas. Ive always been a supporter of finding a game or mod that is more molded to the "tactical" approach... Such as GRAW2...

CoD2 has no run and its an amazing game with the mod on.

CoD4 is no fully modded and guess what its getting better.

Now if I can just get a more simpler set of rules agreed upon!

Things will be great across the board.

And for those who dont play these titles anymore its great to hear your comments and I respect your POV but its hard to hang too much on them. If you left the community because of "lines' or "rules" come back and take a look. Things have changed!!

But ensure you take a look at the sticky about FAQs? Ok? Cool!! Thanks!!

Thread Tools

Display