Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The evolution of "Evolution"

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Gambit7
    started a topic The evolution of "Evolution"

    The evolution of "Evolution"

    Okay... uhhh... Evolution is getting old IMO. BUT, not for the reasons one would expect. The reason is simply because it's near impossible to really glean all of the content from the map before it resets from completion or a crash. Heck, a determined squad could probably clear the map by themselves in one evening if they really wanted to.

    We talked about this a few times the other night, and many agree with me that the ranking system needs to go bye-bye. This would enable us to really dig deep tactically and take advantage of the impending increase in player numbers we're seeing on the server. Also, the old destroy mission spamming would cease and we could enjoy some of the other built in missions in the map.

    Aside from this, I believe the AI needs a good kick in the arse. Is it possible to tweak the difficulty at all?? Obviously, with greater difficulty the map wont reset as much either and it'd be more of a challenge, especially with 10+ players on the server.

    Anyways, I really believe Evolution was a nice attempt at a coop dynamic campaign, but it really needs quite a bit of work to get there. It's definitely no "Falcon 4.0". I DO believe it's possible for a long term dynamic campaign to exist in the VBS format, but it'd take a heck of a lot of work to get there:

    a) There needs to be capturable objectives that the AI can fight over with the players. Towns, FARPs, etc. And each should be spawnable with dependant loadouts. Obviously, HQ would have the most complete loadout.
    b) AI should respawn dependant on supply chain, communications, etc. (this would give reason for actually destroying said items in-game). Most importantly, this would penalize squads that dont complete objectives in a timely manner. i.e. before the enemy reinforces
    c) Campaign status should exist on disk so if the server crashes it's not lost
    d) AI needs to simply be more aggressive and offensive (like in Falcon 4.0). It has to want to take over the map, not just sit there and take it up the butt.


    I cant wait for the day we get to this point.

  • peardog
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    Done..thanks to Shiner for finding it and getting it uploaded...!

    Leave a comment:


  • Tmwrk_Zoot
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    Evo 3.0 is out!!

    Its in the BIS forums. I cant link it because of an absurd forum rule that I cant link stuff until I made 15 posts.

    Update the server please!

    Leave a comment:


  • peardog
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    Originally posted by Raptor82 View Post
    I dont Know having the harrier makes for good air support lasing targets..
    Oh it sure does..but a bit Too Good!.. I can't imagine what evo will degrade into if Harriers and Lased targeting was available from the get go... Basically a Targeting range for pilots I guess..

    But yep..It would be effective...

    Leave a comment:


  • Raptor82
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    I dont Know having the harrier makes for good air support lasing targets


    But again Im new here as well

    Leave a comment:


  • tHa_KhAn
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    Originally posted by Mercenarius View Post
    I will tweak the next unranked version for better coop suitability. (restricting planes for later towns etc)
    I say restrict all aircraft except for UH-60 MG(and of course little birds) until the south island is clear. There is very little armor and Anti-Air on the south island, no need for it. The armed helo's only encourage more lone wolfing as most pilots don't have the restraint to just attack what is requested then return to holding patterns.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mercenarius
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    I will tweak the next unranked version for better coop suitability. (restricting planes for later towns etc)

    Leave a comment:


  • SnakeDoc
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    Originally posted by tHa_KhAn View Post
    You have a great point B. Being new you don't see the flip side of the ranked Evo. You would spend hours getting a score just to have the server crash or something of the sort and you'd be back at square one. The same effect, you never get to play with the advanced toys and everyone is out for themselves.
    Yeah this is a big issue with it being ranked, people end up focusing on getting points just to be able to use a decent weapon. On the other hand using the harriers right at the beginning to level cities isn't very tactical, but I've only seen a few people who actually do that (non-TG people). Most of the fighting can be done with little vehicle support. No reason to use 2 m1a1's to clear somato, or using a blackhawk ffar to clear an entire town.

    Leave a comment:


  • VegaBond
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    You should try out 1.0m and 1.0n, tons new changes.... There the latest official builds...

    Leave a comment:


  • tHa_KhAn
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    Originally posted by |TG| B View Post
    I think we should make a standing rule of entry to the game. Such as communicate and join the acting squad or one of the squads if there are many.

    Make sure to get the current objective city.

    Always have a rally point to regroup outside a city, Landing Zone for troop insertions, and waypoints when traveling through a city. etc.

    Because organized Evo is much fun.

    When BF2 was at its heights we had extremely disciplined troops who had nothing but teamwork on their minds. I am really not seeing that here in Arma community, and this is my second night. I see people driving around by themselves, passing by a stranded soldier, or some cowpoop like that.

    About the server being unraked, it really makes it too easy and takes the fun and requirement to work together out of it. Since they have access to choppers and planes they will just do air attacks and us ground pounders would spend 20 minutes looking for that last single infantry.

    But then again, I am relatively new and everybody has opinions right?


    No intention to cause anybody a emotional distress.
    You have a great point B. Being new you don't see the flip side of the ranked Evo. You would spend hours getting a score just to have the server crash or something of the sort and you'd be back at square one. The same effect, you never get to play with the advanced toys and everyone is out for themselves.

    Great games last night. Organized Evo is a bundle of fun. I too would like to see some standard rules specific to the Evo server. There are enough Evo servers running that if someone doesn't like it they could play elsewhere.
    This is community is only going to grow with teamwork oriented people who keep their fellow player in mind.

    Leave a comment:


  • hedgehog
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    I think we should make a standing rule of entry to the game. Such as communicate and join the acting squad or one of the squads if there are many.

    Make sure to get the current objective city.

    Always have a rally point to regroup outside a city, Landing Zone for troop insertions, and waypoints when traveling through a city. etc.

    Because organized Evo is much fun.

    When BF2 was at its heights we had extremely disciplined troops who had nothing but teamwork on their minds. I am really not seeing that here in Arma community, and this is my second night. I see people driving around by themselves, passing by a stranded soldier, or some cowpoop like that.

    About the server being unraked, it really makes it too easy and takes the fun and requirement to work together out of it. Since they have access to choppers and planes they will just do air attacks and us ground pounders would spend 20 minutes looking for that last single infantry.

    But then again, I am relatively new and everybody has opinions right?


    No intention to cause anybody a emotional distress.

    Leave a comment:


  • tHa_KhAn
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    As a pub server, unranked Evo only maximizes the existing problems. Atleast ranked you could hope if you could play long enough to get to use some vehicles, but when I initially loaded in yesterday, the only vehicles left at base were the little birds and hummers, a few scattered strykers were near by. So that is why we got together and restarted the server to use it as a COOP server essentially. Now being Evo is really allowed people to come and go and continue rolling on as happened. Everyone stayed organized and continued the spirit we started with all evening.

    Check out this After Action Report: http://www.tacticalgamer.com/armed-a...vo-server.html

    Leave a comment:


  • SnakeDoc
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    Theres a discussion in another thread about proposed changes to the evo mission which would probably help a lot (can't remember where it is atm).

    One is no ranking but combined with making ALL the vehicles respawn but at a longer time period like 90 minutes or 2 hours. I agree just turning ranking off makes things worse since people start ditching vehicles all over or just using bombers to level cities.

    The thing with loading the ai in other cities happens regardless since people go near them for missions or decide they're going to attack bagango while everyone else is at somato for example.

    Leave a comment:


  • gunjunkie
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    IMO, people should earn the leet vehicles, that way you are more careful not to lose them for your team.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheBigC
    replied
    Re: The evolution of "Evolution"

    I loath Evolution, period. For some of the same reasons Khan stated above. If you do not start with the game, you play clean up your entire time. People have zero concern for the players that come after them, so they leave vehicles everywhere around the map.

    Unranked Evo solves none of the core issues with why Evolution sucks. When people have zero incentive to work as a team, they will continue to play like that no matter the version or ranking. I do not know how many times, every single player was assaulting a separate city. That causes another issue. Once some clown gets in an aircraft, they have to fly the entire map activating all the AI. That slows down the server by creating a huge burden on the CPU. If you were to simply assault each city as one and progress together, that would not happen.

    I am all for large scale conflicts that have acheivable end states to them, yet realistic limitations. This is nothing more that a feeble attempt at a 1st person shooter where you get killed and respawn, along the way implementing nothing in the form of unit tactics. There is nothing simulation based about Evolution, nor will there ever be.

    Leave a comment:

Connect

Collapse

TeamSpeak 3 Server

Collapse

Twitter Feed

Collapse

Working...
X