'Playable Jedi' Debate (merged, no flaming) - Page 5

Leviathan · 08-06-2005, 07:54 AM

Jedi are cool when they look like to real humans, and not to gods...

Homer Simpson · 08-07-2005, 12:45 PM

yo if u finished the game how do u pass nar shada im stuck, do u got any hints for the xbox version

Homer Simpson · 08-07-2005, 12:48 PM

jedis are basicaly gods in evry sens of the word

Leviathan · 08-07-2005, 02:13 PM

In your previous post, I think you're talking of KotOR II or Jedi Outcast...

Do not forget it isn't the right forum for this kind of questions...

quixter · 08-07-2005, 10:13 PM

Very true this is Star Wars Battlefront Forum?!

P.S. If your talking about Jedi Outcast 2.I've beat it a billion times! I guess you just talk you the bar tender if you haven't done that yet???

Leviathan · 08-08-2005, 12:08 PM

Please come back to the main subject, instead...

AT-ATNemesis · 09-22-2005, 03:26 PM

Playing as a jedi would defeat the object of battlefront
its a game for solders not gods with sabers who are invincible and can kill anything
Buy Jedi knight if u want to do that
there are going to be playable jedi in BF2 so theres no point discussing this any further

Nerf~Herder · 09-30-2005, 10:08 PM

I'm shore there will be a disable Jedi option when creating a server or a no Jedi battle. They will do the same thing they did for JA and JK when you can put light sabers only as an option when making a server but this time there should be a gun’s only. If they do this I will have no problem with Jedi but I can see the negatives that you guys speak of.

*Kurgan* · 10-05-2005, 12:11 AM

Try out the SWBF2 public beta. I think some of the naysayers may end up convinced that this isn't necessarily a bad thing. I think they are actually fairly well done thus far...

This is in no danger of turning into "JA" at the expense of the beloved "grunts fighting each other."

And it's not just Jedi, all of the Heroes are quite useful and fun, but also quite mortal, and this is perfectly in keeping with the movies, especially as we've seen in ROTS...

***

PS: Going back and reading some of the old thread posts, I see I made one glaring mistake. I re-watched the TPM DVD and there were some Droidekas on the outdoor Naboo battle. You just don't see them until the Gungan shields go down. And one of them is destroyed also by Jar Jar's goofy "droid torso attached to my foot that fires when I kick it around" schtick.

My bad! Also the Pilots are not quite as helpless as I portrayed. Having played several more games of them since we had this debate I've noted that their grenade launchers are decent weapons (much better than shotguns) but they are still kind of crappy. Against clueless bots, yes they are awesome, but their slow rate of fire really makes them a liability in close quarters combat against faster firing weapons. Their blast radius is rather small too (not like a real thermal det) and even though they can toss health to the ground to stay alive, they typically have to grab two packs to restore the health lost from one blaster hit... So not totally helpless, but still not, IMHO, "combat equals" of all other classes in one vs. one.

zerted · 10-05-2005, 01:13 AM

No Jedi for me. A snippin' I will go.

JohnLocke · 10-05-2005, 02:22 AM

To me it's simple....
Jedi would be great to play.............in another game.
It doesn't belong in the Battlefront mentality.

CidCaldensfey · 10-12-2005, 06:52 PM

I think this game should have Jedis. It's just fine. Just reduce the speed of everyone who isn't a hero and make heroes just a little bit faster, though with moderate outputs of damage.

It's not that hard to make a melee class in such a way that it won't be overpowering. Just limit how many there can be per team and thats about it. I'll bet five clone troopers could take on a Jedi player with just blaster rifles.

I think one Jedi/hero per team is fair. And it depends on the maps too. Having a Jedi on a space map would be a bit annoying if he/she/it manages to get into the enemy spawn point. Also I don't know how useful force powers will be inside a ship =\

TK-8252 · 10-12-2005, 06:55 PM

If you think that it would be balanced if it took 5 vs. 1 to take down a Jedi then that's not balance. If the classes are balanced then they could all go one-on-one with full ammo, full health, and each would have about the same chance of killing the other.

CidCaldensfey · 10-12-2005, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK-8252

If you think that it would be balanced if it took 5 vs. 1 to take down a Jedi then that's not balance. If the classes are balanced then they could all go one-on-one with full ammo, full health, and each would have about the same chance of killing the other.

It would be balanced considering the scale of which BFII is meant to be played. A single Jedi with at least 50 points in health, increased speed, and some good damage output for MELEE isn't going to be much of a threat in a 32 player game.

And besides, theres a little human variable which gets played every time and that is called skill. With enough practice, a single player can amount to anything.

Also, the fact that the Jedi's primary weapon, a saber, is a melee weapon. All you have to do is just get around behind him and shoot them in the back. It's not that hard of a thing to do. Or better yet, just stay away from them and don't let them get close :P

So even if it would normally take 5 vs 1, it's still very much possible to do 1 vs 1 due to the random factor which is player skill. A player may not be good as a Jedi, therefore it wouldn't take much. Or a player may be great as a random clone trooper. It really is dependant ultimately, in the end, on player skill.

TK-8252 · 10-12-2005, 07:03 PM

If the Jedi player is good, they'll avoid the larger fight and just concentrate on taking out individuals. And when it'll take about five soldiers to take down the Jedi, they can just rack up easy kills while the other team suffers from a crappy round of Jedi whoring.

CidCaldensfey · 10-12-2005, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK-8252

If the Jedi player is good

Exactly. It's all about player skill.

If you are honestly concerned with whoring, you should have all the classes in the game dumbed down a bit to the point where they are practically useless. All it takes is someone who knows how to play to do anything. This is apparent in any game.

And besides, the Jedi characters are supposed to be randomly selected based off of team points. And if theres only one Jedi, then theres nothing really to worry about. However, if the server settings can be altered, well, big deal. Just find a different server or make your own.

Ultimately, what is determined as being 'balanced' is never actually decided as balanced in retrospect of what would be 'fair' but rather just opinions. Therefore, determining what is the best course of action is always the hardest, due to what some and others would perceive as 'balanced'.

TK-8252 · 10-12-2005, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CidCaldensfey

Exactly. It's all about player skill.

So why should players who are already good get an unfair boost to make them even better? It's essentially making a one-man army.

And even if the player isn't as great, they still have an unfair advantage that would require five enemies to take down. Which is unbalanaced.

CidCaldensfey · 10-12-2005, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK-8252

So why should players who are already good get an unfair boost to make them even better? It's essentially making a one-man army.

And even if the player isn't as great, they still have an unfair advantage that would require five enemies to take down. Which is unbalanaced.

It's not an unfair boost if you've actually played the game for a while. It's just the rewards of practice. Thats like saying 'Why should experienced gamers be able to play with noobs who've never played a game before?' It's an unfair boost due to inexperience on the new player's part.

But to answer your question, it's not unfair. Because the players can gain enough experience to be just as good as anyone else, if not better.

Another reason why it would be nice to have the Jedi characters a little more better than your average Joe clone trooper is mainly due to the fact that they would have to be good for something. Lets say it's like this:

Jedi has 100 health, a lightsaber, a force power or two.
Clone has 100 health, grenades, a blaster rifle.

If a clone trooper can kill a Jedi just as easily as anyone else, and theres only one Jedi, whats the point of having that class in the game if it's just about as useless as an engineer? It ruins the whole potentional and purpose.

Also, in my opinion I think a game where everything is perfectly balanced would be incredibly boring, unfortunately. But having too much in the game, and I mean most of the common material, isn't exactly healthy either.

TK-8252 · 10-12-2005, 07:23 PM

The reward for being good is being good. If you can get some kills without dying too much is the reward. And in BF2, you're also rewarded with promotions, medals, etc., and new weapons to unlock (which don't perform any better, just different).

And the "experienced players fighting newbies is unfair" argument doesn't make sense, because there's a place to gain the basic skills to take down enemies, which is called single player. Don't play multiplayer until you're ready to fight real players. It's like the people who practice flying helicopters in multiplayer by hopping in the Black Hawk and filling it up with passengers... only to crash straight into the ocean.

CidCaldensfey · 10-12-2005, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK-8252

The reward for being good is being good. If you can get some kills without dying too much is the reward. And in BF2, you're also rewarded with promotions, medals, etc., and new weapons to unlock (which don't perform any better, just different).

And the "experienced players fighting newbies is unfair" argument doesn't make sense, because there's a place to gain the basic skills to take down enemies, which is called single player. Don't play multiplayer until you're ready to fight real players. It's like the people who practice flying helicopters in multiplayer by hopping in the Black Hawk and filling it up with passengers... only to crash straight into the ocean.

So you are suggesting that playing against poor bots makes up for the experience gained by playing against real people =\?

Also, in Battlefield 2 you can't actually play with bots on large maps. IE: The 64 map version of Gulf of Oman differs greatly from the 16 player bot version, with the difference being four airplanes, six tanks, four armored vehicles (Bradleys primarly as well as the Iraq variant), speed boats, two choppers, and about five flags.

So my arguement does make sense mainly because the noobs and experienced players don't start off on equal basis. The reason for this being past experience from playing other FPS games. So in the end, it's entirely impossible to make a 'balanced' game due to the fact that human experience isn't a controlled factor.

TK-8252 · 10-12-2005, 07:31 PM

It worked for me, so it should work for others.

Once you get the feel of the weapons (this one is inaccurate, this one does heavy damage, low ammo for this one, etc.), it's easy to take out real enemies. The experience you gain online is mostly adapting to how players fight: how to avoid spawn campers, bunny hoppers, which spots typically attract snipers, where artillery commonly strikes and when, etc.

CidCaldensfey · 10-12-2005, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK-8252

It worked for me, so it should work for others.

Once you get the feel of the weapons (this one is inaccurate, this one does heavy damage, low ammo for this one, etc.), it's easy to take out real enemies. The experience you gain online is mostly adapting to how players fight: how to avoid spawn campers, bunny hoppers, which spots typically attract snipers, where artillery commonly strikes and when, etc.

Right. So whats to stop one player from taking out an opposing one with an advantange yet with disadvantages? What the Jedi doesn't have in range, it makes up in both speed and melee damage. Now that is being balanced. If you were to make the Jedi's ranged capabilities, if it has any, just as good as any regular soldier, then that would be unbalanced.

The Jedi is entirely a melee combat character. It loses it's ranged capabilities and makes up for it in melee, as described above.

TK-8252 · 10-12-2005, 07:36 PM

If it takes five players to take down one player based on class then it's not balanced.

CidCaldensfey · 10-12-2005, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK-8252

If it takes five players to take down one player based on class then it's not balanced.

I think we're argueing about the same thing but from different perspectives.

What I meant was, the most that they should do for the Jedi class, is increase the health for the Jedi class from 100% (100% being normal) to 150%.

Also, they should keep the damage that a lightsaber does greater than the damage than a blaster rifle causes, due to the fact that it is a melee weapon after all.

And to make up for the Jedi and it not having grenades, they would have force powers. These things would either let the Jedi increase speed, health, damage, or even the casual force lightning or something.

Thats what I meant.

*lukeiamyourdad* · 10-12-2005, 10:41 PM

I think you're both right and wrong.

TK is wrong for badly defending his position and Cid for discouraging balance.

Cid is partly right. If the Jedi, which is a melee only character, did the same amount of damage and had the same HP as a simple soldier, things would actually be unbalanced for the Jedi.

Now, where he is wrong is balance when it takes 5 to beat 1? Let's be realistic, how often will the jedi solo an entire battalion in a 32 players game? He'll be smart and stay with at least a few teamates. Which of course, makes it even harder to bring the Jedi down.
There's also the sneaking to kill him bit. Unless you're a crackshot and hack into the game a better rifle then what we have now, sneaking around won't be much help.
If anything, it's the melee unit who should do the sneaking around. In SWBF2's context, it really isn't realistic, but a better form of balancing. Combine it with better speed and a insta-kill weapon and it ain't so bad. Can't charge an entire battalion, but can quickly dispose of single targets.

As much as we should encourage newbies to get better, I must agree with Cid that nothing beats experience. If I'm a veteran and I manage to rack up more kills then a newbie, so what? I'm a veteran, I'm supposed to be better. Discouraging better players while trying to encourage newbies isn't the right way.

One last thing, unbalanced games can be fun, however, if played with the right persons. An unbalanced map in an MP game leads to mostly whining from the newbies of the losing team and lots of anger from the vets of the same team. If I play with vets only and I lose a game because of a balancing problem, I can still have a good time, but when it's with idiots...well, we all know what a game with idiots looks like.

TK-8252 · 10-12-2005, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lukeiamyourdad

TK is wrong for badly defending his position

Oh yeah...? Well you didn't do any better!

*lukeiamyourdad* · 10-12-2005, 11:08 PM

Actually, you could have played the 6 players of equal skills in a 5 vs 1 clone and Jedi confrontation shouldn't see themselves have even a slightly hard time dealing with the Jedi.

Flash512 · 10-13-2005, 05:05 AM

Well I know alot of people will choose Jedi
since people just go for the easy kills "/
would be cool to have a jedi vs sith saber war

*Kurgan* · 10-18-2005, 11:45 PM

Apparently you can... in the Mos Eisley Assault map! (Unplayable in the beta, but it features two teams of heroes against each other, and plenty of them have sabers!)

All you people still in doubt that Jedi can be done well in this game, check out the free SWBF2 public beta, and see what you think.

And yes, through batch files you can play it offline to your heart's content too!

Fate's Decision · 10-19-2005, 11:15 PM

Can you actually kill jedis? I thought they just died after a certain amount of time.

*Kurgan* · 10-20-2005, 02:33 AM

Of course! All Heroes are killable.

They have a health meter that is constantly diminishing (it looks like a big Lightsaber blade, even for non-Jedi Heroes). When it's completely gone, they "flee" (actually just crouch down for a few seconds and then you're sent back to the respawn screen as a normal soldier). You can diminish the bar further by dealing damage to them. They can increase the bar a bit for every kill they get (it diminishes more for team kills, as if they had been dealt damage by an enemy).

Falling off a cliff (like one of those guarenteed kill pits) also defeats the Hero.

And Heroes are not just Jedi, but also like Han Solo, Princess Leia, the Fetts and Chewbacca (basically just infantry with some special bonuses like good weapons or jetpacks, team buffs, etc).

And Jedi can block with their saber, but they have a limited block meter (based on time, not whether they block anything). This meter is also used for "force powers." In fact, it's the same bar that ALL characters use for sprinting (a new faster method of running short distances). Jumping also prevents the "activity" (?) bar from replenishing. But Jedi blocking is thus severally limited. If they're not in block stance, everything gets through, just as it would on a normal soldier.

Though I could be wrong, I think at least in the beta, a swinging saber can bat away blaster bolts it happens to hit mid-swing, but that's the only exception.

Flash512 · 10-21-2005, 05:47 PM

there is a hero-on and hero-off choice so thats helpful