TF2: Turrets are overpowered
BaltimoreBri
first attempt)
Let me first admit that I haven't played a whole lot of Team Fortress
2, probably only about 10-15 games or so (mostly on 2forts). However,
I did play a lot of TFC and Q3F back in the day. While my memory of
those two older games may be a little hazy, I don't remember the
turrets being so overpowered. It seems almost impossible to take them
down unless you're either a soldier firing from a large distance or a
demo from around a corner. I think there's a device that a spy can
plant on them, but I haven't tried that class too much yet.
By removing grenades from the game, Valve really limited the ways to
counter turrets. I remember in TFC, just about every class had a
grenade capable of doing significant damage to a turret. I think it
made the game much more offense-minded and dynamic. Now in TF2,
usually about 60-70% of the teams consist of engineers placing
turrets. This seems to result in a WWI-style battle of attrition, with
the only way to the intelligence being to use the demo class to slowly
de-turret the base. Not a whole lot of fun in my opinion. Especially
since a fully upgraded turret can take down a person real quick, if
you pop your head out for instant you're most likely a dead man. I'm
sure better teamwork would help, but that's not always possible in
pick-up games.
Anyway, I've got to say that TF2 has been a disappointment so far. It
can be fun sometimes, but the balancing issues (including one map that
seems to overwhelmingly favor the defensive team) make it much more
frustrating and tedious than it should be. Not to mention the lag,
though I guess that's going to be fixed soon. In spite of TF2's
problems, I still think the Orange Box is a whole lot of fun.
boodybandit
"BaltimoreBri" <Baltim...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193164480.6...@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
I would like to help but I'm not allowed to give an objective opinion
regarding 360 titles.
slaye...@hotmail.com
> demo from around a corner. I think there's a device that a spy can
> plant on them, but I haven't tried that class too much yet.
You're an idiot and I stopped reading here. Complaining that turrets
are overpowered while simultaneously saying you have no idea what a
sapper is or how spies work explains your own grievance. One good spy
can easily take out any number of turrets and the engineers with them.
The game is mostly a balancing act, offense classes beat support
classes, support classes are the key to beat defense classes, and
defense classes are the way to stop offense classes. It's so fucking
simple they even spell it out for you when you choose a class.
Tom
"boodybandit" <allabo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Cc2dnaPtetQP1YPa...@comcast.com...
LMAO!
I haven't bought the game as I would just rather play a PC version.
Tom
<slaye...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193167019.0...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
It's sad that you can't even answer without attacking someone that was
simply asking for a little help. I guess when you had an issue trying to
figure out a game, etc, you were also an idiot for not figuring it out,
right?
slaye...@hotmail.com
> <slayerma...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
You're so quick to jump on the other side and add words like 'asking'.
He was not asking anything. The only question mark on this entire page
is the one YOU MADE. It's like complaining that the bishop is way
overpowered in chess. You've heard of this 'queen' thing, but you'll
be damned if you'll try THAT out before bitching about it online.
I'll even go as far as to read the whole post.
'Anyway, I've got to say that TF2 has been a disappointment so far. It
can be fun sometimes, but the balancing issues (including one map that
seems to overwhelmingly favor the defensive team) make it much more
frustrating and tedious than it should be.'
Balancing issues being something you know nothing about due to the
fact that you have no idea what certain classes can do to level the
field.
A map that favors defense? Welcome to the dustbowl series, where each
map increasingly favors the defense. Cry more noob, it's not terribly
hard to win.
BaltimoreBri
Wow, thanks for the insult. Way to keep this discussion friendly. Ok,
so now there's one more class that works against turrets (assuming the
spy isn't recognized by the surrounding enemies). So instead of just
Demo vs. Turret, there's also Spy vs. Turret (in regards to indoors,
the Soldier can only really take them out at a distance). Also, you
say a GOOD spy can take them out, but most people probably aren't
good. However, a player of just about any skill level can set up a
turret. I still don't think that's entirely balanced. So in the games
that I've played where so many people play engineers, only spies and
demos are mostly effective then. That's quite a change from TFC where
just about any class could go on the offensive and have a reasonable
chance of taking the objective. THAT was fun.
Also, since so many people seem to play the engineer, that still
leaves the scout, pyro, and soldier at a disadvantage. So there's less
of an incentive to play those classes. So that means less diversity in
the classes that people play, which means the game just isn't as
interesting. Sure, those 3 classes can still be really useful
offensively if the team can back them up. But since most games seem
unplayably laggy at more than 12 players or so and since most people
don't seem to use their mic, the chances of any good coordination or
diversity in the classes are slim. That just makes the game boring.
Maybe on the PC version it's better. The rock-paper-scissors design of
the classes doesn't seem to be enjoyable for the games that I've
played.
And really, why remove grenades anyway? They're not that hard to
manage and the nail/pyro bombs were a blast (no pun intended).
slaye...@hotmail.com
Oh, my bad, I forgot to answer your question and then personally
attack you because I don't like you.
Yes, the next time I play a game for 15 minutes, then come here and
complain about a 'flaw' in the game because I am obviously terrible at
the game and only tried half the classes, you have MY PERMISSION to
call me an idiot.
On that note, you are an idiot for thinking this person was asking a
question. Did your dyslexia randomly replace bitching and moaning with
question marks and pleasantry?
slaye...@hotmail.com
You're welcome, thanks for acknowledging your view of the game is
skewed by your lack of experience. I said a good spy can take out an
entire base. An idiot spy can run around waving his hands in the air
and still randomly click on a turret and place a sapper. If most the
enemy is playing engineers it makes it THAT MUCH EASIER. Disguise as
an engineer and they will NEVER find you. Engineers CANNOT keep a
turret up if sappers are constantly being placed on it.
> Also, since so many people seem to play the engineer, that still
> leaves the scout, pyro, and soldier at a disadvantage. So there's less
> of an incentive to play those classes. So that means less diversity in
> the classes that people play, which means the game just isn't as
> interesting. Sure, those 3 classes can still be really useful
> offensively if the team can back them up. But since most games seem
> unplayably laggy at more than 12 players or so and since most people
> don't seem to use their mic, the chances of any good coordination or
> diversity in the classes are slim. That just makes the game boring.
> Maybe on the PC version it's better. The rock-paper-scissors design of
> the classes doesn't seem to be enjoyable for the games that I've
> played.
The SCOUT, PYRO and SOLDIER are at a disadvantage to the ENGINEER? So
what you're telling me is that the OFFENSE classes are at a
disadvantage to a DEFENSE class? NO WAY. It's called TEAM Fortress for
a reason, numbnuts. A scout is going to get lit up by a turrent, which
is why you get spies to sap them. Back to the basic circle of
OFFENSE>SUPPORT>DEFENSE>OFFENSE. A combination of support and offense
destroys turrets as well. An uber pyro can run in and light the
engineer, or a soldier can just spam rockets and outdamage the
engineers healing, while being healed by a medic.
> And really, why remove grenades anyway? They're not that hard to
> manage and the nail/pyro bombs were a blast (no pun intended).
Grenade spamming ruins games, especially with a free refill of
grenades at the spawns. TF2 is head on, tactical fighting, not
throwing grenades at things you can't see and hoping to get a lucky
kill. If every class had grenades, every class would have a way to
deal with turrets. That's not how TEAM Fortress works.
BaltimoreBri
Wow, thanks for the insult. Way to keep this discussion friendly. Ok,
so now there's one more class that works against turrets (assuming the
spy isn't recognized by the surrounding enemies). So instead of just
Demo vs. Turret, there's also Spy vs. Turret (in regards to indoors,
the Soldier can only really take them out at a distance). Also, you
say a GOOD spy can take them out, but most people probably aren't
good. However, a player of just about any skill level can set up a
turret. I still don't think that's entirely balanced. So in the games
that I've played where so many people play engineers, only spies and
demos are mostly effective then. That's quite a change from TFC where
just about any class could go on the offensive and have a reasonable
chance of taking the objective. THAT was fun.
Also, since so many people seem to play the engineer, that still
leaves the scout, pyro, and soldier at a disadvantage. So there's less
of an incentive to play those classes. So that means less diversity in
the classes that people play, which means the game just isn't as
interesting. Sure, those 3 classes can still be really useful
offensively if the team can back them up. But since most games seem
unplayably laggy at more than 12 players or so and since most people
don't seem to use their mic, the chances of any good coordination or
diversity in the classes are slim. That just makes the game boring.
Maybe on the PC version it's better. The rock-paper-scissors design of
the classes doesn't seem to be enjoyable for the games that I've
played.
And really, why remove grenades anyway? They're not that hard to
Tom
> On Oct 23, 1:40 pm, "Tom" <no...@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > <slayerma...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:1193167019.0...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > On Oct 23, 11:34 am, BaltimoreBri <Baltimore...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> demo from around a corner. I think there's a device that a spy can
> > >> plant on them, but I haven't tried that class too much yet.
>
> > > You're an idiot and I stopped reading here. Complaining that turrets
> > > are overpowered while simultaneously saying you have no idea what a
> > > sapper is or how spies work explains your own grievance. One good spy
> > > can easily take out any number of turrets and the engineers with them.
> > > The game is mostly a balancing act, offense classes beat support
> > > classes, support classes are the key to beat defense classes, and
> > > defense classes are the way to stop offense classes. It's so fucking
> > > simple they even spell it out for you when you choose a class.
>
> > It's sad that you can't even answer without attacking someone that was
> > simply asking for a little help. I guess when you had an issue trying to
> > figure out a game, etc, you were also an idiot for not figuring it out,
> > right?
>
> You're so quick to jump on the other side and add words like 'asking'.
> He was not asking anything. The only question mark on this entire page
> is the one YOU MADE. It's like complaining that the bishop is way
> overpowered in chess. You've heard of this 'queen' thing, but you'll
> be damned if you'll try THAT out before bitching about it online.
So fricking what! the guy made a post, even apologized in advance in
case of being redundant, and you attack the guy, without so much as
being congenial at all. You're the real idiot in this case, and IMHO,
you'll aways be one. You're a blowhard knowitall wannabe who
condescends at the drop of a dime with people.
>
> I'll even go as far as to read the whole post.
>
> 'Anyway, I've got to say that TF2 has been a disappointment so far. It
> can be fun sometimes, but the balancing issues (including one map that
> seems to overwhelmingly favor the defensive team) make it much more
> frustrating and tedious than it should be.'
And you replied so kindly, you jerk!
>
> Balancing issues being something you know nothing about due to the
> fact that you have no idea what certain classes can do to level the
> field.
>
> A map that favors defense? Welcome to the dustbowl series, where each
> map increasingly favors the defense. Cry more noob, it's not terribly
> hard to win.-
Me cry, I don't own the game on the 360 nor PC, and I don't play
shooters on PCs either, never have, too many kiddies (like you) that
are typically shit to play with. I was simply commenting on your lack
of humility by your namecalling. Note the guy even thanked you for the
insult, and you still act like a little bitch.
Tom
>
> - Show quoted text -
You're so braindead, you have to reply to me twice for the same post
eh? You're a joke!
slaye...@hotmail.com
So you're going to hide from my words behind a very fractured sentence
and an insult. I replied to you twice for the same post? No, I replied
to you twice for two very different posts, one directed at you, one
directed at the OP. The reason I directed one at the OP was because
you made it seem like he was being intelligent and asking questions.
When I saw that this was not the case and the rest of the post was
filled with idiocy, I was driven to respond.
Once again, where did he ask a question?
Tom
>
> - Show quoted text -
Not hiding from anything and you didn't reply from two different post,
and I'll make you look like the idiot you are right now by copying and
pasting how you replied to the same post twice, as if you needed to
keep going on about something, here goes (right in line where everyone
can read it, with the actual links too);
Post #1 from you to me:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/msg/0345cc59c8ee2de2
(I said first time)
> It's sad that you can't even answer without attacking someone that was
> simply asking for a little help. I guess when you had an issue trying to
> figure out a game, etc, you were also an idiot for not figuring it out,
> right?
(Your first reply)
"You're so quick to jump on the other side and add words like
'asking'.
He was not asking anything. The only question mark on this entire
page
is the one YOU MADE. It's like complaining that the bishop is way
overpowered in chess. You've heard of this 'queen' thing, but you'll
be damned if you'll try THAT out before bitching about it online.
I'll even go as far as to read the whole post.
'Anyway, (snipped inane babble)"
Then you reply again to the same post, the markers indicate this
clearly:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/msg/0ab9d53703ecf8c4
(Still from my first post)
> It's sad that you can't even answer without attacking someone that was
> simply asking for a little help. I guess when you had an issue trying to
> figure out a game, etc, you were also an idiot for not figuring it out,
> right?
(You reply with a totaly different response)
"Oh, my bad, I forgot to answer your question and then personally
attack you because I don't like you.
Yes, the next time I play a game for 15 minutes, then come here and
complain about a 'flaw' in the game because I am obviously terrible
at
the game and only tried half the classes, you have MY PERMISSION to
call me an idiot.
On that note, you are an idiot for thinking this person was asking a
question. Did your dyslexia randomly replace bitching and moaning
with
question marks and pleasantry?"
So, did your inability to follow different replies you calim you did,
help expose how you reply to people who don't measure down to your
level of idiocy?
slaye...@hotmail.com
Once again, your dyslexia prevents you from having an actual argument.
I understand I replied to a post twice, your exact wording is 'You're
so braindead, you have to reply to me twice for the same post eh?
You're a joke!' I did NOT reply twice FOR the SAME post. I replied
twice for two completely different posts. I am now pretty sure you
meant to say FROM the same post, but even that doesn't make a lot of
sense. You even admit I reply with a completely different response,
thus I obviously did not reply FOR the same post.
Since you seem to want to ignore it, I'll ask you again; When did the
OP ask a question?
Tom
>
> - Show quoted text -
Remember Dick, these are your words, "I replied
twice for two completely different posts"
Show me the two completely different posts, I know you can't because I
already showed you the text to which you replied the first two times
to me. I just showed you that you replied to the same post I initially
made, which was the very first one, and you did each with a different
response as if you didn't finish moaning the first time, but felt you
needed to piss a little more. You can see the words that I typed the
first time in this thread, are in your *first two* replies to me. Now
you do deny this (while trying poorly at semantics) and look more
idiotic in front of everyone here who reads these threads..
I also won't answer your question, because my second post (don't get
confused with my first one, OK!) was in regard to the OP not asking a
question, and I alluded to that by saying right off in my SECOND post
"So fricking what!". You not only have reading comprehension skills,
but you also exhibit terrible lack of depth in understanding.
slaye...@hotmail.com
What don't you understand? You said 'You had to reply to me twice FOR
the same post', when what you should have said was 'You replied to the
same post twice.' I realize I replied to the same post twice, it's
really no big deal, but I did NOT reply to it FOR THE SAME POST. 'For
the same post' means that I replied once, and then replied again with
the same post. For is a word that indicates purpose.
> I also won't answer your question, because my second post (don't get
> confused with my first one, OK!) was in regard to the OP not asking a
> question, and I alluded to that by saying right off in my SECOND post
> "So fricking what!". You not only have reading comprehension skills,
> but you also exhibit terrible lack of depth in understanding.
My point is, you come into this thread spouting fire about me 'jumping
all over someone' for asking a question, when the person never asked a
question. You've admitted to being dyslexic and have made incredibly
fragmented impossible to understand sentences before all the while
calling me an idiot only to admit later that you are in fact wrong.
(Hello, Havoc physics debate with N). Can't you just grasp that it IS
possible that the way you said something isn't how you meant it? Hell
I will even let you back out of it at this point because once again,
your idiocy has derailed yet another thread.
slaye...@hotmail.com
This is a perfect time to give you an example of what I did before.
Here I am replying to a post I just replied to, but I am not replying
to you twice for the same post. (Which isn't even a correct sentence
anyways).
You said 'so fricking what!' in your THIRD post, and how I am supposed
to know that this is acknowledging that he didn't ask a question?
There were two points in the paragraph you said that to and it could
have easily been referring to him not playing as a spy.
slaye...@hotmail.com
Ignoring the fact that you said he 'asked a question' when he was
blatantly stating the game was flawed. NICE. Of course I am going to
condescend to someone who practically posts a review of a game after
playing fifteen minutes and crying that it's unbalanced.
> > I'll even go as far as to read the whole post.
>
> > 'Anyway, I've got to say that TF2 has been a disappointment so far. It
> > can be fun sometimes, but the balancing issues (including one map that
> > seems to overwhelmingly favor the defensive team) make it much more
> > frustrating and tedious than it should be.'
>
> And you replied so kindly, you jerk!
Heaven forbid someone calls someone else an idiot on the internet.
Jesus Christ, the guy is taking it better than you are because he
knows he made a mistake and derserves to be branded an idiot for a
little while. What are you all butthurt about?
> > Balancing issues being something you know nothing about due to the
> > fact that you have no idea what certain classes can do to level the
> > field.
>
> > A map that favors defense? Welcome to the dustbowl series, where each
> > map increasingly favors the defense. Cry more noob, it's not terribly
> > hard to win.-
>
> Me cry, I don't own the game on the 360 nor PC, and I don't play
> shooters on PCs either, never have, too many kiddies (like you) that
> are typically shit to play with. I was simply commenting on your lack
> of humility by your namecalling. Note the guy even thanked you for the
> insult, and you still act like a little bitch.
I am blatantly talking to the OP when I say cry more. I guessed you
would have figured that by me quoting his 'map that favors defense'.
You have got to be the biggest idiot on usenet if you think he was
actually thanking me for insulting him.
Then you have the audacity to say that there are too many kiddies on
PC shooters? Have you ever even TOUCHED a console that's hooked up to
live? Didn't really think so. You try to insult me by saying I am shit
to play with, but it means nothing coming from someone who has never
played the game with me, let alone at all.
Private Private
episode of the view. Tampons on Isle 5
Tom
"Private Private" <KS...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:20432-47...@storefull-3232.bay.webtv.net...
> You guys are so fucking sensitive ,this thread is has turned into an
> episode of the view. Tampons on Isle 5
>
I'm guilty, I admit it, but it's interesting that you read enough to then
comment on it, on about the same level you indicate in your post of how "
You guys are....". Now go help yourself to those tampons, LOL.
slaye...@hotmail.com
actually asked a question instead of spouting idoicy as truth it
probably would have went like this:
slaye...@hotmail.com
> I'll be the first one to admit that I'm a dick. However, had the OP
> actually asked a question instead of spouting >>>>idoicy<<<< as truth it
> probably would have went like this:
>
Epic failure...