Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 08/14/2008
Offline
343 posts
 

Re: Why no classic layout?

Apr 18, 2013

Also: 

BASIN

BASIN

BASIN

BASIN

BASIN

BASIN

BASIN

BASIN

 

etc....

Message 11 of 30 (160 Views)
Reply
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 12/31/2008
Offline
1094 posts
 

Re: Why no classic layout?

Apr 18, 2013

Well, at least it sounds like it's not all just:

"Basin -Groundpounder"

"Basin -Groundpounder"

"Basin -Groundpounder"

"Basin -Groundpounder"

"Basin -Groundpounder"

 

That's all it used to be.

 photo StubbornPuppetSig2011-1.gif
Message 12 of 30 (157 Views)
Reply
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 01/25/2012
Offline
7276 posts
 

Re: Why no classic layout?

Apr 18, 2013
The days when all servers where Groundpounder.
Message 13 of 30 (148 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 12/08/2008
Online
8552 posts
 

Re: Why no classic layout?

[ Edited ]
Apr 18, 2013

My theory.

 

Classic isnt as popular as heavyweight among the most hawkcentric players.

This is likely due to the fact that other can survive for a bit when not in a hawk(ie in a jetpack is your best chance to survive a direct hawk attack), and pilots do not like this very much.

 

Heavyweight is of course much better for this crowd as you either fly or die for the most part, although a case for the grizzly can be made here, but not much of a case.  It offers no where near the ability to avoid/survive hawk attacks as the jetpack.

 

IMO the jetpack is the thing hawks fear most, making of course heavyweight more popular for this crowd.

 

Now for the less hawkcentric players who wouldnt love lightweight?  Its got it all, makes for sweet ground battles and you never have to worry about sneak bombing runs, stealth flak, etc.

 

 

For the all around guys classic is pretty good, but the fear of it being over run by the hawk crowd is likely why you dont see it as much as the others.  The easiest way to ruin a good classic match is when the spam clusters and flak/torps/stealth stomps and shielded mechs take advantage.

 

Its just players have decided the loadouts they like best, or are least likely to be ruined by someone in either a hawk or jetpack(Context sensitive of course) and create these servers, if you build it, they will come too.

 

This is how i see it, and why I too usually avoid classic servers, and much more so heavyweight.

 

Hawkfan267 wrote:
Seriously, there's just certain things that we must accept about the PS4. In time, it may get better, who knows.


dulun18 wrote:
**honestly if you still have your PS3.. and lot of games to go through.. there's no reason to jump onto the PS4 bandwagon just yet...
Message 14 of 30 (144 Views)
Reply
Pistol Proficinado
Registered: 07/07/2012
Offline
590 posts
 

Re: Why no classic layout?

Apr 18, 2013

StubbornPuppet wrote:

Well, at least it sounds like it's not all just:

"Basin -Groundpounder"

"Basin -Groundpounder"

"Basin -Groundpounder"

"Basin -Groundpounder"

"Basin -Groundpounder"

 

That's all it used to be.


Don't you mean we had choice between "Basin - Groundpounder" or "Basin - Get Base Ravaged for 20min if You Lose Air Superiority" (for TDM at least) :smileytongue:

Message 15 of 30 (137 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 02/08/2013
Offline
1043 posts
 

Re: Why no classic layout?

[ Edited ]
Apr 18, 2013

Phillyblunz wrote:

My theory.

 

Classic isnt as popular as heavyweight among the most hawkcentric players.

This is likely due to the fact that other can survive for a bit when not in a hawk(ie in a jetpack is your best chance to survive a direct hawk attack), and pilots do not like this very much.

 

Heavyweight is of course much better for this crowd as you either fly or die for the most part, although a case for the grizzly can be made here, but not much of a case.  It offers no where near the ability to avoid/survive hawk attacks as the jetpack.

 

IMO the jetpack is the thing hawks fear most, making of course heavyweight more popular for this crowd.

 

Now for the less hawkcentric players who wouldnt love lightweight?  Its got it all, makes for sweet ground battles and you never have to worry about sneak bombing runs, stealth flak, etc.

 

 

For the all around guys classic is pretty good, but the fear of it being over run by the hawk crowd is likely why you dont see it as much as the others.  The easiest way to ruin a good classic match is when the spam clusters and flak/torps/stealth stomps and shielded mechs take advantage.

 

Its just players have decided the loadouts they like best, or are least likely to be ruined by someone in either a hawk or jetpack(Context sensitive of course) and create these servers, if you build it, they will come too.

 

This is how i see it, and why I too usually avoid classic servers, and much more so heavyweight.

 


This is true, because most of the matches are tdm classic doesn't get played much. Its a much better loadout for zones, capture the flag and assault imo.

 

Also the lightweight loadout is becoming my favorite one especially on orbital,junction, and glade

Message 16 of 30 (131 Views)
Reply
Gaming Beast
Registered: 02/04/2010
Offline
1991 posts
 

Re: Why no classic layout?

Apr 19, 2013

Phillyblunz wrote:

My theory.

 

Classic isnt as popular as heavyweight among the most hawkcentric players.

This is likely due to the fact that other can survive for a bit when not in a hawk(ie in a jetpack is your best chance to survive a direct hawk attack), and pilots do not like this very much.

 

Heavyweight is of course much better for this crowd as you either fly or die for the most part, although a case for the grizzly can be made here, but not much of a case.  It offers no where near the ability to avoid/survive hawk attacks as the jetpack.

 

IMO the jetpack is the thing hawks fear most, making of course heavyweight more popular for this crowd.

 

Now for the less hawkcentric players who wouldnt love lightweight?  Its got it all, makes for sweet ground battles and you never have to worry about sneak bombing runs, stealth flak, etc.

 

 

For the all around guys classic is pretty good, but the fear of it being over run by the hawk crowd is likely why you dont see it as much as the others.  The easiest way to ruin a good classic match is when the spam clusters and flak/torps/stealth stomps and shielded mechs take advantage.

 

Its just players have decided the loadouts they like best, or are least likely to be ruined by someone in either a hawk or jetpack(Context sensitive of course) and create these servers, if you build it, they will come too.

 

This is how i see it, and why I too usually avoid classic servers, and much more so heavyweight.

 


Actually Heavyweight is used more by non pilots because it gives them the Flak Turret and the Grizzly. Hawk centric players prefer the Classic or Speeder loadouts because they don't include the flak turret.

 

That is the way i see it anyway.

Photobucket
Message 17 of 30 (95 Views)
Reply
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 05/30/2012
Offline
928 posts
 

Re: Why no classic layout?

[ Edited ]
Apr 19, 2013

Phillyblunz wrote:

My theory.

 

Classic isnt as popular as heavyweight among the most hawkcentric players.

This is likely due to the fact that other can survive for a bit when not in a hawk(ie in a jetpack is your best chance to survive a direct hawk attack), and pilots do not like this very much.

 

Heavyweight is of course much better for this crowd as you either fly or die for the most part, although a case for the grizzly can be made here, but not much of a case.  It offers no where near the ability to avoid/survive hawk attacks as the jetpack.

 

IMO the jetpack is the thing hawks fear most, making of course heavyweight more popular for this crowd.

 

Now for the less hawkcentric players who wouldnt love lightweight?  Its got it all, makes for sweet ground battles and you never have to worry about sneak bombing runs, stealth flak, etc.

 

 

For the all around guys classic is pretty good, but the fear of it being over run by the hawk crowd is likely why you dont see it as much as the others.  The easiest way to ruin a good classic match is when the spam clusters and flak/torps/stealth stomps and shielded mechs take advantage.

 

Its just players have decided the loadouts they like best, or are least likely to be ruined by someone in either a hawk or jetpack(Context sensitive of course) and create these servers, if you build it, they will come too.

 

This is how i see it, and why I too usually avoid classic servers, and much more so heavyweight.

 


You got it backwards actually. True pilots/players prefer classic over heavyweight because they can actually dogfight without flak  turrets shooting them in the **bleep** with their rediculous range.  

 

Jetpacks are easy to take out in a hawk. They can be autolocked on with the machine gun while boosted and you can kill them with swarms and perfectly timed/released homers. So if any pilot here says they fear jetpacks then they need to quit the game. 

 

Heavyweight servers are everywhere because noobs/casual players make up 95% of whats left of starhawk player base. Heavyweight servers are usually nothing but camping and turret spam everywhere. Go into a heavyweight server and truly look at what each individual player on your team is doing. Usually it is camping in a bunker, bubbleshield, building turrets everywhere, or just standing still and wating for the other team to come to them.

 

Same goes for why there are groundpounder servers everywhere. The noobs/casual players like to play in games that take the least amount of effort to survive in. 

 

Message 18 of 30 (83 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 11/21/2012
Offline
1282 posts
 

Re: Why no classic layout?

Apr 19, 2013
4x hawkram kill...i love classic.

Sweet KittySweet KittySweet KittySweet KittySweet KittySweet KittySweet KittySweet KittySweet Kitty

Emmett kitty is hungry.
Message 19 of 30 (74 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 12/08/2008
Online
8552 posts
 

Re: Why no classic layout?

Apr 19, 2013

ArVaDa- wrote:

 The noobs/casual players like to play in games that take the least amount of effort to survive in. 

 


Oh like pilots avoiding servers with Flak turrets so it takes the least amount of effort to survive?

 

I get it now.

 

I'm only half serious of course but it does sound fairly contridictory.  "True" pilots avoid loadouts where something besides a hawk can kill them?

 

While noobs hide in bunkers and shields in these same matches where they have no chance of fighting back against hawks?

 

"True" pilots should play dogfights and harry potter games.

If they insist on playing mostly games with grounders, the least they can do is risk the dreaded....... Duh, Duh, Duh.......flak turret!!!  

 

But my ideas are skewed by years of comic books and super hero cartoons.  Have me all filled with rightous ideals the younger generation seems to lack, especially online.

 

End social commentary.

Hawkfan267 wrote:
Seriously, there's just certain things that we must accept about the PS4. In time, it may get better, who knows.


dulun18 wrote:
**honestly if you still have your PS3.. and lot of games to go through.. there's no reason to jump onto the PS4 bandwagon just yet...
Message 20 of 30 (64 Views)
Reply