• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Rainbow Six: Siege |OT| Idris Elba sold separately

I'm getting a sound bug at least 2-3 times a night now where all I can hear all round is the constant looping of a drone sound. Guns, footseps, explosions etc are all muted. Getting to be really tiresome.
 

etta

my hard graphic balls
Man why do the gun skins look so bad on medium textures :/
Can devs please upgrade the skins to the highest textures regardless of the setting? It's not like it would eat more than a handful of MBs.
 
At one point today, my sound kept cutting in and out, and I couldn't connect to any squad invites.

Thought Ubi must be having server issues.

Turns out, my X1 was overheating because I had played for six hours straight :-| (part of the problem is that I need to give it some more space/venting room under the tv by remounting its shelf)

Help.
 
Just need to get 200 penetration kills now. This is going to be a while

Go to consolate, it has indestructable sofas that you can use for penetration kills.

Plant bomb infront of sofa's .

Wait until terrorists are defusing, shoot through sofa.

You can get 5+ kills per bomb this way, plus more as you clear the rooms. Probably lots of other places you can do it on, just need something you can shoot through that won't be destroyed.
 

Deband

Member
Does the ps4 version have built in voip? Tried to get it working last night on terrorist hunt, but think I had the remains of party chat running at the same time.

Feels like it was the og xbox last time I used in game chat.
 
Does the ps4 version have built in voip? Tried to get it working last night on terrorist hunt, but think I had the remains of party chat running at the same time.

Feels like it was the og xbox last time I used in game chat.
It does, but by default, whenever you start or join a party chat, the PS4 automatically prioritizes party chat over any ingame chat. You can swap back and forth on the fly in the party chat settings. When you leave party chat, it will auto switch back too.
 
You know what, Plane has an entrance in the back that leads to the top of the plane, and down a hatch to the cargo level

It's not even an option to spawn on, and maybe it should be

Honestly, some of them, if they didn't step out of the firetruck into bullets, they would be falling off the roof.

Players being killed like this are not good. They will make mistakes one way or another, and suddenly adding a rooftop spawn would lead to a lot of accidentals.

I'm all for it though, it would be funny. I just don't think it's a good idea. I think it might make their spawn very obvious too as their footsteps would be very apparent if they spawned there.

I know that feel bro.

I feel that it's weird and broken. I've been gold 2 since I first became ranked and despite winning 15 straight matches I have not increased in rank at all. Maybe I need to play more, I don't know.
 
Segregation between North America and Europe.

Yeah.

But when I first became ranked it was with Gaz and Keihart and some others. So it definitely should rank us cross regionally. That was my concern at first, maybe we can't rank up on your servers or something silly, but that shouldn't be the case.

They just need a ranking system that's more transparent. I'm sure it's fuelled by some sort of numeric value, so we should be able to see those numbers and how they are affected by wins / losses. Ubisoft probably hide them because then people won't hold the accountable when the ranking system doesn't work (i.e. if nothing changes or we lose an excessive amount of points on a single loss, we can't even tell).
 
Yeah.

But when I first became ranked it was with Gaz and Keihart and some others. So it definitely should rank us cross regionally. That was my concern at first, maybe we can't rank up on your servers or something silly, but that shouldn't be the case.

They just need a ranking system that's more transparent. I'm sure it's fuelled by some sort of numeric value, so we should be able to see those numbers and how they are affected by wins / losses. Ubisoft probably hide them because then people won't hold the accountable when the ranking system doesn't work (i.e. if nothing changes or we lose an excessive amount of points on a single loss, we can't even tell).

You up for another go at ranked? in like 6-7 hours?
 
Yeah.

But when I first became ranked it was with Gaz and Keihart and some others. So it definitely should rank us cross regionally. That was my concern at first, maybe we can't rank up on your servers or something silly, but that shouldn't be the case.

They just need a ranking system that's more transparent. I'm sure it's fuelled by some sort of numeric value, so we should be able to see those numbers and how they are affected by wins / losses. Ubisoft probably hide them because then people won't hold the accountable when the ranking system doesn't work (i.e. if nothing changes or we lose an excessive amount of points on a single loss, we can't even tell).
Found this faq when looking for info on the ranking system. You apparently have a separate ranking for each region, to account for the different pools of players. Also need five games in each region to get ranked. So while I'm silver 3 in the US, I'm probably unranked in Europe. Playing in different regions may be why it seems so slow to move up or down.

Also interesting to note only team wins and losses matter...there is no "I" in ranked.

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1352317-Ranked-Matchmaking-FAQ-Forums
 
Found this faq when looking for info on the ranking system. You apparently have a separate ranking for each region, to account for the different pools of players. Also need five games in each region to get ranked. So while I'm silver 3 in the US, I'm probably unranked in Europe. Playing in different regions may be why it seems so slow to move up or down.

Also interesting to note only team wins and losses matter...there is no "I" in ranked.

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1352317-Ranked-Matchmaking-FAQ-Forums

If only team wins and losses matter why then, when I played with five people to get us all ranked, for the first time, when we did receive a rank, we all had different ranks, despite the same win loss ratio? I know you're just repeating their information, but Ubisoft are full of crap sometimes.

Also the cross regional ranking system is stupid. It might make sense if it were transparent, but as it is it's just stupid and is going to leave people confused and irritated. My PS4 itself randomly switches between Northern and Western Europe, so Ubisoft are seriously saying I have to rank up in two pools depending on their servers random allocation? Not only that, but we can't play with friends across region, in ranked if we want to progress.

All in all, frustrating and poorly designed.
 
idk i may be one of the few people who doesnt care about doing ranked. I enjoy casual fine enough. anything im really missing by not doing ranked besides more xp?
 

Evolved1

make sure the pudding isn't too soggy but that just ruins everything
A lot of my skins are missing as of this morning.
Not sure if this is what you're issue is, but I noticed that if you access operator loadouts while servers are down, it will reset yoyr skins and such to default next time you log back in.
 
I think Klykka mentioned it, but I also think they should reconsider the absolute OHK headshot rule right now.

LevelCap pointed out that if they're going for realism, there are a number of operators with helmets (or gas masks, for that matter) that are completely ineffectual.

I'd be okay with close range OHK headshots from any weapon, but at range, through walls, with suppressors, etc., I think there should be damage penalties. It would make the weapons feel different and would really eliminate a lot of REALLY??? moments.

Like when I shot a rook'd Rook a few times in the body and he pistols me with one shot to the head.

How is it cheap though? It's harder for him to pull off, than it is for you to deal with it. It's absolutely contingent on the defending team making a mistake or oversight. If there were nothing you could do to accommodate it, I would understand that perspective.

The game is called Rainbow Six: Siege--emphasis on Siege.

Honestly, I'm fine with them trying different ways of managing it before outright not allowing it. Make it so they are *instantly* spotted when they hop outside--there is no reason they shouldn't be. I mean, if we're trying to look at some kinda realism, there would no doubt be snipers covering every facade of the building.

Yesterday, on Hereford Base, defenders kept hopping out onto the balcony (which has cover, in addition to just overlooking our spawn). Because they aren't immediately spotted, they have a few seconds to get into position and fuck us over.

Now that I think of it, it actually happens a lot of Hereford.

There's nothing fun about that. All of the great things about Siege--outwitting the enemy, counter-attacking their defensive measures, etc.--have zero to do with this tactic. It's literally shooting fish in a barrel.

Not to mention, all it does is prolong the *actual* game, which is assaulting the buildings. Wasting 30 seconds trying to prevent your team from getting shot before they even *attempt* to breach isn't fun for anyone, except maybe the defenders.
 
The game is called Rainbow Six: Siege--emphasis on Siege.
.

Aha, is this serious? Your expecting semantic interpretations of a video games title to hold weight in an argument on its design?

What about the first half of that very same title, Rainbow Six. Ubisoft made a clear decision to ignore the semantic definition of its title, and reduced the player count down to five for the sake of the games design - this makes it very clear that the title does not dictate a games design or orientation.

Either way, let's run with this approach.

"a military operation in which enemy forces surround a town or building, cutting off essential supplies, with the aim of compelling those inside to surrender."

They have still done that. Just because someone comes to shoot them from the outside perimeter in no way prevents this being a 'siege'. Normally what happens is the police force on the outside would cut off outside access for the people inside. As in, watch the entrances and openings. Your team should try that.

But, this is a ludicrous line of argument. It was still called Siege when it was presented in the initial trailer, where defenders could go wherever they wanted, it was still called Siege in the early alpha, where defenders could go where they want. It's very clear that the games design has always been independent of its titles semantic meaning, as it is with most games, funnily enough.

Yesterday, on Hereford Base, defenders kept hopping out onto the balcony (which has cover, in addition to just overlooking our spawn). Because they aren't immediately spotted, they have a few seconds to get into position and fuck us over.

Now that I think of it, it actually happens a lot of Hereford.

There's nothing fun about that. All of the great things about Siege--outwitting the enemy, counter-attacking their defensive measures, etc.--have zero to do with this tactic. It's literally shooting fish in a barrel.

Again you make out as though they're at a huge advantage by doing this. They have to acquire you as a target the same as you have to acquire them, they're marked, so they are limited to two seconds and then they either have to retreat, or they are at a huge disadvantage being on the outside. I'm sorry but if you're struggling to deal with people on Hereford Balcony, then you absolutely deserve to be killed by them. You make out that it's far easier than it is 'shooting fish in a barrel' is not an accurate description of this at all.

You have various elements that give you the advantage, beyond the marking system. You can hear them break barricades. They have to funnel themselves through small chokepoints that if they want to live, they have to return through. They have very limited angles in which to approach you, compared to the angles in which you can approach them. These strategies play on your teams predictability and negligence and are not easy to pull off, or at all safe (as you make them out to be) for the defenders.
 
Aha, is this serious? Your expecting semantic interpretations of a video games title to hold weight in an argument on its design?

What about the first half of that very same title, Rainbow Six. Ubisoft made a clear decision to ignore the semantic definition of its title, and reduced the player count down to five for the sake of the games design - this makes it very clear that the title does not dictate a games design or orientation.

Either way, let's run with this approach.

"a military operation in which enemy forces surround a town or building, cutting off essential supplies, with the aim of compelling those inside to surrender."

They have still done that. Just because someone comes to shoot them from the outside perimeter in no way prevents this being a 'siege'. Normally what happens is the police force on the outside would cut off outside access for the people inside. As in, watch the entrances and openings.

But, this is a ludicrous line of argument. It was still called Siege when it was presented in the initial trailer, where defenders could go wherever they wanted, it was still called Siege in the early alpha, where defenders could go where they want. It's very clear that the games design has always been independent of its titles semantic meaning, as it is with most games, funnily enough.

You know I posted a lot more after that first line, right?

And yeah, the title is indicative of the game design.
 
Honestly, some of them, if they didn't step out of the firetruck into bullets, they would be falling off the roof.

Players being killed like this are not good. They will make mistakes one way or another, and suddenly adding a rooftop spawn would lead to a lot of accidentals.

I'm all for it though, it would be funny. I just don't think it's a good idea. I think it might make their spawn very obvious too as their footsteps would be very apparent if they spawned there.



I feel that it's weird and broken. I've been gold 2 since I first became ranked and despite winning 15 straight matches I have not increased in rank at all. Maybe I need to play more, I don't know.

Haha no no, not directly on the roof. There is a ladder that gets you into the back of the plane, but a second ladder that gets you on the roof.

There is literally no spawn on that side. Ubisoft gives us three sides to spawn on in total on Plane, yet there are 4 "sides" with entrances.

A smart team would actually just spawn in and take the long way around, as the front spawn has that cargo area entrance, as well as a long run to the back of the plane.

But that rooftop entrance is in the back, and on the other side of the plane, where there is no spawn in zone at all. Not many randoms know about it, and it'd be nice if it became available so that attackers can't anticipate the limited existing spawn locations.

Honestly, I'm okay with attackers anticipating a spawn, but it goes against the spirit of the game.

There's a much bigger issue though:

Spawn killing. I'm talking instant death. Attackers set up at a window, you spawn, and are instantly killed. That's game breaking.

I think we're bound to see spawn invincibility by Ubisoft soon. It's at least the easiest solution.
 
You know I posted a lot more after that first line, right?

And yeah, the title is indicative of the game design.

I did quote the rest, but was editing etc.

And to a degree, the title offers a vague represtation of the games theme, but even with that definition, the defenders stepping outside doesn't make this any more, or less a siege. In the same way the besieged citizens of a castle aren't any less besieged if they send one individual outside to fight, or sit on the walls throwing rocks down (re, hereford base example).

Can someone explain to me what this game was like in alpha/initially?

It seems to have undergone a lot of changes.

Some things I remember.

Different icons for characters, you could go outside for longer and the defensive team would often just run outside and kill the attackers, you could move the hostage at will, pulses heartbeat scanner which much more effective.
 
Can someone explain to me what this game was like in alpha/initially?

It seems to have undergone a lot of changes.

Ugly ass icons for operators.
Only 3 maps, consulate, hereford and house.
5 seconds timers for detection outside.
missing operators, glaz, ash, kapkan, tachanka, castle, thatcher.
Pulse was op, because the range of his heartbeat was like 3 rooms.
Matchmaking was really bad.
Not as much teabagging.
Used to be best out of 7? and then dropped to best out of 5 because of connection problems.
Used to have a summary after everyround, adding 10 seconds delay between rounds, it showed who killed who and the order of kills/death.
 
Again you make out as though they're at a huge advantage by doing this. They have to acquire you as a target the same as you have to acquire them, they're marked, so they are limited to two seconds and then they either have to retreat, or they are at a huge disadvantage being on the outside. I'm sorry but if you're struggling to deal with people on Hereford Balcony, then you absolutely deserve to be killed by them. You make out that it's far easier than it is 'shooting fish in a barrel' is not an accurate description of this at all.

You have various elements that give you the advantage, beyond the marking system. You can hear them break barricades. They have to funnel themselves through small chokepoints that if they want to live, they have to return through. They have very limited angles in which to approach you, compared to the angles in which you can approach them. These strategies play on your teams predictability and negligence and are not easy to pull off, or at all safe (as you make them out to be) for the defenders.

Gonna take a wild guess and assume you're one of those "if your team is getting spawn camped/killed in Battlefield, you deserve it" kind of guys?

All a defending team has to do is post defenders on commonly approached sides of the objective--barricades can be removed in the preparation phase, so hearing them being removed isn't always a factor. Then you just need one guy on cams to call out where they are. It's hard to do on the larger maps, but small ones like Hereford, it's extremely easy.

I'm arguing from a perspective of value, for all players, in the game design. Players will always find a way to exploit game design to harass and grief other players--see spawn camping/killing. Just because a team *can* do it, doesn't mean they should be *able* to do it. It has less to do with what a team "deserves" and more to do with what makes the game fun.

I'll go back to the keystone of my argument: defenders going outside adds little to the game. You posted before that, when a bomb is defused, Attackers will chill outside and just pick off anyone who comes in to defuse it. Why not apply your own logic to it? If they let the Attackers get in, clear a bomb site, *AND* plant the defuser--why do the Defenders not "deserve" to lose? They were outmatched, just like you're arguing for Defenders picking off Attackers as they approach.
 

Gaz_RB

Member
Used to have a summary after everyround, adding 10 seconds delay between rounds, it showed who killed who and the order of kills/death.

I actually liked the weird time graph thing they had in the alpha, and I kind wish it was still in Ranked. It could be something you could look at for the last round after you've picked your operators.
 
Gonna take a wild guess and assume you're one of those "if your team is getting spawn camped/killed in Battlefield, you deserve it" kind of guys?

I don't play Battlefield but probably, though this isn't exactly a similar situation, in my opinion.

If your team is so bad as to be being beaten in humiliating ways by the opposition, then what you should be calling for is better matchmaking or a forfeit match button. I don't have a problem with people playing a game within the parameters of the outlined ruleset and I would imagine, if you were spawn camped in Battlefield there are a lot of mistakes that your team made, collectively, that lead up to that situation.

As for the rest of your post, even if they find out where you are with the cameras (please, shoot every outdoor camera), you still have every opportunity to be aware of the potential that you will be shot at. No one but you and your team are responsible for you blindly walking up to the enemies building expecting not to be assaulted in some way. If they pop a barricade early, then it's easy to identify where you are likely to be attacked from. If they don't, then you get to hear it when they do. It's lose / lose for them in that regard. From there, it's not very easy, regardless of knowledge of which side of the building you are on, for them to assault you. Again, you can be anywhere outside, and they have a limited number of windows to poke from. I do not see why it would be at all difficult for the defensive, outdoor team to outplay the aggressive players in this regard, and thus far, with 120 hours played, I haven't experienced any issue with this. It's common for teams to pop second and third floor windows, but I've never had this cause a problem for our team, and I play with a very diverse range of people.

As for the bomb plant thing, because just because they have planted a bomb doesn't mean the defenders deserve to automatically lose, planting a bomb must also require you to have capacity to defend it, and that mechanic is pointless if defending it is effortless. Bomb plants place the cards in your hand, but they should not be an automatic win for the offending team, and as I said, it's nice that the defending team have options to get people off windows, where a bomb defuse would otherwise be next to impossible.
 

Rebel Leader

THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
I don't play Battlefield but probably, though this isn't exactly a similar situation, in my opinion.

If your team is so bad as to be being beaten in humiliating ways by the opposition, then what you should be calling for is better matchmaking or a forfeit match button. I don't have a problem with people playing a game within the parameters of the outlined ruleset and I would imagine, if you were spawn camped in Battlefield there are a lot of mistakes that your team made, collectively, that lead up to that situation.

Or map design aka

Operation metro
Battlefields most played map
 

No Love

Banned
They should automatically ban players who team kill in the first several seconds of a round.

What they should do is implement a mechanism that detects team killing in those early times and boots the TK'er and respawns the teammate that was killed so they don't have to get fucked for the whole round.
 
Top Bottom