Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Mechastrike wrote:it's okay if we don't have combiners in the game, we already have Trypticon and Omega Supreme. they're big enough to kick ANY combiners butt.

And unfortunately they're unplayable...

dragons wrote:combiner situation who says it has to be 5 make t 2 one person control legs, the other contrl the top half arms, or make conbiner where one person controls it armada game prime flys firginting unicron he cant fly without using jetfire combined form that only took one person not 2.

But that's the problem, I don't want to only control half the robot. I want to be the entire robot.

Scatterlung wrote:Why can't this just work like Star Wars: Battlefront?

One person in control of the body, the others take on weapons points across it. So whoever is playing the core body is in control, meanwhile, everyone else controls turrets belonging to their component (i.e: Brawl's cannon).

That's similar to an idea someone had for a Targetmaster-styled system. My answer is also very similar: I don't want to give up control of my character to someone else just so I can control one gun.

Shadowman wrote:

Scatterlung wrote:Why can't this just work like Star Wars: Battlefront?

One person in control of the body, the others take on weapons points across it. So whoever is playing the core body is in control, meanwhile, everyone else controls turrets belonging to their component (i.e: Brawl's cannon).

That's similar to an idea someone had for a Targetmaster-styled system. My answer is also very similar: I don't want to give up control of my character to someone else just so I can control one gun.

But see, I would say that 'in the heat of battle' (depending on how seriously you take it) you wouldn't have time to complain. Just get in that turret and shoot for all your worth!

Scatterlung wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

Scatterlung wrote:Why can't this just work like Star Wars: Battlefront?

One person in control of the body, the others take on weapons points across it. So whoever is playing the core body is in control, meanwhile, everyone else controls turrets belonging to their component (i.e: Brawl's cannon).

That's similar to an idea someone had for a Targetmaster-styled system. My answer is also very similar: I don't want to give up control of my character to someone else just so I can control one gun.

But see, I would say that 'in the heat of battle' (depending on how seriously you take it) you wouldn't have time to complain. Just get in that turret and shoot for all your worth!

Yeah, but that fails on two fronts:

1. I still don't want to give up control of my character to someone else so I can control one gun. There is no way I would ever agree to that.

2. There's no benefit to turning five smaller combatants into one big one. You just become one big target. Even if you control one turret, you can't reposition yourself for a better shot unless whoever controls the main body wants to, not to mention, the main body will be moving a lot, so it would be difficult to hit all those small targets who are killing you.

Shadowman wrote:

Scatterlung wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

Scatterlung wrote:Why can't this just work like Star Wars: Battlefront?

One person in control of the body, the others take on weapons points across it. So whoever is playing the core body is in control, meanwhile, everyone else controls turrets belonging to their component (i.e: Brawl's cannon).

That's similar to an idea someone had for a Targetmaster-styled system. My answer is also very similar: I don't want to give up control of my character to someone else just so I can control one gun.

But see, I would say that 'in the heat of battle' (depending on how seriously you take it) you wouldn't have time to complain. Just get in that turret and shoot for all your worth!

Yeah, but that fails on two fronts:

1. I still don't want to give up control of my character to someone else so I can control one gun. There is no way I would ever agree to that.

2. There's no benefit to turning five smaller combatants into one big one. You just become one big target. Even if you control one turret, you can't reposition yourself for a better shot unless whoever controls the main body wants to, not to mention, the main body will be moving a lot, so it would be difficult to hit all those small targets who are killing you.

1. Well, I wouldn't make it so you'd only have one gun. Each member of the team has a special ability, and in the combined form you'd still be able to use it (assuming its a shield or something) so that would be an extra. Also, adding more turrets to all sides would make it fairer. But this still doesn't sell it. I would still cite, though, the strategy and team work involved as a key feature. If you don't want to be part of a team and use said abilities strategically to defend the whole, be a character who doesn't combine. Obviously the fact that behaving as a team should reap a higher bonus for each kill or objective completed, rewarding cooperation.

2. Again, you become more obvious and easy to hit, so it becomes more important to use that forcefield or shoot back and defend the bulk. As for hitting smaller targets, it still comes back to team work. Do your bit, and hope your allies are doing theirs and I don't see much reason other than tiny details that you couldn't get a lot done.

I think it'll boil down to "No! I wanna be the big guy, not the leg!" otherwise.

Scatterlung wrote:1. Well, I wouldn't make it so you'd only have one gun. Each member of the team has a special ability, and in the combined form you'd still be able to use it (assuming its a shield or something) so that would be an extra. Also, adding more turrets to all sides would make it fairer. But this still doesn't sell it. I would still cite, though, the strategy and team work involved as a key feature. If you don't want to be part of a team and use said abilities strategically to defend the whole, be a character who doesn't combine. Obviously the fact that behaving as a team should reap a higher bonus for each kill or objective completed, rewarding cooperation.

Giving up control to someone else isn't "teamwork," even if you still have some minimal amount of control.

Scatterlung wrote:2. Again, you become more obvious and easy to hit, so it becomes more important to use that forcefield or shoot back and defend the bulk. As for hitting smaller targets, it still comes back to team work. Do your bit, and hope your allies are doing theirs and I don't see much reason other than tiny details that you couldn't get a lot done.

But that's the problem, all of that is significantly more effective when you AREN'T one huge target. I can still defend my allies while also retaining my ability to move of my own free will. This is why they aren't implementing this: "Teamwork" doesn't mean "give up control," and a lack of control isn't fun.

SlyTF1 wrote:These guys are going way too overboard with this. You shouldnt have to play as a body part, you should be able to play as the WHOLE frekn Transformer.

My thoughts exactly. Why is playing as one limb, or as the gunman versus the guy on the ground, even being debated? How idiotic is that?

This makes about as much sense as Michael Bay saying dinosaur bots don't work...then giving us, let's see...some crappy wannabe one-eyed skeleton cat bot as ravage, a scorpion bot that doesn't transform as scorponok, a fly bot that can't do anything but wear a satellite dish and get ripped apart as an insecticon, a farting pile of rusted metal as jetfire...yeah, you get the point.

Ultra Magnus wrote:It would be cool if you could control the one of the team members and all the others were AI controlled, and you could switch between them like in the Lego games or the Legends games. Of course when the group combines you would have full control of the Combiner form.

I had always thought this would be a cool idea also; for a single player game. Might not work too well online with multiple players and one giant robot though.

My mind briefly envisioned a system where one constructicon player would have full control of the gestalt, but it would switch off every few moments from player to player. It's inelegant, but it would carry the idea that Devastator wouldn't be functional unless "all minds agreed (and are paying attention)". The hard part would be getting all minds to know what each one is up to.

Then again, I take that back, it wouldn't be hard with 360 and PS3's voice support.

Here's a way to make combiners work in a multiplayer video game. You play as one of the combiner team, running around, shooting stuff, doing your usual online gameplay kind of stuff. When certain requirements are met, like powering up or something, get all your teammates together and do the combine move.

In the combined form, the gestalt would be HUGE, like the movie Devastator in comparison to Skids and Mudflap. The defense/lifebar for this thing is also suitably huge, because it's such a big target.

Control is handled by averaging all team member inputs. Simply walking around would cause extreme damage, and the guns that it shoots would have a very widespread area of damage (either they make huge explosions or fire in a shotgun-like spread pattern). The way damage is dealt would ensure that precise control isn't necessary.

When the gestalt takes enough damage, it splits back into individuals and gameplay continues as normal until they can power up again.

This kind of a setup would basically make the combined form a temporary powerup. They merge, stomp around and destroy buttloads of stuff for a few minutes, and then when they've taken enough damage, they split.

I'm sure a bunch of hardcore Transformers fans would hate this because they really want intelligent, well-defined combined forms, plus they probably want to control the whole damn thing themselves (as unfair as that would be), but from a gameplay perspective, this would work great. Plus it fits into the mythology, since this is basically how the original Constructicons worked when forming Devastator.

Plus, if you had a decent level of teamwork, you could direct this force of nature good enough to really do some damage.

Requiem Prime wrote:My mind briefly envisioned a system where one constructicon player would have full control of the gestalt, but it would switch off every few moments from player to player. It's inelegant, but it would carry the idea that Devastator wouldn't be functional unless "all minds agreed (and are paying attention)". The hard part would be getting all minds to know what each one is up to.

Then again, I take that back, it wouldn't be hard with 360 and PS3's voice support.

That still forces me to give up control, even if I DO gain control of the entire combiner form, the problem is that I'd still have to give it up.

8 bit wrote:

Ultra Magnus wrote:It would be cool if you could control the one of the team members and all the others were AI controlled, and you could switch between them like in the Lego games or the Legends games. Of course when the group combines you would have full control of the Combiner form.

I had always thought this would be a cool idea also; for a single player game. Might not work too well online with multiple players and one giant robot though.

See, now that's an idea for combiners that works. You control one guy, probably the one who forms the main body, while the other team members are all AI controlled.

I'd think they could make the controls so that the combiner just does whatever the majority of the member do. So if three out of five memebrs say walk forward, it walks forward. If three out of 5 say fire a weapon, it fires the weapon. It would make the combiner a bit slow, but powerful, which is what they are!

This is stupid... the whole reason they are not putting in combiners is because they wanna build on a franchise... why do u think they added devastator in the SECOND film instead of the first. If they wanted to put combiners in the game they could have easily figured a way out, but they didnt. Expect a War for Cybertron 2 with combiners.

Scaleface wrote:I'd think they could make the controls so that the combiner just does whatever the majority of the member do. So if three out of five memebrs say walk forward, it walks forward. If three out of 5 say fire a weapon, it fires the weapon. It would make the combiner a bit slow, but powerful, which is what they are!

Yeah, but two other people end up being ignored which is the main problem of combiner teams in this sense. There's no way it can be fair to the entire team unless the team itself is some kind of hive-mind.

I don't see a system like that keeping 2 people from playing, since it would change from moment to moment what the majority rules says. When one guy changes from walking to punch, if 2 others are ready punching the combiner punches. Plus, I'd guess that the players can TALK to one another, so one player might say "PUNCH THAT GUY" and if two others join him in puching punch the combiner punches. If one plays says DUCK and at least two others don't join him, the combiner just stands there.

I'd also guess that any member of the gestalt team can desolve the combination at any time, so they other members wouldn't piss them off too much for fear of them leaving and ruining the combiner.

I'd like to see Targetmasters just played as a player with a AI companion who can shoot aim at an enemy for you. You could even throw him and he becomes a follower, or you could pilot him as a small scout while the bigger guy hides.

Triple Changer, if one mode was a flying mode, could just be a special effect of flying. When they fly they take on jet or helicopter mode.

Action Masters would be easy. They lack alt modes, but heal quicker, are faster and stronger.

Micromasters are easy to. They are small and energy efficient.

Scaleface wrote:I don't see a system like that keeping 2 people from playing, since it would change from moment to moment what the majority rules says. When one guy changes from walking to punch, if 2 others are ready punching the combiner punches. Plus, I'd guess that the players can TALK to one another, so one player might say "PUNCH THAT GUY" and if two others join him in puching punch the combiner punches. If one plays says DUCK and at least two others don't join him, the combiner just stands there.

But that's the problem, I don't want partial control. I want full control. I don't want to just hope the 'bot will do what I want it to, assuming four other people happen to agree with me. Control of my character is not a democracy, nor should it be.