I'd have to disagree with long TTK and the no one-shots idea. While, on the one hand, we don't want to make the TTK so short that Bolters are ripping apart heavily armoured enemies in a couple of seconds, we also don't want them to deal little more than scratches on the more lightly armoured classes. The TTK in Space Marine is a good benchmark for this game to work with, since it didn't feel too short or too long (excluding a handful of weapons) I, for one, do want to see some one-shots thrown in; hitting someone with a Plasma Cannon blast or a Lascannon, or any Anti-Vehicle weapon really, should one-shot most classes. I dunno about everyone else, but if I hit someone with a Power Fist and got a good solid hit, I wouldn't want them to get back up with only half their armour lost.
I played some PS1, few hours of PS2 and no Space Marine (seen some vids, and while it looked very fun for solo, mediocre for arena type pvp, I cant imagine this system for massive battles). What I want is to do more things in combat than dakka. As I stated in OP, I want roles (not full skillbars and pigeon-holed classes from classical (fantasy) trinity). We have more opportunities in wh40k. Why not cc and resists, it brings some variablity. I dont want this game to be like... first month - superhyped WAAAGH dakka dakka dakka second month - dakka dakka dakka, got new gun available, DAKKA DAKKA DAKKA *yawn* third month - dakka dakka dakka *bored* /quit
We'll just have to put some faith into the developers and hope that they can give each class its own definitive role on the battlefield, I'm sure all of them will provide "Dakka" in their own way but will also have other roles that they can facilitate through support or suppression, anti-tank/anti-infantry, melee/ranged, etc
No point to roles within a war-centric system. No such thing as a 'tank' or a 'healer' or a 'mage'. Well, 'mage' maybe, since Librarians will have some sort of presence. But for example, while an apothecary should be more or less the 'healer', he should also be able to be pretty decent at fighting. Medics in PS2 can be pretty effective even at fighting, as long as you get the right guns. But the entire concept of tanks is anathema to me. If one guy is going to break an entire defensive line, then Imma keep my money with me, because it'd be easier for me to go play LOTRO or something. Some classes should be really flexible. Tacticals should have some melee capacity, but also be decent at AP, but also be decent at AV. Devastators would be really good at either AP or AV. Assault Marines would be generally really good at AP, with some on-the-fly AV capacity via melta bombs/krak grenades. Etc, etc, etc. But having certain predefined roles is not good IMO.
Been there, done that. Actually going to play again in December, need to finish college first though.
yeah I don't mean roles in the "holy trinity" sense, I mean roles as in, devastator, tactical, assault, those are not only just classes in the game but they also perform specific roles on the battlefield. Hopefully they'll also give us a lot of options like you were mentioning so that we can really make ourselves feel unique as well.
so you should know that tanks are supposed to be line-breakers, but are also countered pretty heavily with anti-vehicle stuff. its also a fun as hell challenge.... taking down a chaos land raider...*smiles*...it brings a tear to my eye...coordinating with my battul bruvas...
