Return of Reckoning

freshour wrote:You only need 1 flag to win Nordenwatch if you have over 200 points as long as you "zerg" your kills. Mmkay pumpkin?

And how do you kill them when they hold the other 2 and never attack yours?

Pumpkin?

bloodi wrote:

freshour wrote:You only need 1 flag to win Nordenwatch if you have over 200 points as long as you "zerg" your kills. Mmkay pumpkin?

And how do you kill them when they hold the other 2 and never attack yours?

Pumpkin?

I thought i was your pumpkin...

Call it a zerg, call it a pizza. I dont care what you call it. Right now SCs are FILLEd with two groups, sticking together, running from point A to point B to complete X objective.

Even when you have a 6 man premade group, the ENTIRE group as a whole doesnt have any strategy except "stick together" and "PIZZA" them (aka zerg/bum rush/w.e).

This is my entire point. RATHER than have a game that is basically slayer with "objectives" mixed in. Why not have a game that is TRULY objective focused with kills mixed in.

I have been in games where my team caps 1 node, trades off on another node, but zergs (yes zergs - sticks together, zero "strategy" other than relying on sheer numbers IN AN SC!) and wins based on kills.

When you played "capture the flag" the premise is nothing matters but the flag...

So All I am saying is i think this game would be more fun for more people IF there were more emphasis on objectives RATHER THAN "kinda-objectives but lets just stick together and kill.

Forcing players to focus on not only taking BOs but ALSO defending them because there is more points in defending than just zerging as a group to the next node... Seems like a positive to me..... ANd I think others too....

We can differ and still be friends

Now can we please stop arguing over semantics when it has zero relevance to this topic?

Penril wrote:
Except i was right. You even agreed with me when you said, and i quote: "A "zerg" is just x amount of players that rely more on their numbers than their individual strenght in order to win".

You can't rely more on your numbers in a SC since both sides have EQUAL amount of players. Geez bloodi...

No, because you refuse to admit that there is zergs in scs, so just by that, your definition is out of line.

Specially because composition also plays a role, if one side has no healers or just 1, the other side can just zerg them, that is just go around and plop aoe and rely on having more healers.

So yes, you can rely on your numbers on scs, hell, how many scs have you lost because the other side has more of "x"?

I lost a few thats for sure.

Penril wrote:
I thought i was your pumpkin...

Tu eres mi calabacita.

th3gatekeeper, you already have SC's like the one you mention.

Highpass cemetery, Khaine's Embrace (soon?), Twisted Tower, Talabec Dam, Logrin's Forge, Phoenix's Gate, and several others. These SC's give a LOT of points for capturing the flags (90-100?).

Just gotta wait until they release all these SCs.

@bloodi: I was just waving the white flag because, knowing you, if i continue we will derail this thread. I'm sure no one wants to see us going back and forth for 10+ pages. Cheers pumpkin.

Take away SC's for a month and see what happens in the lakes. Do it as a experiment. Say you gotta work on stuff or something.

Opinion
I think these SC's have been more destructive then productive to the community. It has pigeon holed the community into only thinking of only 6 or 12 man in their organization/coordination type players.

The sad truth is until there is a ladder/tracked stats/MMR system literally no one will give a **** about winning scenarios after they have emblems... every sc will just be team death match.

I'd love to have 6v6 objective based scenarios where people care about strategy and player roles on the map, instead of just zerging. But it will probably never happen in this game.

Jaycub wrote:The sad truth is until there is a ladder/tracked stats/MMR system literally no one will give a **** about winning scenarios after they have emblems... every sc will just be team death match.

I'd love to have 6v6 objective based scenarios where people care about strategy and player roles on the map, instead of just zerging. But it will probably never happen in this game.

Thank you. This x1000.

I think that ladders and tracked stats are a negative thing actually. Because then people care TOO much about losing games. The permanency of a loss looms over them and people will do EVERYTHING in their power to avoid loses and deaths. Ive expereinced this in Neverwinter Online where it was implemented and at FIRST it was the best thing EVER then quickly people only ever ran premades, it killed solo/duo/trio quing which increased Que times and then premades started avoiding other premades they knew they couldnt win. hiding and "searching" the person until they knew they were in a PVP or not so it was "safe to que" etc etc.

Thats just my perspective as well. If you want to do "tracked stats" the only thing that should be tracked are wins vs loses and NOT kills or deaths as it merely promotes selfish play only.

I think the current SCs CAN be objective based. But merely need to be "tweaked" to favor objectives just a tad more...

(opinion)
There should be a kill based system similar to Eve online. Its based on PURE bragging rights. You have your kill boards and tracks all the people you kill/what equiptment they had/blah blah. Then you have people competing to get the most monthly kils and what-not within a guild or server.

Actually this game had that with the statue's but (opinion) should be more transparent to allow the players see their own (monthly) progress and others.

again I keep saying this (opinion) I think SC's kinda ruin the game. It was never suppose to be the focus. The ORVR lakes were suppose to be the BIG SC.

I think showing kills is a cool idea. When you add deaths or the infamous KDR... you run into problems. People avoid dying at all costs. Let teammates die, let the objective die, even lose the game just to keep their KDR high. But showing the top weekly killers in SC's AND RvR would be kinda cool. Definitely separate them so the SC people get their claim and the RvR people get theirs.

Now that we are referencing neverwinter online. How hard would it be to add a "Damage taken" to the SC scoreboard? As it stands, healers get to be like BRO YOU SEE THOSE HEELZ, DPS get to brag about DB's and Damage, but tanks are like... hey, hey dude, you remember that one time I *gets cut off by slayer yelling about how he is number one DPS*

- Being a tank at heart in the games I've played prior to this. At the end of dungeons it was always fun to see how much you actually soaked up. Idk if this would be a simple few lines of code or a huge long painful process. But I mean obviously tanks taking damage is in the game for contribution (or at least I hope it is) and to add it to SC scoreboard would be pretty awesome to encourage some more tanking.

Random I know... but thought I'd mention that when you play a tank.. you don't have anything but stories to talk about, a damage taken meter would be pretty sweet. It might even encourage newer tanks to guard, swap guard to people who need it, cross guard etc.