DUST Search - Our game types are redundant.

Alaika Arbosa wrote:

DeadlyAztec11 wrote:

Alaika Arbosa wrote:

DeadlyAztec11 wrote:

Alaika Arbosa wrote:

Remove the ability to spawn on a lettered Objective entirely.

Give the Defending team all of the installations on the map from the start (Letter Objectives or otherwise)

Merge One-and-Only into Skirmish (utilize Acquisition rotation for single Objective Skirmishes).

Remove clone counts from Skirmish and slow down the MCC damage tick

^^Those four changes would work a world of good for the game IMHO.

Skirmish as a gamemode is perfect in my opinion. This game is balanced completely around Skirmish. I think the current iteration of Skirmish should be held.

Skirmish needs worked on if you ask me, even if they only changed the ability to spawn on lettered objectives or removed clone counts it would be a significant improvement.

Spawning on the letter is key. It's the difference between having to rely on your teammates for excellent uplinks or not. Currently there are not nearly enough players placing acceptable uplinks for this change to be beneficial.

What if the removal of letter spawning was accompanied by an extra CRU per letter on each affected map?

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Alaika Arbosa No Context 2	Posted - 2015.08.07 20:25:00 - [31] - Quote DeadlyAztec11 wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: DeadlyAztec11 wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: Remove the ability to spawn on a lettered Objective entirely. Give the Defending team all of the installations on the map from the start (Letter Objectives or otherwise) Merge One-and-Only into Skirmish (utilize Acquisition rotation for single Objective Skirmishes). Remove clone counts from Skirmish and slow down the MCC damage tick ^^Those four changes would work a world of good for the game IMHO. Skirmish as a gamemode is perfect in my opinion. This game is balanced completely around Skirmish. I think the current iteration of Skirmish should be held. Skirmish needs worked on if you ask me, even if they only changed the ability to spawn on lettered objectives or removed clone counts it would be a significant improvement. Spawning on the letter is key. It's the difference between having to rely on your teammates for excellent uplinks or not. Currently there are not nearly enough players placing acceptable uplinks for this change to be beneficial. What if the removal of letter spawning was accompanied by an extra CRU per letter on each affected map? I <3 introducing reddots to ragdoll physics!
Shadowed Cola Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 686	Posted - 2015.08.07 20:28:00 - [32] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: DeadlyAztec11 wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: DeadlyAztec11 wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: Remove the ability to spawn on a lettered Objective entirely. Give the Defending team all of the installations on the map from the start (Letter Objectives or otherwise) Merge One-and-Only into Skirmish (utilize Acquisition rotation for single Objective Skirmishes). Remove clone counts from Skirmish and slow down the MCC damage tick ^^Those four changes would work a world of good for the game IMHO. Skirmish as a gamemode is perfect in my opinion. This game is balanced completely around Skirmish. I think the current iteration of Skirmish should be held. Skirmish needs worked on if you ask me, even if they only changed the ability to spawn on lettered objectives or removed clone counts it would be a significant improvement. Spawning on the letter is key. It's the difference between having to rely on your teammates for excellent uplinks or not. Currently there are not nearly enough players placing acceptable uplinks for this change to be beneficial. What if the removal of letter spawning was accompanied by an extra CRU per letter on each affected map? What's the difference other then it's easier to tell where you're going to spawn from to camp you?
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 520	Posted - 2015.08.07 22:47:00 - [33] - Quote Medal of Honor had a long skinny mapset (can't member mode name) that had an objective every so often. Attackers had to get into, set charges, and hold till they blew. This killed the current spawn for defenders, and allowed attackers further through map. I have always liked this idea for dust. Can you imagine, a complex, a building fight. From the front desk to the CEO chamber. Glorious. It could pay more for x depending on how far attackers did or did not get. Best of all, it could be a no droplink zone where the crupack idea would be king. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Alaika Arbosa No Context 2	Posted - 2015.08.07 23:15:00 - [34] - Quote Shadowed Cola wrote: What's the difference other then it's easier to tell where you're going to spawn from to camp you? How is that any different than what we have now? I mean rather than spawn camping the letter spawns, you'd just move over to the CRU. It is merely a change in venue, however, it also disconnects the letter from the ability to spawn. If A is being sieged and you lose the CRU, you're going to need to depend on your squad/team to deploy links or you'll need to decide where to rally to retake A. It takes the letters and turns them into actual objectives to seize and hold rather than CRUs which damage our enemies MCC. It makes people think more about letter defense than "Quick, spawn in before they get the hack". It is a minor change, however, it is a change which could serve to revitalize a neglected game mode. I <3 introducing reddots to ragdoll physics!
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 12	Posted - 2015.08.08 01:32:00 - [35] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Shadowed Cola wrote: What's the difference other then it's easier to tell where you're going to spawn from to camp you? How is that any different than what we have now? I mean rather than spawn camping the letter spawns, you'd just move over to the CRU. It is merely a change in venue, however, it also disconnects the letter from the ability to spawn. If A is being sieged and you lose the CRU, you're going to need to depend on your squad/team to deploy links or you'll need to decide where to rally to retake A. It takes the letters and turns them into actual objectives to seize and hold rather than CRUs which damage our enemies MCC. It makes people think more about letter defense than "Quick, spawn in before they get the hack". It is a minor change, however, it is a change which could serve to revitalize a neglected game mode. I would not mind objective-spawning in Skirmish being replaced with more CRUs, but I don't find it to be a necessary change, and this is off topic anyway. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Alena Ventrallis Commando Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.08.08 01:52:00 - [36] - Quote Is there a reason we can't go back to skirmish 1.0? Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Shadowed Cola Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 698	Posted - 2015.08.08 01:55:00 - [37] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Shadowed Cola wrote: What's the difference other then it's easier to tell where you're going to spawn from to camp you? How is that any different than what we have now? I mean rather than spawn camping the letter spawns, you'd just move over to the CRU. It is merely a change in venue, however, it also disconnects the letter from the ability to spawn. If A is being sieged and you lose the CRU, you're going to need to depend on your squad/team to deploy links or you'll need to decide where to rally to retake A. It takes the letters and turns them into actual objectives to seize and hold rather than CRUs which damage our enemies MCC. It makes people think more about letter defense than "Quick, spawn in before they get the hack". It is a minor change, however, it is a change which could serve to revitalize a neglected game mode. I need this explained to me again. Let me just tell you what i understood: You want CRU instead of objective spawn because - ????????? You hate people spawning at the point? You're not speaking clearly on how it even helps the mode - do your really believe people would enjoy that the objectives became harder to defend and react too? CRU being flipped - most don't notice, it never gives saved - but an objective is a big flashing light of help me i'm dying. if by the time your team notices the objective is being flipped it's already too late to react - what's the point in that? That would just create bunny hopping from objective to objective as you EASILY push out defenders and there links with fluxes.
Shadowed Cola Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 698	Posted - 2015.08.08 01:56:00 - [38] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Is there a reason we can't go back to skirmish 1.0? It was permanently deleted - CCP no longer has the data or means to recreate it - and even if they did - they were unable to balance it the first time around, which is why it was taken off.
deezy dabest IMPERIAL SPECIAL FORCES GROUP Evil Syndicate Alliance. 2	Posted - 2015.08.08 02:07:00 - [39] - Quote Shadowed Cola wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Is there a reason we can't go back to skirmish 1.0? It was permanently deleted - CCP no longer has the data or means to recreate it - and even if they did - they were unable to balance it the first time around, which is why it was taken off. I very well may be wrong but I was under the impression that skirm 1.0 was part of the Carbon build which was entirely trashed. I can not say for sure as I was not there. Remove NPC orbitals from FW. -- Fix orbital timers for Eve players assisting in Planetary Conquest.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 12	Posted - 2015.08.08 05:18:00 - [40] - Quote deezy dabest wrote: Shadowed Cola wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Is there a reason we can't go back to skirmish 1.0? It was permanently deleted - CCP no longer has the data or means to recreate it - and even if they did - they were unable to balance it the first time around, which is why it was taken off. I very well may be wrong but I was under the impression that skirm 1.0 was part of the Carbon build which was entirely trashed. I can not say for sure as I was not there. The version of Dust that ran on the Carbon engine never available for us to play in closed beta, and in fact, I heard PS3s couldn't handle Carbon anyway. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 12	Posted - 2015.08.14 11:08:00 - [41] - Quote Still redundant Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Varoth Drac Dead Man's Game 1	Posted - 2015.08.14 12:34:00 - [42] - Quote To be honest, on another platform, we should have free roaming MCCs over large maps. If you want to attack something, you should fly your MCC there to attack it. Give the MCC ground firing weapons instead of a redline. The MCC can't approach within range of too many enemy null cannons without dieing. Infantry would need to hack or destroy null cannons for you to approach. The MCC should project the tacnet to an area around it where friendly mercs could operate. This would have a max bandwidth, limiting the number of players in a given area. Number of MCCs would also need a limit, unfortunately. If tacnet extends to Null cannon, the cannon can shoot the MCC. More deployable defences are needed, including small turret defences. We need drones to help defend installations, to buy time for defenders to assemble a defense force. Once MCC docks with outpost, ownership and control of null cannons can switch. As attackers fight drones and defence turrets to hack null cannons, defenders bring their MCC to defend by firing on attacking MCC. Friendly outpost projects tacnet. Uplinks should be active when carried, not deployed. Perhaps have single use, personal, deployable uplinks. Maybe vehicles with an mcru could act like mini MCCs, projecting their own limited tacnet.
Joel II X Bacon with a bottle of Quafe 8	Posted - 2015.08.14 12:36:00 - [43] - Quote Domination and Acquisition are the same thing because they don't switch fast enough. *Scouts United* Gk.0s & Quafes all day.
Mobius Wyvern Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 6	Posted - 2015.08.14 14:04:00 - [44] - Quote If throwing Likes at KAGEHOSHI made CCP do what he said, Dust 514 would be a LOT more fun than it is right now. Not to say I'm going to stop. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Mobius Wyvern Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 6	Posted - 2015.08.14 14:08:00 - [45] - Quote KingBabar wrote: As with many other things in Dust, suffice to say, they should've listened more to us MAG vets... Yeah...no. M.A.G. is not some kind of FPS messiah, Babar. I get that a lot of people loved it, and you were among them, but trying to say that fixing Dust means adding as many features from that game as possible is applying the rose-tinted goggles a little too much. As I recall, quite a few M.A.G. fans were perfectly fine with the TTK back when it was so short you barely had time to react to getting shot, which prompted CCP to put it where it is now. Just because M.A.G. supported a lot of players doesn't mean it's the Holy Grail that every shooter should emulate. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Soraya Xel Random Gunz Rise Of Legion. 6	Posted - 2015.08.14 16:42:00 - [46] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Domination and Acquisition are almost the same thing, which isn't surprising because the idea for Acquisition was first thought of as an upgrade to make Domination not be a stagnant suckfest, and it was not supposed to be it's own game type. I strongly agree here, and I've asked for this to happen multiple times. There are others which are big fans of Domination (for some reason). CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
sir RAVEN WING Vader's-Fist 4	Posted - 2015.08.14 18:14:00 - [47] - Quote Elimination. (Formerly named Arena) - Small Area of Battle, largely the size of a single city socket. - Clone count of 150 for both sides. - Meta Level 15 and under. - Each Clone has 10 lives. - After 10 deaths, the player becomes unable to harm anyone. - Friendly Fire is on Salvage -Medium Sized Map -Payout is decreased -Salvage is increased -Game revolves around CRUs. -Contested hacks are the same speed as regular hacks -Each team fights for CRUs to keep up clones. -Clones for each team is 300 at start but declines at 1 Per 3 Seconds. (Without deaths.) Hacking CRUs will extend the time before the next clone disappears. Might think up a few more if these get good reviews. I'll be watching the likes on the post. VF Diplomat. "Goodbye Mr. Fishy, you're now a bird."
Alaika Arbosa No Context 2	Posted - 2015.08.14 21:31:00 - [48] - Quote Shadowed Cola wrote: I need this explained to me again. Let me just tell you what i understood: You want CRU instead of objective spawn because - ????????? You hate people spawning at the point? You're not speaking clearly on how it even helps the mode - do your really believe people would enjoy that the objectives became harder to defend and react too? CRU being flipped - most don't notice, it never gives saved - but an objective is a big flashing light of help me i'm dying. if by the time your team notices the objective is being flipped it's already too late to react - what's the point in that? That would just create bunny hopping from objective to objective as you EASILY push out defenders and there links with fluxes. Sorry, I forgot that no one would think to dig in and actually defend an objective because this game is only played by caffeine addicted kids suffering from ADD who can't focus on anything aside from chasing kills for more than 30 seconds or so. What is the point in spawning in on the letter when you know that 15 reddots have heavy/logi blobbed the letter? Or even worse, that you'll be caught in that bullshit spawn trap where they complete the hack at 1 second left and force you to spawn somewhere else anyway? Separating the spawn from the letter is good because it will force a change in established gameplay, it will shake things up and make our redundant gametypes a little less monotonous since we'll be playing an old game mode in a new way. I think you're just too attached to a particular routine and too tunnelvisioned on your way to play Dust that you think everyone will react the same as you. I <3 introducing reddots to ragdoll physics!
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 12	Posted - 2015.08.19 22:06:00 - [49] - Quote Arise chicken! Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.08.19 22:26:00 - [50] - Quote Still wishing there was an asymmetrical siege or attrition based game mode where players objectives are to advance through several locations destroying objectives as they go. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 12	Posted - 2015.08.30 22:31:00 - [51] - Quote Redundancy persists Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.08.30 22:38:00 - [52] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Redundancy persists PERSISTING! Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Krixus Flux Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 971	Posted - 2015.08.31 02:44:00 - [53] - Quote The natives are restless Saying what's on people's minds
Robert Conway Concordiat Mercenaries 631	Posted - 2015.08.31 07:51:00 - [54] - Quote Might I suggest this as a different game mode for your consideration? https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=213797&find=unread Yassavi Approved. -Aero Yassavi
xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Corporation 3	Posted - 2015.08.31 09:48:00 - [55] - Quote I have to agree entirely with OP and KingBabar: the very first Skirmish was exciting as hell, taking many concpts from MAG's domination and bringing them into Eve Universe. It is clear that people are far more interested in multi-level experiences simply because it gives you that sensation of "achievement". A clear example of multi-level in Dust would be: - Infiltrate into [insert facility name here] facility - Set explosives to main gate (primary objective) - Disable automatic defense system (primary objective) - Disable AA battery (secondary objective) - Disable Null Cannons - Disable Null Cannon A - Disable Null Cannon B - Disable Null Cannon C [Once Null cannons are disabled the MCC approaches the main base and the spawn point changes] - Destroy Enemy Main Camp - Set Explosives Charges on D, E, F, G This is just a simple example of what could be done: your mission is clear and easy to understand, making it a bit more "realistic". take time or take aurums (Gò»#-_-)Gò»~~~GòºGòÉGòº [FSTNM SCDNM]
xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Corporation 3	Posted - 2015.08.31 10:14:00 - [56] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: KingBabar wrote: As with many other things in Dust, suffice to say, they should've listened more to us MAG vets... Yeah...no. M.A.G. is not some kind of FPS messiah, Babar. I get that a lot of people loved it, and you were among them, but trying to say that fixing Dust means adding as many features from that game as possible is applying the rose-tinted goggles a little too much. As I recall, quite a few M.A.G. fans were perfectly fine with the TTK back when it was so short you barely had time to react to getting shot, which prompted CCP to put it where it is now. Just because M.A.G. supported a lot of players doesn't mean it's the Holy Grail that every shooter should emulate. As far as I remember, Mobius, MAG's ttk was one of the highest ttk for its time (and still much lower than Dust's). The problem is a bit more complex than simple "higher ttk is better": a higher ttk means a higher rate of "forgivable mistakes". If you are heading toward an enemy ambush, chances are that you and your squad will die, no matter what equipment you have or how "good" your aim is. The thing is, this doesn't always happen here on Dust: it is not certain that even if you ambush 1 guy shooting him from behind, you are going to kill him. How many times people came at 1 mt behind me with a shotgun and I had all the time to charge-shot them and survive. I know I shouldn't have survived, because it was my fault being in the wrong place at the wrong time. A reviewer, ages ago, said that Dust514 is the "thinking man's shooter" but, in fact, it's not. It keeps forgiving (and many times even rewarding) player's mistakes, whether it is wrong positioning or soloing entire squads. Don't get me wrong, because of its depth, skills system, customization etc it could potentially be the "thinking man's shooter" but at the end of the day, it's not. You should pick your fight, right? No. This is a plague. This is why people choose to leave battles because they are simply "picking their fight" and chose not to go against "Protostompers" and "full squads" or leaving matches when they are losing. take time or take aurums (Gò»#-_-)Gò»~~~GòºGòÉGòº [FSTNM SCDNM]


Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page