DUST Search - Bring back the long attack skirmish maps please

All Channels

General Discussions

Bring back the long attack skirmish maps please

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
mongo flash Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 81	Posted - 2012.09.20 17:34:00 - [1] - Quote CCP, I really miss the old skirmish map where there was a side defending and a side attacking. Not this we both start with noting and have to rush to the objectives. I want to have to attack and defend! remember the good old days of the map in the mountains where one side started on in one corner and had to PUSH to the other side? What happened to that? That was awesome. In this next build could we please get more of those type of skirmishes. You know the kind where progress pushed the map to the next set of objectives. Way better than current rush model. Without this type of map I feel I might have to begin complaining about balance and stg (or who ever they are that are ruining the game) and other trivial none helpful things that people are so focused on these days. Cheers!
Tarn Adari Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 157	Posted - 2012.09.20 17:38:00 - [2] - Quote I think these are Conquest, not Skirmish.
mongo flash Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 81	Posted - 2012.09.20 17:53:00 - [3] - Quote That could be. But the battle type descriptions says there is only ambush and skirmish. I believe they were called skirmish back then too but if they made it a third type I would be ok with that solong as they bring them back. It doesn't make any since for defenders to show up to a battle the same time as the attackers. The defenders of maps should already have a hold of what ever it is they are defending. Being a defender and having.g to rush the objective I'm supposed to be defending is silly
Varys Targaryen 200	Posted - 2012.09.20 17:53:00 - [4] - Quote Tarn Adari wrote: I think these are Conquest, not Skirmish. Those matches were labeled as "Skirmish" (and I miss it too). In the patch notes, the Skirmish mode we are playing is known as "Skirmish 2.0". I'm expecting bigger things for a "Conquest" mode.
Tarn Adari Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 157	Posted - 2012.09.20 17:58:00 - [5] - Quote Yeah...I also want these. I am in the beta for 2-3 weeks only, but I saw something like this in the Dust Keynote. I hope they come back and we get infantry cloaks at the same time, so I can circumvent the defenses and hijack the objectives while the grunts distract the enemy :D
HowDidThatTaste Imperfects Negative-Feedback 2242	Posted - 2012.09.20 18:16:00 - [6] - Quote In a post someone said that that game was to weighted advantage to the defender. So that is why we don't see it anymore
mongo flash Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 81	Posted - 2012.09.20 18:26:00 - [7] - Quote That's too bad. Battles SHOULD and ARE always weighted in the defenders advantage and I dont ever remember not winning when I was attacking in fact it always seemed to be the team that was more organized that won and not simply by defender default. That would be a silly thing for ccp to remove. I mean really. If you are defending a planet for the minmitar republic don't you think that they would let you on to the planet BEFORE the Amarr get there? It just makes common since. Now in these none control dictating battles like we are doing now that don't effect eve sov at all its fine but when the battles start mattering the types of battles we have now are not going to cut it.
Knarf Black Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 397	Posted - 2012.09.20 18:26:00 - [8] - Quote I think they had memory issues with the map being so big, too. The problem wasn't so much that the defenders had a huge advantage, but that the match could be definitively won with tons of time left on the clock. If the attackers took out the first two objectives fast enough, they could win the match without taking a single secondary objective. Conversely, if they just barely managed to take out the initial objectives before the MCC was forced to retreat (Defenders won if the MCC lost shields before the attackers could open up the secondary objectives.) then they would have to immediately take all the secondaries and hold them for the entire rest of the match in order to win. So not super balanced, but you could put together a full Prototype Assault guy for less than 5mil SP.
Skytt Syysch Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 235	Posted - 2012.09.20 18:36:00 - [9] - Quote HowDidThatTaste wrote: In a post someone said that that game was to weighted advantage to the defender. So that is why we don't see it anymore Yeah, they took it out because it wasn't balanced. It may come back in a new mode, but it won't be present in what is known as skirmish is what they've said.
jenza aranda BetaMax. 1005	Posted - 2012.09.20 18:37:00 - [10] - Quote what i miss are the oooooold crater lake map where the attackers need to take out the defence relays before heading to neutralise the null cannons. i felt that this method has a lot more structure to things, right now there is no defined attacker or defender, it just looks like there will be two sides battling over unclaimed territory (or maybe thats the idea... hmm)

mongo flash Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 81	Posted - 2012.09.20 18:47:00 - [11] - Quote Exactly my point. Right now defending and attacking means nothing. It doesn't effect what suit I use however I play or what happens in the battles. In fact I would bet that most if not all propel playing rightcnow don't even know or care going into a map Warner they are attacking or defending. Its a moot point. They might as well take out the attacker and defender text because it is useless info in this current model. In the old crater lake it made a huge difference where you spawned what u spawned as and what role u had on the field. It mattered if you where defending or attacking. Now not so much. Balance has made this game not have meaning.
Maken Tosch Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore 1592	Posted - 2012.09.20 18:57:00 - [12] - Quote The two-part skirmish map you refer to is what is being looked into for memory leaks.
mongo flash Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 81	Posted - 2012.09.20 19:25:00 - [13] - Quote That is good that they are looking into it I would hope that would mean they are bringing it back. It would be strange to me that those maps were causing too much trouble I remember them being far more stable then this current build
Skytt Syysch Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 235	Posted - 2012.09.20 19:43:00 - [14] - Quote The mode wasn't removed because of memory leaks. The comms/biomass maps were temporarily taken out for that reason with the E3 build. The mode was removed because of balance reasons, and won't be returning to skirmish, but may come back as a new mode.


Pages: 1 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.