| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gaechti
BetaMax.
71
   |
Posted - 2012.10.19 10:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
Dear CCP
In the first beta build I had access to (3 builds ago?) there was very cool game mode. Think it was a mode pretty much like in MAG.
Basicly the attackers had to get and hold both A and B, then they would get destroyed, the second part of the map got unlocked and the final opjectives C and D would appear. If again both C and D were held at same time, they would again get destroyed and the battle was won.
Defenders could win by getting the attackers remaining clones to 0
I really enjoyed that mode / build
Will it get a comeback or was it scrapped? |
Umbat Boki
Circle of Huskarl
Minmatar Republic
157
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 10:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
As far as I understand, it's been scrapped. We are going to have 3 game modes: skirmish, ambush and conquest. Conquest is something without strict rule-set where installation deployment will be used. |
Gaechti
BetaMax.
71
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 10:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
That would really be a shame. The mode worked pretty good I recall... |
Kleanur Guy
SyNergy Gaming
154
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 10:41:00 -
[4] - Quote
Yep, beyond the glitches and stuff in the build the game mode was really fun. |
KingBabar
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
443
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 11:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
First off, you didn't have to cap A and B simultaneously, they exploded when capped.
Taking out both A and B unlocked a new part of the map which resultet in C, D and E being exposed and it was now down to holding them as long as possible to do dammage to the MCC, just like in skirmish.
If the MCC lost its shields before A and B were capped, the defenders won the round.
I do agree with OP though, the game mode was brilliant. It gave me warm associations to some of the game modes in MAG. Its the progressive part of the mode that is the trick.
I do believe that the attacker vs attacker formula we now have in Skirmis is the right one, it makes the games more dynamic and you don't have to be alone on an attacking team filled up with snipers.
So perhaps a "new" game mode for the future?
I love the idea of attacking/defending in stages, it gives a sence of progression and the focus of the battle keeps shifting. I'd gladly go all the way to Z....
And this sort of mode could also be combined with some form of capture the flag thingy. First you have to cap this and that, unlock so and so and then you even have to steal something and bring it out without whatever it is getting destroyed.
|
Maken Tosch
Planetary Response Organisation
Test Friends Please Ignore
1591
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 12:02:00 -
[6] - Quote
Perhaps it might be implemented back into the game in a later expansion after release. You could ask a council member of the CSM to try to help convince CCP to bring it back one day once they work out the kinks. |
arimal lavaren
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
186
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 13:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
I can't source it but I believe I read ccp's reasoning was that all there data showed it heavily favored the defenders. So they had to rework it. |
Drako Light
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
13
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 13:21:00 -
[8] - Quote
Maybe it would work well when corps own districts and the corp was on the defending side of the attack! |
Gaechti
BetaMax.
71
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 15:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
KingBabar, your right. Holding both objectives was in MAG not here.
Well it was long ago and many smokes since then ;)
I disagree with it favouring defenders. Once you railguned the turrets and the CRU's, first part of the map was easy mode... |
Reimus Klinsman
BetaMax.
319
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 15:58:00 -
[10] - Quote
That was definitely my favorite game mode. I loved how the A and B didn't even need to be captured, you could just kill the nodes. It made it very easy when you deployed tanks... They just needed to tweak a few things. I really hope they do readd it. Skirmish right now is already pretty dull. |
|
|
Gaechti
BetaMax.
71
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 16:34:00 -
[11] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:You could ask a council member of the CSM to try to help convince CCP to bring it back one day once they work out the kinks.
Now I gonna look like a noob, but never heard of this before? Can you enlighten me?
(I'm not playing EVE, and forum search didnt bring up more info either) |
jenza aranda
BetaMax.
1005
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 16:45:00 -
[12] - Quote
KingBabar wrote:
I do believe that the attacker vs attacker formula we now have in Skirmis is the right one, it makes the games more dynamic and you don't have to be alone on an attacking team filled up with snipers.
I personally disagree, i dont like the fact that there is no obvious attacker/defender |
Tony Calif
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
2002
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 17:11:00 -
[13] - Quote
Yeah, anything unique and cool will be removed for imbalanced mediocrity. |
Tiel Syysch
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
633
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 17:26:00 -
[14] - Quote
They said it was taken out for balance reasons, and that it might come back in the future as a new mode. |
Ghost-33
ShootBreakStab
108
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 17:47:00 -
[15] - Quote
arimal lavaren wrote:I can't source it but I believe I read ccp's reasoning was that all there data showed it heavily favored the defenders. So they had to rework it.
I thought that was usually a given in most all battles? 9 times outta 10 Defenders have the home field advantage and the resources to put on a good defense. The only way most defenders are overrun is with attrition or by the attackers overwhelming numbers or firepower. Since numbers are even and usually firepower is even then it becomes a batle between the tactics chosen for defending or attacking.
But I did love that game mode as well, it also had the best map. |
J'Jor Da'Wg
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
648
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 18:03:00 -
[16] - Quote
I like dynamic game modes, such as RUSH in BF3. Old Skirmish was great! They should bring it back, possibly as a new game mode? Maybe instead, there should be "Neutral Skirmish" and "Attacking/Defense Skirmish".
It would be cool if you deployed in the MCC and THEN set up the forward base by capturing it. Defenders who destroy the forward base would initiate a countdown until the whole forward base was orbital striked. If the attackers secured it and pushed forward, I & II nodes would open for taking. Once they are destroyed, A, B, and C would open for securing and the MCC to dock.
This could make great use of the terrain and landscape surrounding the maps currently, the mountains and valleys being washed over with warfare. It would make LAV transport even more enormously useful, as well as dropships. |
SILENTSAM 69
Pro Hic Immortalis
RISE of LEGION
421
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 19:50:00 -
[17] - Quote
I have heard the old one was scrapped because it favoured the defenders quite heavily.
That said I think it should be brought back because it was great fun. With all the latest tweaks it is hard to say it would still be as imbalanced. |
SoTa PoP
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
1772
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 19:51:00 -
[18] - Quote
Gaechti wrote:Dear CCP
In the first beta build I had access to (3 builds ago?) there was very cool game mode. Think it was a mode pretty much like in MAG.
Basicly the attackers had to get and hold both A and B, then they would get destroyed, the second part of the map got unlocked and the final opjectives C and D would appear. If again both C and D were held at same time, they would again get destroyed and the battle was won.
Defenders could win by getting the attackers remaining clones to 0
I really enjoyed that mode / build
Will it get a comeback or was it scrapped?
As much as I love this idea... It wreaks of Battlefield Bad Company 2 Gold Rush Mode. If they do intend to bring it back, it needs something original to be more then a knock-off. |
VK deathslaer
Tritan-Industries
Legacy Rising
149
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 19:58:00 -
[19] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:Perhaps it might be implemented back into the game in a later expansion after release. You could ask a council member of the CSM to try to help convince CCP to bring it back one day once they work out the kinks.
great idea!
VK Deathslaer for CSM! |
DON RODIE II
Deep Space Republic
168
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 21:49:00 -
[20] - Quote
Gaechti wrote:Dear CCP
In the first beta build I had access to (3 builds ago?) there was very cool game mode. Think it was a mode pretty much like in MAG.
Basicly the attackers had to get and hold both A and B, then they would get destroyed, the second part of the map got unlocked and the final opjectives C and D would appear. If again both C and D were held at same time, they would again get destroyed and the battle was won.
Defenders could win by getting the attackers remaining clones to 0
I really enjoyed that mode / build
Will it get a comeback or was it scrapped?
That sound great, sad to hear I miss out on that. |
|
|
Leither Yiltron
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
417
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 23:09:00 -
[21] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote: You could ask a council member of the CSM to try to help convince CCP .
lol
Dust is a poison topic for half of the CSM. They're the last people you want to rely upon to get Dust changes. Advocate things yourself if you think they're good ideas! Heavens knows we're all more qualified to say things about Dust than most CSM members. |
Kay High
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
86
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 23:18:00 -
[22] - Quote
I liked that mode as well. I know that CCP said that the mode was too heavy for the defenders I also heard that the two part skirmish combined with the Biomass Map was part of the reason for the memory leak that caused our systems to hard freeze every three matches (Roughly) |
Gaechti
BetaMax.
71
|
Posted - 2012.10.21 11:22:00 -
[23] - Quote
Can someone enlighten me what a CSM is? Is that some EVE thingy? |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |