Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
aden slayer
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
407
|
Posted - 2012.12.20 16:14:00 -
[1] - Quote
In the early build of dust skirmish was a lot different than what we are playing now. But as everyone say, Old school always beats new school.
This request to the DEVs is to bring back the original skirmish mode as a new Gametype called "invasion".
a brief info for those who weren't here in the beginning: The skirmish we play today consist of two attacking teams as they fight for control of NULL cannons around the map to destroy each other's MCC.
But the original is far different, as it had one attacking team and defending team. There is one MCC belonging to the attackers and they must ensure it safely reaches the Defender base without being destroyed.
The defending team starts out with control of all NULL cannons on the map, the attacking team starts on the other side of the map.
The attackers objective is to infiltrate the NULL cannons and set them to self-destruct, the defenders objective is to stop the attackers for hacking the null cannons and disarming any NULL cannons set to self-destruct. If the attackers fails to destroy the NULL cannons in time, their MCC will be toast.
BUT, if all NULL cannons were destroyed the defenders will retreat to their main base for a final firefight.
at the main base, defenders will have to protect AA missile installations and reactivate any offline AA installations. The attackers must deactivate the base defenses and make sure they stay deactivated.
There is no time limit and the match will only end if the MCC gets destroyed or reaches and docks the defenders base safely. end of info
I hope you will support this idea. |
fenrir storm
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
314
|
Posted - 2012.12.20 16:26:00 -
[2] - Quote
Ye skirmish used to be a load of fun.
I give my support to it's return may even enjoy playing again, instead of the ring a roses game we have now. |
aden slayer
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
407
|
Posted - 2012.12.20 16:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
Oh yeah I forgot If anyone wants more info on the early build just post the question and someone will reply. |
Ivar Iosef
G I A N T
3
|
Posted - 2012.12.20 18:30:00 -
[4] - Quote
The only reason they took it away was Defenders were swatting MCC out of the air WAY too quickly. It was a fun game type, and as long as they cut back on the amount of AA defenses in the first zone, I think it would still be a lot of fun! |
WHz DS9899
Doomheim
136
|
Posted - 2012.12.20 19:27:00 -
[5] - Quote
Ivar Iosef wrote:The only reason they took it away was Defenders were swatting MCC out of the air WAY too quickly. It was a fun game type, and as long as they cut back on the amount of AA defenses in the first zone, I think it would still be a lot of fun!
From my memory, it was the complete opposite. if you were defender, you lost. End of story. |
Ivar Iosef
G I A N T
3
|
Posted - 2012.12.20 20:00:00 -
[6] - Quote
That's what happened near the end of the build, after they were mucking with some of the mechanics and turret placements. Heavies would roll up and wipe out the first 2 objectives, thus shortening the match so the Defenders couldn't possibly win in time.
I guess they were having so many balance issues, they just scrapped it. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.12.20 20:36:00 -
[7] - Quote
Hey guys... new idea. Don't just bring the old mode back, renovate it...
First stage is the current Skirmish.
When one team's MCC is destroyed, the other team become the "attackers" and can push forwards if their MCC is still strong enough (more than 50% armour). If this happens, a new portion of the map opens out (redline shift) and the MCC starts moving towards an enemy base in the now-accessible area, which also has several more NULL Cannons, all of which are already controlled by the defenders. The attackers have to move up to capture the new NULL Cannons before their MCC moves into range. The defenders just have to make sure the MCC doesn't reach the base.
If the surviving MCC has less than 50% armour when the enemy MCC is destroyed, then the battle is a pyrrhic victory to the team whose MCC survived. They still technically won, but it's not so much a "victory" as it is "losing less badly than the other guys".
If the surviving MCC gets destroyed in the latter part of the mission, then it's a stalemate. Both sides lost an expensive and important asset, and need time to recover from their loss.
If the surviving MCC reaches the enemy base, VICTORY! To the winner go the spoils.
In this battle type, a negative modifier would be applied to any ISK earnings, and a positive modifier would be applied for successfully capturing the enemy base. This means a solid victory gives better rewards, and being beaten would become less of a profitable option for the redline-camping snipers who ignore their team's attempt to actually PTFO. |
aden slayer
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
407
|
Posted - 2012.12.21 01:13:00 -
[8] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Hey guys... new idea. Don't just bring the old mode back, renovate it...
First stage is the current Skirmish.
When one team's MCC is destroyed, the other team become the "attackers" and can push forwards if their MCC is still strong enough (more than 50% armour). If this happens, a new portion of the map opens out (redline shift) and the MCC starts moving towards an enemy base in the now-accessible area, which also has several more NULL Cannons, all of which are already controlled by the defenders. The attackers have to move up to capture the new NULL Cannons before their MCC moves into range. The defenders just have to make sure the MCC doesn't reach the base.
If the surviving MCC has less than 50% armour when the enemy MCC is destroyed, then the battle is a pyrrhic victory to the team whose MCC survived. They still technically won, but it's not so much a "victory" as it is "losing less badly than the other guys".
If the surviving MCC gets destroyed in the latter part of the mission, then it's a stalemate. Both sides lost an expensive and important asset, and need time to recover from their loss.
If the surviving MCC reaches the enemy base, VICTORY! To the winner go the spoils.
In this battle type, a negative modifier would be applied to any ISK earnings, and a positive modifier would be applied for successfully capturing the enemy base. This means a solid victory gives better rewards, and being beaten would become less of a profitable option for the redline-camping snipers who ignore their team's attempt to actually PTFO.
I still think the original is better. |
Grimmiers
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
158
|
Posted - 2012.12.21 01:57:00 -
[9] - Quote
If that mode is brought back I think the map would have to be bigger. At least one of the objectives you hack/destroy need to be indoors, or at a high elevation. Before both objectives were destroyed pretty quickly most of the time.
Another balance that might work is the fact that you can jump out of the mcc now. They just need to make it so when the mcc reaches the goal It actually takes extra time to dock when it is over the area. That way even if you couldn't hack the terminals before to spawn in you have the option of jumping on the objectives for a last chance hack before your mcc blows up. |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3064
|
Posted - 2012.12.21 01:59:00 -
[10] - Quote
+1 Old skirmish revamped as a new game type (not a variation) would be awesome. |
|
aden slayer
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
407
|
Posted - 2012.12.21 03:15:00 -
[11] - Quote
Grimmiers wrote:If that mode is brought back I think the map would have to be bigger. At least one of the objectives you hack/destroy need to be indoors, or at a high elevation. Before both objectives were destroyed pretty quickly most of the time.
Another balance that might work is the fact that you can jump out of the mcc now. They just need to make it so when the mcc reaches the goal It actually takes extra time to dock when it is over the area. That way even if you couldn't hack the terminals before to spawn in you have the option of jumping on the objectives for a last chance hack before your mcc blows up.
Good idea. +1 |
aden slayer
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
407
|
Posted - 2012.12.21 10:41:00 -
[12] - Quote
Ivar Iosef wrote:That's what happened near the end of the build, after they were mucking with some of the mechanics and turret placements. Heavies would roll up and wipe out the first 2 objectives, thus shortening the match so the Defenders couldn't possibly win in time.
I guess they were having so many balance issues, they just scrapped it.
Yes There were lots of balance issues with the original but it's still more fun than now. |
G Torq
ALTA B2O
88
|
Posted - 2012.12.21 12:15:00 -
[13] - Quote
+1 - sounds like good fun! |
ArMaGeDoN The Cat
Systems Federation Coalition of Galactic Unity
157
|
Posted - 2012.12.21 13:33:00 -
[14] - Quote
Persitant battles should have the old skirmish. Once the game comes out and you actually fight for planets. |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3064
|
Posted - 2012.12.24 01:14:00 -
[15] - Quote
I want some invading. |
Ulysses Knapse
Nuevo Atlas Corporation
73
|
Posted - 2012.12.24 01:50:00 -
[16] - Quote
I hate the idea of adding new battle-types, but I would prefer this over the new skirmish. I wish there was a concrete system of battle-types, instead of this mismatched system. Open-ended and the like, similar to EVE and less similar to the usual FPS. |
KEROSIINI-TERO
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
248
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 18:13:00 -
[17] - Quote
Let's have plenty of different game modes, scenarios if you will.
Not all of them have to be perfectly balanced as I wouldn't expect the real scenarios to be either. And remember, at this point it doesn't matter whether you win or lose.... |
Logi Bro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
836
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 20:20:00 -
[18] - Quote
Have you seen this? Skip to 16:00 to get them to play the damn game.
I think this would be a great game mode, especially considering they've already created the game mode, now they just need to copy and paste it to our newer and shiny-er beta. |
PyroTech 03
Legion of Darkwind Order of the Void
3
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 22:44:00 -
[19] - Quote
I like the idea of adding this as a new game mode....great for when a force has fortified itself in a district.
The current skirmish would be good when maybe two sides are contesting the same spot before a defender has really setup shop there... |
Jayquan18
The Southern Legion
42
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 22:47:00 -
[20] - Quote
Logi Bro wrote:Have you seen this? Skip to 16:00 to get them to play the damn game. I think this would be a great game mode, especially considering they've already created the game mode, now they just need to copy and paste it to our newer and shiny-er beta. I'm not sure why they didn't bring this in the beta. I really want this mode too, but this map features 24 player battles, so i doubt they will add that into the beta. |
|
Draco Dustflier
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
45
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 22:51:00 -
[21] - Quote
bring it back but call it siege. |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3064
|
Posted - 2013.01.04 10:29:00 -
[22] - Quote
For a multistage attack/defend mode, the number of objectives per stage should vary based on the map; it would keep things interesting. |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3064
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 10:17:00 -
[23] - Quote
I would still love. |
Zat Earthshatter
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
304
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 10:04:00 -
[24] - Quote
I would love to see this mode return, not in the least because the multi-stage mode proudly displayed the MAG heritage and was an actual attack-defend scenario. Old Skirmish also required the most strategy out of any game-mode we've fought in. You had multiple paths in the starting Craterlake canyons, which meant multiple ways to flank and the ability to choose which Defense Relay to blow up first. But the strategy wasn't over after A and B died. Blow up the Large Turret installations to get vehicles in faster, or hack them and fire into the base? Attack from which side? what side are they going to attack from? The Craterlake + endbase map design encouraged vehicles far better than our current tiny maps. If you ate some golden donuts and spawned as Heavy, your fat self needed a ride or you were going to miss the fun. The strategic placement of the turrets required more Forge Guns and Swarm Launchers on the field, as they would rip apart most of what you sent otherwise. Lastly, Old Skirmish players had learned to uphold the almighty CRU as their god - for without the CRU in your possession, your forces withered and failed for having to spawn in the Red Zone, which was not only far back, but it was never in a position to snipe from either. Now the CRU is a mere toy, where in New Skirmish they are always right next to the Red Zone, and in most cases the Red Zone is safer in the situations where they may be needed where they are. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 15:46:00 -
[25] - Quote
skirmisH 1.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skirmish 2.0 running around crap.
Hell i can still remember the fresh air of that sweet valley of death. Running as fast as a bunny using steroids. Watching that frontline move back and forth on tough games. |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3064
|
Posted - 2013.01.28 19:04:00 -
[26] - Quote
This is the most needed game mode |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3064
|
Posted - 2013.01.30 08:51:00 -
[27] - Quote
Something like this should be a priority. |
Coleus Rattus
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
25
|
Posted - 2013.01.30 10:11:00 -
[28] - Quote
I have to admit I actually like Skirmish 2.0 more though haven't played the closed beta much.
It had following problem: Battles could be decided quite early, with them dragging on forever for them to finally end. It was especially jarring if the attacking side was on a huge advantage, as when the MCC reached about half the distance with most health intact, it wouldn't go down even if the defenders would've turned around the match and held all null-cannons from then on. (actual figures pulled out from my ass, but you get my point, I hope)
Still, I do like the idea of assymetrical modes very much, but I'd drop the MCC (or at least it's health) as a win condition alltogether.
I think it would work better if only time and clone reserves would factor in, and it could be explained as follows:
The objective stays the same: the MCC has to get to an objective. But instead of having null-cannons to defend the objective, there are tractor beams/repulsors/ whatever happens to be in the EVE lore, to lock the MCC in place. If the defenders hold all the tractor beams, the MCC halts completely. For every tractor beam captured by the attackers, the MCC travels faster. That system would both allow overwhelmingly good attackers speedy wins, while still allowing "last second" turnaround of battles, where it would matter to capture all the objectives for the defenders at any point in the game. |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3064
|
Posted - 2013.02.02 21:43:00 -
[29] - Quote
Still would love |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3064
|
Posted - 2013.02.07 04:38:00 -
[30] - Quote
No one else wants this glorious mode? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |