| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Konohamaru Sarutobi
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Legacy Rising
91
   |
Posted - 2012.12.27 16:43:00 -
[1] - Quote
In Skirmish some matchs you can see in the enemy team a lot of sinpers, or some tanks with full people inside. They get a lot of kills but they lose the match because no one takes the points (A, B, C, etc). If they just want to get kills, force them to play ambush, because there is not point to play "Skirmish" if you get rewards based in your points and not in the final result. |
The dark cloud
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
1060
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 16:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
Oh there is a point for those players. Simply that they dont have to worry about people who could kill them. Redline protection is the reason for that and the fact that ambush maps are to small for snipers and tanks.
|
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis
775
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 19:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
The ISK rewards system already gives a larger share of the possible ISK from the match to the victors. So on the ISK side this is already in game.
On the SP side I personally think the fundamental system of awards works as is because it makes more sense that you'd learn from your actions not from the outcome of the mission.
0.02 ISK
Cross
ps ~ those who don't learn to capture objectives are going to find themselves in a sorry state once the game goes live, FW (and later Null) will eat them alive. |
WHz DS9899
Doomheim
136
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 22:41:00 -
[4] - Quote
I guess you haven't seen me drive my HAV. Just so you know, not all HAV drivers and snipers hide in our readlines. Some us actually PTFO. Don't judge all of us because you see some of them doing it. |
Ulysses Knapse
Nuevo Atlas Corporation
73
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 22:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
I disagree with your assumptions. I am a sniper, and I actively try to take the points, but that requires an unguarded point, because you can't go in at close-range with a scout dropsuit and a scrambler pistol and expect to take it from one or two opponents with assault rifles and assault dropsuits without a great deal of luck, or badass grenade skills. As for HAVs, they are slow and bulky, not capable of rushing a point and taking it. Snipers and HAVs are not meant to capture ground. It certainly isn't that way in real life. Everyday infantry does that. HAVs and Snipers are for support.
Also, there are clone reserves in Skirmish. It's only 50% higher than in Ambush. I've seen teams win from depleting the enemy's clone reserves in Skirmish more than once, I can tell you that.
As for the ISK rewards, winners already get more. Also, NPC contracts are going to be so new players can get the hang of the game before going into a corporation, which likely sets its own rewards. |
Thranx1231
CowTek
90
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 18:06:00 -
[6] - Quote
I think you are basically off base on this. Winning already pays more. I suspect in SP as well as ISK.
Forcing people to play one particular way because you don't like their style interfering with your definition of fun ... kinda sucks.
This is an MMO/FPS/RPG-ish game with ties to Eve. Nobody really knows how all this is going to play out. But trying to limit play styles is not something CCP does in Eve so don't get yourself worked up about something that has Zero chance of turning out your way.
If you don't know much about Eve then you need to do some searches for "Burn Jita". Then throw those silly dreams away. |
Piercing Serenity
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
RISE of LEGION
181
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 19:59:00 -
[7] - Quote
I agree with this idea in principle. It is the implementation that could be done better. I think that showing players how much ISK/SP they missed out on because their team lost would be excellent. People are naturally risk adverse. We feel losses more than gains, even if the two are of the same magnitude.
I'd be a whole lot more likely to jump into battle and hold objectives if I got a notice during the post battle screens.letting me know that I lost 75,000 ISK and 4,000 SP because my team lost. Something like that would visually show what everyone in this thread has been expressing.
But that's just my 0.02 ISK. Take care,
PS |
Scheneighnay McBob
Bojo's School of the Trades
1062
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 20:00:00 -
[8] - Quote
Why not just double for those who win? |
Piercing Serenity
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
RISE of LEGION
181
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 20:31:00 -
[9] - Quote
Scheneighnay McBob wrote:Why not just double for those who win?
Point taken. Consider my suggestion an "add on" to whatever victory bonus we decide on. Take care,
PS |
Jikt Terlen
Certificate of Participation
6
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 04:27:00 -
[10] - Quote
Thranx1231 wrote:
Forcing people to play one particular way because you don't like their style interfering with your definition of fun ... kinda sucks.
That's already the case, though -- snipers force everyone to play "avoid/kill the sniper" instead of focusing on "capture and hold the objectives." The OP isn't saying there shouldn't be snipers, just that if your battlefield role is parasite instead of team member, you shouldn't get as great a reward for it.
I personally would rather I didn't have guys on my team sitting at the edges of the map waiting for random low-hanging fruit to wander in front of their scope. If you're a sniper working with your team in a genuine support role rather than just shooting anybody you see no matter where they are, or if you're actively denying access to an objective, you're useful to your team. If all you care about is kills and you let your team lose to maximize your kills, I don't know why you're playing an objective-based game to begin with. I actually think it would be fun to have a game mode in which you got no points whatsoever for kills, only for accomplishing specific objectives, but that's another post entirely. |
|
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
3064
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 04:32:00 -
[11] - Quote
Winners should get 25-50% more ISK. Losers don't need a decrease. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |