DUST Search - ===[Bring Back Skirmish 1.0]===

Maken Tosch wrote:

Dev Blog by CCP Frame:
http://dust514.com/news/blog/2013/06/developing-game-mode-variations/

Quote:

There have also been major changes to Skirmish Mode. Players who have been with us since closed beta will remember that Skirmish used to involve a team escorting a Mobile Command Center (MCC) across a map while a rival team attempted to stop them, a setup now commonly called GÇ£Skirmish 1.0GÇ¥. Unfortunately, this mode was not as balanced as we would have liked. At the time it was deployed, the fittings and skills players could select, and the randomization of outposts in each battle, led to uneven gameplay between the teams.

Players let us know, so we created a version of Skirmish Mode (commonly called GÇ£Skirmish 2.0GÇ¥) with more symmetry among teams. Anyone who has played DUST 514 should be familiar with this newer setup. There are now two MCCs floating above a battlefield, launching barrages of concentrated firepower at each other. Players rush to capture NULL cannons to damage their enemyGÇÖs MCC as quickly as possible while preventing their rivals from doing the same.

CCP, who were those players that let you know? Those players were just wrong. Skirmish 1.0 was a very balanced game. I never understood why anyone in the forums thought they were unbalanced. The game mode encouraged a lot of teamwork, we had to move with a purpose regardless of which side we were on, and it allowed the defenders a chance to regroup and mobilize without getting too redlined because they had an entire base to heavily guard and protect WITHIN THEIR OWN REDLINE WHERE THE NULL CANNONS WERE!!!

I do recall seeing a handful of players in the forums whining and QQing about the original game mode claiming that defending the objectives were difficult but they completely ignored the fact that they had every chance to establish a solid fortification while the attackers were busy trying to deal with the defense relays.

I also do recall similar players complaining about how hard it was to attack. But those players were wrong as well because they were just not working together as they should have. On top of that, there were plenty of places to flank the enemy but noooooooo they just wanted to run-n-gun like in CoD out in the open for snipers to shoot at and at the time snipers were crap so that's saying something about the unit cohesion of the players.

Let's also not forget that during this time in which Skirmish 1.0 existed, players were unable to squad up, unable to form corporations let alone group up with alliances and qsync, and there were no voice comms available. The only reason Skirmish 1.0 seemed unbalanced to some was due to the missing features I just mentioned. I bet you 500 million ISK (or one PLEX) from my Eve Online character that if the above-mentioned features were available at the time, then Skirmish 1.0 would have been loved by every player... even the whiners would have loved it because then they would rely on green dots rather than random blueberries. I bet this feature would also make PC battles more interesting.

So on behalf of all of the players on this community who want Skirmish 1.0, I ask CCP to please bring this game mode back. It was fun, it was balanced, I saw no reason why it had to go.

If anyone here agrees, put a +1 in your reply and scream HOOAH!!!!

EDIT:

Maken Tosch wrote:

Thanks for the support, guys. I appreciate it.

For those of you who are not aware how Skirmish 1.0 works, here is a step-by-step process on how it went in any given match.

1. Match starts with an attacking MCC slowly advancing on the far side of the map away from the target outpost or city while the attacking mercs attempt to hack and destroy 3 defense relays before their MCC's shields run out.

2. At the same time, the match starts with the defending players having NO MCC on their side but do have a city with 2-3 null cannons located FAR BEHIND the redline where they can organize and fortify their position before the defense relays get taken out.

3. Defending side hope to keep the attacking side from destroying their defense relays.

4. If all 3 defense relays go down before the shields do, then the MCC has a chance to advance further and dock up over the outpost or city as the redline retreats back and exposes the city. But it needs to dock up before its armor runs out.

5. Attacking mercs do everything they can to try to capture the null cannons within the city.

6. Defending side fortifies itself within the city in an attempt to keep the enemy from coming in.

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
KEROSIINI-TERO Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 482	Posted - 2013.06.23 22:59:00 - [31] - Quote +1 for Skirmish 1.0 along with many other non-symmetrical battles! Matches in dust are not that rare events that single matches need to be on even starting grounds, practically all players are playing several matches per game day. That means odds will even up. And if there are 20+ different variations (100+ or even 1000+ is doable if all variables like height map, SIs, objectives, deployment style, OMS, team sized, vehicle limits and many others are taken advantage of) I assume most of this balancing needs is done with random matches in mind. In PC the matches don't have to be even by default, the New Eden side decides the initial settings (who's attacking, how many clones, the SI, the mission etc etc) Create truly variable random pub games and no-one will complain that a certain combination happens to favour one side, as it is a single occurence out of hundreds of different variations! THIS is what I expected of Dust, THIS is what I expected to make Dust great!
Seymor Krelborn DUST University Ivy League 17	Posted - 2013.06.24 01:54:00 - [32] - Quote I will +1 this thread as well... I never had the chance to play this game mode but it sounds interesting and would add a much needed level of strategy dust lacks at the moment... granted in a skirmish or domination now the potential for team dynamics and strategy are present when both sides possess organized squads, but hamfisted run and gun tactics are still awfully prevalent and sometimes preferred over organized team strategy because, well they work.... a game mode like this would put the focus more on team and strategy than on simply capping run and gun and capping again which is what the majority of the matches I play seem to degrade into.... CCP I hope you hear us!
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 2845	Posted - 2013.06.24 06:04:00 - [33] - Quote Any devs wanting to weigh in on this?
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 2855	Posted - 2013.06.24 19:09:00 - [34] - Quote Wow. Already in the third page. I just hope someone in CCP got the message by now.
Kitt 514 True North. 94	Posted - 2013.06.25 04:47:00 - [35] - Quote I loved skirmish 1.0 Seriously loved it. Was very sad when it was removed.
Nova Knife Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 1063	Posted - 2013.06.25 05:15:00 - [36] - Quote While CCP keeps saying they /want/ to bring back skirmish 1.0... What a lot of people don't bring up is that most of what made 1.0 fun was /not/ the mode (Even if the mode was much better than 2.0) It was the terrain map or 'battleground'. Craterlake. Say it with me. Craterlake. Crater F***** Lake. Hands down, one of the best outdoors maps I have played in a shooter. It was a canyon, with tons of diverging paths, nooks, crannies, high ledges, and more paths. (Did I mention bridges? Something we haven't seen at all until more recently) Oh, and let's not forget the small installations, something we haven't seen since Craterlake was taken from us. If there was such a thing as a 'perfect map', Craterlake was the closest thing CCP (and some other devs) have ever come to making it. It had all of the above, proper chokepoints, workaround routes, and tons of cover. There was no 'god sniping' spots that allowed someone to see the entire map. Very little of the map was exposed to a sniper at any given time, which forced them into watching specific chokepoints. Changes to how they make the maps now... Prevent us from seeing a return of the old Craterlake battleground, ever. For this, the entire Dust community has suffered a great loss.... even if they don't know it. If you can't tell, I'm still super butthurt about them removing it. But then, here's a toast to the /original/ Uprising 1.0.... Back in december 2011. (The best and most balanced build of dust to date... Think of how much that says) raises whiskey glass
Chinduko KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 228	Posted - 2013.06.25 05:57:00 - [37] - Quote I agree. Skirmish 1.0 was best. However, by CCP logic, Skirmish 1.0 was not a balanced game mode. By that logic, CCP are stating that if something is not balanced, remove it. There were far more horribly balanced things in Dust to worry about than a great game mode that CCP for some reason thought was imbalanced. I guess EA should have just removed their Rush mode since it is the same game mode. CCP, no matter how bad EA's reputation is, you may want to take a few lessons from them in developing a FPS. Bring back Skirmish 1.0 and use that game mode in PC as well!
KEROSIINI-TERO Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 485	Posted - 2013.06.25 07:48:00 - [38] - Quote Nova Knife wrote: While CCP keeps saying they /want/ to bring back skirmish 1.0... What a lot of people don't bring up is that most of what made 1.0 fun was /not/ the mode (Even if the mode was much better than 2.0) It was the terrain map or 'battleground'. Craterlake. Say it with me. Craterlake. Crater F***** Lake. . . Craterlake was awesome as was Skirm 1.0 But Cratelake had some really disturbing problems. Nost notably, too narrow path terrain/unfitting redlline: Attackers could bring in LAV and happily drive around defences to final defence node thru western empty area where everything was just flat: no terrain designed. But then again I guess that's because Craterlake was the first map, hand made. Afterwards the height map is supposed) to be generated by algorithm and therefore it's no sense testing the draft instead of the real thing. ) According to Fanfest video there is supposed to be multiple height maps even tho Devs admit it's not realistic to have each district generate their own height map based on planetary terrain (WANNA HAVE WANNA HAVE). Unfortunately the fact that battelfield (Line Harvest, Ashlands, etc...) we've fought on can be seen on the SAME height map -map! That would indicate that no truly random terrain is coming but every planetart district has exactly the same terrain and we're forced to fight on same thing over and over again. Thing which we have to face if player counts and field sized are ever gonna get bigger.
KOBLAKA1 Opus Arcana Orion Empire 83	Posted - 2013.06.25 13:01:00 - [39] - Quote Loved craterlake (assuming it was the original map with all the towers and the three main roads) I also liked the complex (biomass?) When it was just desert all around it nothing else for ambush. Skirmish 1.0 seems more appealing than the battlefield 2 set up we have now.
pegasis prime The Shadow Cavalry Mercenaries DARKSTAR ARMY 325	Posted - 2013.06.25 13:08:00 - [40] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: Dev Blog by CCP Frame: http://dust514.com/news/blog/2013/06/developing-game-mode-variations/ Quote: There have also been major changes to Skirmish Mode. Players who have been with us since closed beta will remember that Skirmish used to involve a team escorting a Mobile Command Center (MCC) across a map while a rival team attempted to stop them, a setup now commonly called GÇ£Skirmish 1.0GÇ¥. Unfortunately, this mode was not as balanced as we would have liked. At the time it was deployed, the fittings and skills players could select, and the randomization of outposts in each battle, led to uneven gameplay between the teams. Players let us know, so we created a version of Skirmish Mode (commonly called GÇ£Skirmish 2.0GÇ¥) with more symmetry among teams. Anyone who has played DUST 514 should be familiar with this newer setup. There are now two MCCs floating above a battlefield, launching barrages of concentrated firepower at each other. Players rush to capture NULL cannons to damage their enemyGÇÖs MCC as quickly as possible while preventing their rivals from doing the same. CCP, who were those players that let you know? Those players were just wrong. Skirmish 1.0 was a very balanced game. I never understood why anyone in the forums thought they were unbalanced. The game mode encouraged a lot of teamwork, we had to move with a purpose regardless of which side we were on, and it allowed the defenders a chance to regroup and mobilize without getting too redlined because they had an entire base to heavily guard and protect WITHIN THEIR OWN REDLINE WHERE THE NULL CANNONS WERE!!! I do recall seeing a handful of players in the forums whining and QQing about the original game mode claiming that defending the objectives were difficult but they completely ignored the fact that they had every chance to establish a solid fortification while the attackers were busy trying to deal with the defense relays. I also do recall similar players complaining about how hard it was to attack. But those players were wrong as well because they were just not working together as they should have. On top of that, there were plenty of places to flank the enemy but noooooooo they just wanted to run-n-gun like in CoD out in the open for snipers to shoot at and at the time snipers were crap so that's saying something about the unit cohesion of the players. Let's also not forget that during this time in which Skirmish 1.0 existed, players were unable to squad up, unable to form corporations let alone group up with alliances and qsync, and there were no voice comms available. The only reason Skirmish 1.0 seemed unbalanced to some was due to the missing features I just mentioned. I bet you 500 million ISK (or one PLEX) from my Eve Online character that if the above-mentioned features were available at the time, then Skirmish 1.0 would have been loved by every player... even the whiners would have loved it because then they would rely on green dots rather than random blueberries. I bet this feature would also make PC battles more interesting. So on behalf of all of the players on this community who want Skirmish 1.0, I ask CCP to please bring this game mode back. It was fun, it was balanced, I saw no reason why it had to go. If anyone here agrees, put a +1 in your reply and scream HOOAH!!!! EDIT: Maken Tosch wrote: Thanks for the support, guys. I appreciate it. For those of you who are not aware how Skirmish 1.0 works, here is a step-by-step process on how it went in any given match. 1. Match starts with an attacking MCC slowly advancing on the far side of the map away from the target outpost or city while the attacking mercs attempt to hack and destroy 3 defense relays before their MCC's shields run out. 2. At the same time, the match starts with the defending players having NO MCC on their side but do have a city with 2-3 null cannons located FAR BEHIND the redline where they can organize and fortify their position before the defense relays get taken out. 3. Defending side hope to keep the attacking side from destroying their defense relays. 4. If all 3 defense relays go down before the shields do, then the MCC has a chance to advance further and dock up over the outpost or city as the redline retreats back and exposes the city. But it needs to dock up before its armor runs out. 5. Attacking mercs do everything they can to try to capture the null cannons within the city. 6. Defending side fortifies itself within the city in an attempt to keep the enemy from coming in. Pluss 1 googleplex on this . Was the best game mode in my eyes . I joined just before they took it away and never knew why (hadent discoverd the forums at this point) it would have compleatly changed the dynamic of corp battles and pc if it was kept in the game.

Fox Gaden DUST University Ivy League 545	Posted - 2013.06.25 17:39:00 - [41] - Quote Skirmish 1.0 was gone before I started playing in the Closed Beta (It took a while to get a PS3), but that sounds like a really cool game mode.
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 2924	Posted - 2013.06.25 22:49:00 - [42] - Quote Please read the bottom of the OP as I updated it with an important piece of information I forgot to mention earlier.
Drendill DUST University Ivy League 3	Posted - 2013.06.27 12:45:00 - [43] - Quote Sounds like a fun game mode, I would love to give it a try myself. +1
Shadow Archeus OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 92	Posted - 2013.06.27 13:03:00 - [44] - Quote I want it back CCP.........and call it siege
calisk galern BurgezzE.T.F 340	Posted - 2013.06.27 14:14:00 - [45] - Quote considering all the imbalances in the game already can't see how this mode would hurt anything. skirmish 1.0 sounded like a game mode with a purpose and an evolving battle field and changing objectives. something the current game modes lack and one of the things that made MAG really fun. at some poinjt the devs need to sit down and play mag, and take some serious notes about what they did right with their game modes, and adopt some of their policies.
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 2943	Posted - 2013.06.28 19:05:00 - [46] - Quote Damn it. Once again it didn't make this week's update.
Daedric Lothar Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 768	Posted - 2013.06.28 19:08:00 - [47] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: Damn it. Once again it didn't make this week's update. I honestly have no idea what the DEVs are working on. I'd like to see Skirmish 1.0 as well. CCP always just says "Wait and see" So I guess, we will just have to "Wait and See"


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