17 replies to this topic

[El Bandito]

As the title suggests. Would increasing the time shaved to 20 seconds or more, help break up the deathballing near the center of the map, in Domination?

[Roughneck Cobra]

It wouldnt do much since the dominations on most maps have been called out multiple times already for being biased to a lance or two on one team - thats to confirm it isnt just a light thing, some of these maps just dont fit how they've set domination up.

[TheArisen]

Stryker Ezekiel, on 24 March 2016 - 04:56 AM, said:

It wouldnt do much since the dominations on most maps have been called out multiple times already for being biased to a lance or two on one team - thats to confirm it isnt just a light thing, some of these maps just dont fit how they've set domination up.

Agreed. They should make the circle bigger or smaller depending on the map and look into changing the location.

Another thing is destroying alpha & bravo should be able to make your teams timer go above 1:00.

[Y E O N N E]

I would rather we have a lot more booster points to destroy.that, together, totaled a whole minute. And they should be neutral, granting the bonus to whoever destroys them.

[Tristan Winter]

Maybe it would slightly decrease deathball, but to what end? What's the point in doing that?

First you have to look at what the concept for the game mode is, and then how to incentivize the kind of behaviour you want. What is the concept for this game mode? It's about taking and holding a piece of land, and either forcing the enemy team back or killing them. That's it.

You could add a bunch of O-gens and spread out the MFB's across the map to spread the teams up, but it doesn't change the concept for the game mode, which is to take and hold a piece of land. It just seems counter-intuitive to add a bunch of mini-objectives that force teams to spread out. It would be very different if the objective was to destroy a base, and the mini objectives were power generators, turret control tower and communication array. That would make sense. But right we have now is just so arbitrary.

It's just a terribly uninspired game mode, IMO. Green bubble skirmish.

[Roughneck Cobra]

Tristan Winter, on 24 March 2016 - 05:02 AM, said:

Maybe it would slightly decrease deathball, but to what end? What's the point in doing that?

First you have to look at what the concept for the game mode is, and then how to incentivize the kind of behaviour you want. What is the concept for this game mode? It's about taking and holding a piece of land, and either forcing the enemy team back or killing them. That's it.

You could add a bunch of O-gens and spread out the MFB's across the map to spread the teams up, but it doesn't change the concept for the game mode, which is to take and hold a piece of land. It just seems counter-intuitive to add a bunch of mini-objectives that force teams to spread out. It would be very different if the objective was to destroy a base, and the mini objectives were power generators, turret control tower and communication array. That would make sense. But right we have now is just so arbitrary.

It's just a terribly uninspired game mode, IMO. Green bubble skirmish.

Correct, with 2/3rds of the maps giving better firing lines and cover to one team only.

[Jikil]

It's clear that Domination is meant to be a king of hill type game mode with things to shoot if you need more time.

The problem is that while it is an interesting change of pace certain asymmetrical map designs make it much harder for one team.

Perhaps making the capture circle larger on certain maps would help. One idea would be to have the location of the hill change on the destruction of a mobile field base.

[Remillard]

On most maps it seems like the secondary towers are pretty close to the control point, and are on the enemy's side of the map. Thus to get those extra time points, you end up going through the enemy already to get to them, and if you can do that, why are you bothering with the secondary towers instead of just killing everyone?

[Richard Hazen]

What about if they made it so that you need to hold two secondary objectives before the timer starts to tick if you hold the primary objective or is that to difficult, perhaps hold one secondary objective but if you hold two the timer ticks faster?

[zeves]

not sure if its about complications but rather, people not bothering if it gets harder to do than to just kill the enemy.

[Sergeant Random]

Just kill the enemy, deathball vs deathball. Let pugs learn how to defeat a *firing line* with a *coordinated push* into a weak flank...

But ... herding pugs, of course...

[no one]

Making the circle larger, or having multiple control points, would help. Really though, it seems people need to have a more... personally relevant reason to get in and risk their necks. I'm seeing domination games where people simply don't ever try to enter the circle or support their team members therein. Domination clearly needs some sort of penalty for non participation, or rewards based more heavily on time spent in the circle, damage done from within the circle or damage done on enemies within the circle. The amount of studied cowardice I see in domination games right now is phenomenal.

[EgoSlayer]

Destroying the enemy Alpha and Bravo MCPs should reduce your timer, not increase your opponents timer. Makes it an attack move and an early objective rather a try and save a lost match move.

[TheArisen]

Tristan Winter, on 24 March 2016 - 05:02 AM, said:

Maybe it would slightly decrease deathball, but to what end? What's the point in doing that?

First you have to look at what the concept for the game mode is, and then how to incentivize the kind of behaviour you want. What is the concept for this game mode? It's about taking and holding a piece of land, and either forcing the enemy team back or killing them. That's it.

You could add a bunch of O-gens and spread out the MFB's across the map to spread the teams up, but it doesn't change the concept for the game mode, which is to take and hold a piece of land. It just seems counter-intuitive to add a bunch of mini-objectives that force teams to spread out. It would be very different if the objective was to destroy a base, and the mini objectives were power generators, turret control tower and communication array. That would make sense. But right we have now is just so arbitrary.

It's just a terribly uninspired game mode, IMO. Green bubble skirmish.

It plays a little differently in my experience. In skirmish you can run away or reposition easily. In domination you have to stay close to/in the circle which does create a different dynamic from regular skirmish.

[Lupis Volk]

No Conquest and Domination would benefit form one thing. Respawns.

[Deathlike]

Destroying Alpha+Bravo have next to no consequence when people play the mode correctly. It is worthwhile to increase the timer over the cap of 1 minute as suggested by others though, but it's mostly meaningless with the mode as currently constituted.

The problem is that cowardice by not being in the middle for the circle drives me nuts. I know that everyone doesn't have to be there, but when you're seeing Direwolves and Atlases camping outside of it attempting to fire at long range... you know people are doing it wrong.

The locations and circle radius leaves to be desired... especially on maps on Bog where it overly favors Team 2 (eastern spawns) just by current design.

Edited by Deathlike, 24 March 2016 - 06:05 PM.

[badaa]

the only thing thats going to help domination is forcing ppl to learn how to play it

[sycocys]

I don't think it really would. The zone selections are pretty terrible which goes pretty far in making the mode feel like a terrible off-shoot of skirmish.