objective in this game is having agi and to spam. you get plenty of points for that
Which is why I see so many STR whores crutching plate and holding great maul in their grubby sweaty hands lately.
I agree though, too much agi can pose a balancing problem, but this same is also in effect for too much STR.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Tomeusz on December 21, 2014, 10:12:10 pm
but its about OBJECTIVE here. Why there are no points for playing objective? I love games like Battlefield, because i like this all time tension to jump from one flag to another and cap it. Siege felt similar to conquest in battlefield, but opposly to battlefield warband doesnt reward u for playing objective, not any points, etc., only them dips and kills matter... .
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Switchtense on December 21, 2014, 10:44:14 pm
Because all the tryhards would quit once they are not getting valour every round anymore, just because some bloke going 1:20 was capping all the flags is higher up on the scoreboard than them.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Algarn on December 21, 2014, 11:47:00 pm
Because all the tryhards would quit once they are not getting valour every round anymore, just because some bloke going 1:20 was capping all the flags is higher up on the scoreboard than them.
It'd be a huge loss for cRPG.
... ...
...
Not at all in fact.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Leshma on December 21, 2014, 11:57:41 pm
Because all the tryhards would quit once they are not getting valour every round anymore, just because some bloke going 1:20 was capping all the flags is higher up on the scoreboard than them.
Currently, there is 20 try hards on cRPG servers on average (out of 30 which is average population these days). On native, there are servers with at least double that amount, less skilled players. Which would you rather play with? Tryhards who only care about their kdr or average, less skilled players who care about objectives?
For cRPG is too late, but new game from these authors needs to get rid of 'elite' mindset if it wants to succeed. They'll never sell enough copies if things stay the way they are in cRPG. This isn't niche. cRPG is niche of a niche of a niche, filled with insufferable cunts. There are insufferable cunts in native too, but way way less. And people tend to avoid those servers where they play which means they can only be cunts to themselves. Kinda like cRPG.
This has nothing to do with game rules. Native is completely different from early cRPG, yet I feel the same as I felt on full Pecores server ages ago. Game is in focus, not other things. And I love it.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Gravoth_iii on December 22, 2014, 03:36:51 am
Currently, there is 20 try hards on cRPG servers on average (out of 30 which is average population these days). On native, there are servers with at least double that amount, less skilled players. Which would you rather play with? Tryhards who only care about their kdr or average, less skilled players who care about objectives?
For cRPG is too late, but new game from these authors needs to get rid of 'elite' mindset if it wants to succeed. They'll never sell enough copies if things stay the way they are in cRPG. This isn't niche. cRPG is niche of a niche of a niche, filled with insufferable cunts. There are insufferable cunts in native too, but way way less. And people tend to avoid those servers where they play which means they can only be cunts to themselves. Kinda like cRPG.
This has nothing to do with game rules. Native is completely different from early cRPG, yet I feel the same as I felt on full Pecores server ages ago. Game is in focus, not other things. And I love it.
Yes make cRPG more casual, somebody call blizzard, i heard they know a thing or two on this matter.
You guys hate tryhards this much? Why? The game is great for competetive play and "tryharding", thats what makes it fun imo.
Also capping flags makes you win, if that isnt enough for you i dont know what is. Its not like you wont get kills on the flags, that tends to be where most of the fighting is.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: //saxon on December 22, 2014, 08:18:34 am
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Smoothrich on December 22, 2014, 09:50:59 am
Why game doesnt award You for capping a flag or oppening gates, rising ladders, etc., basicly playing objective? Not any points for that.
Agreed. I thought that was going to be the entire purpose of Points when it was first implemented into the mod. Instead you just farm points by spamming into high HP horses, rapid AGI spam, or RMB turtling in big brawls.
I wish the devs of cRPG spent more time polishing Siege 2.0 with all the Conquest flag stuff, points, respawns, and high quality maps for objective gameplay instead of just fucking up item balance and sperging new shady algorithims to nerf ranged and cav while buffing stupid melee builds.
Like big open maps with different flags to attack and defend in fortified areas like ruins so Cav and Ranged can play where they belong harassing the infantry but give melee more to do than camp or die when there's a lot of open space instead of needing shitty counter-strike city maps to brawl in.
Would make the game much better than any new balance bullshit and animation fuckups.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Leshma on December 22, 2014, 02:19:57 pm
You guys hate tryhards this much? Why? The game is great for competetive play and "tryharding", thats what makes it fun imo.
Also capping flags makes you win, if that isnt enough for you i dont know what is. Its not like you wont get kills on the flags, that tends to be where most of the fighting is.
This is niche game, not counter strike. That together leads to population decline and this game is meant to be played with hundreds of players, not up to 30 like it usually is on cRPG servers.
neoGK Siege = low skilled players but hundreds of them at any given time, looks like a medieval siege with warriors pouring from all sides cRPG Siege = high skilled players but 30 of them, game is unbalanced becasue Siege gamemode isn't designed with that amount of players in mind (defense is incredibly hard). Doesn't looks like medieval sim at all.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: POOPHAMMER on December 22, 2014, 02:39:36 pm
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Leshma on December 22, 2014, 03:44:26 pm
While we are discussing siege mode, deployable ladders were great addition to that game mode. Those who care about objective would win every time and those who want to kill enemies at their spawn would lose.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Gravoth_iii on December 22, 2014, 04:12:19 pm
This is niche game, not counter strike. That together leads to population decline and this game is meant to be played with hundreds of players, not up to 30 like it usually is on cRPG servers.
neoGK Siege = low skilled players but hundreds of them at any given time, looks like a medieval siege with warriors pouring from all sides cRPG Siege = high skilled players but 30 of them, game is unbalanced becasue Siege gamemode isn't designed with that amount of players in mind (defense is incredibly hard). Doesn't looks like medieval sim at all.
This is a medieval sim? this is news to me, feels sort of unrealistic and arcadey to me.
I never play siege so i dont know how it is with low pop, but eu1 is completely fine with 30-40 players imo, feels like a nice small incest family.
Also what point are you making, that we need to get rid of good players and replace them with lowskilled ones in higher quantities somehow? Cause i dont see how that could possibly be done. Also i prefer having a bunch of highskilled players over a clusterfuck of lowskilled ones, makes for a better experience fighting.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Leshma on December 22, 2014, 04:38:20 pm
For me this is large scale medieval sim, that is why I started playing cRPG in the first place. If it was like EU4 back in the day, I would never stick around. We have different priorities.
I don't like incest and this community isn't my family, god forbid.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Gravoth_iii on December 22, 2014, 05:04:35 pm
For me this is large scale medieval sim, that is why I started playing cRPG in the first place. If it was like EU4 back in the day, I would never stick around. We have different priorities.
I don't like incest and this community isn't my family, god forbid.
As much as you may want to deny it, you are one of the retarded incest born children of this community. Some may say one with the most birth defects. The sooner one accepts himself, the sooner you will reach nirvana.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Leshma on December 22, 2014, 05:35:07 pm
Might be... or just a bad habit like Elmuri said. If weren't for us two this forum would be dead today :D
cRPG not playing anymore because of permanent ban. Best way to make sure you won't ever play again.
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Tomeusz on December 22, 2014, 08:26:23 pm
Well, I just playd siege on Crpg. Me ALONE went huge way to throw down ladders and close gate. This forced like 10 players to go around and rise ladders. It delayd siege. Was I rewarded for that? No. What other players of my team did? Camped at once spot and counting kills... .
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: Gravoth_iii on December 22, 2014, 09:19:26 pm
Add score to closing gates / dropping ladders, im going to deploy and drop ladder endlessly for ez valour! Kreygasm
Title: Re: No benefits from playing objective
Post by: San on December 23, 2014, 07:01:41 am
Score sucks for siege. Can't give score for gates/ladders since it can be abused and will miss many other acts of proper teamplay. I think I tried to push having a score multiplier when fighting near the flag, but nothing much came from that. Because it's harder to keep a multi without a gigantic stack, I like the idea of +2 multi if you win and possibly ignoring valour since score is flawed for it.