A general discussion on the issue of ranged

[Tydeus]

Don't underestimate the effect of the game mode. How many complaints against certain classes come from siege players? The freeform and the non linear way the rounds play out is what makes infantry struggle so much. But of course I agree to you, I like freedom and change in gameplay as you do. That's why this master of the field change Tydeus mentioned doesn't really get me excited, since its simply not enough.

Yeah. We talked about doing more, but certain people were really hesitant to do much of anything. I don't much care for tradition and I'm probably too eager to accept change, so I'm all for doing more. I suggested changing the functionality of MotF, then having the flags drop at the start of the round. Things like increasing the radius of the area that can start raising the flag to ~ 15-20m(very large), then change how it is that flags raise/lower so that you only need to have more players within the area than your opponent has, to start raising your flag/lowering your opponents.

This turns battle into a single-life CTF gamemode. Still, the size of the area would keep players from having to fight in the same exact spot every round, there is some flanking that is allowed(would be a bit different on open field maps).

Note: At the moment, it would seem that MotF is extremely broken and not functioning as intended. MotF spawning every first round of a map is working as intended though, blame Shik. 

[Joker86]

Kudos to your stance on that matter, Tydeus. 

I think a proper 1-life-conquest-mode should simply be made and tested, so people can see if it is really so inferior to their precious team-deathmatch-battle-mode. I bet after short time the conquest mode would become more popular than the battle mode, especially among the infantry players who tend to be the loudest anyway. I could imagine that cavalry or ranged players could perhaps like it a bit less, since the kills they score don't count as much any more, and for some reason I bet cavalry and archers would kill less infantry in general, for some mysterious reason...


The reason would be that most players would concentrate on the flag and thus there would be less autowalker-Rambo-lemmings, the different infantry classes would cooperate more together, negating their weaknesses and improving their strenghtes, in combination with being more defensive around the flag und thus being more aware of their surroundings



But since most infantry players would probably drift to conquest, the others would have to follow, and I bet all looms I have that after some time it would turn out that cavalry and archers could use a buff again. Which, I hope, makes conquest attractive for them again.

[Tydeus]

That involves a lot more work than simply changing MotF functionality, thus is less likely to happen(But I agree).

[Joker86]

That involves a lot more work than simply changing MotF functionality, thus is less likely to happen(But I agree).

If I only had the skills of you and the rest of the team (esp. cmp with his WSE).... whoa! I would have made a version of cRPG where the upkeep system gets completely replaced, a commander mode, secondary attributes like charisma and intelligence, option to lead bots into battle, a team balance which actually works, and a lot of other stuff. But then I always wake up and then get up to fetch myself clean boxershorts. 

[Ronin]

If I only had the skills of you and the rest of the team (esp. cmp with his WSE).... whoa! I would have made a version of cRPG where the upkeep system gets completely replaced, a commander mode, secondary attributes like charisma and intelligence, option to lead bots into battle, a team balance which actually works, and a lot of other stuff. But then I always wake up and then get up to fetch myself clean boxershorts. 

The answer to that will be simple I'm afraid: "get those skills"