No benefits from playing objective

[Tomeusz]

Why game doesnt award You for capping a flag or oppening gates, rising ladders, etc., basicly playing objective? Not any points for that.

[Grumpy_Nic]

?

objective in this game is having agi and to spam. you get plenty of points for that

[Nightmare798]

?

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.

[Tomeusz]

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... .

[Switchtense]

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.

[Algarn]

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.

[Leshma]

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.

[Gravoth_iii]

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.

B-b-but balance build beats both 

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.

[//saxon]

[Smoothrich]

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.

[Leshma]

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.

[POOPHAMMER]

I know a guy that did this build

Funny shit to watch

[Leshma]

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.

[Gravoth_iii]

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.

[Leshma]

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.