Destruction is still broken

User avatar
Hob_Gadling
Captain
Posts: 1623
Joined: Tue 14 Feb 2012 00:15
Contact:

Re: Destruction is still broken

Postby Hob_Gadling » Wed 8 May 2013 03:56

Akulapanam wrote:It's called tactics...


I used to love that word. Tactics. Nowadays I hate it. I associate it too strongly with A BLOO BLOOOOOO BLOOOOOOOOOO.

To counter your argument, A BLOO BLOOOOOO L2P BLOOOOOOOOOO

Swift
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu 28 Jul 2011 13:59
Contact:

Re: Destruction is still broken

Postby Swift » Wed 8 May 2013 03:58

Tigga wrote:
Akulapanam wrote:It's called tactics... Some people use them. In particular you need to focus on combined arms. If you are loosing more then you are killing then by all means you should loose the game, even if you hold all but one area.

Fun fact: I know how to play the game.

:O
Image

User avatar
OpusTheFowl
General
Posts: 6660
Joined: Sun 26 Feb 2012 19:52
Location: White Rock, Canada
Contact:

Re: Destruction is still broken

Postby OpusTheFowl » Wed 8 May 2013 04:03

Akulapanam wrote:It's called tactics...

Ya, I might not want to test Tigga on tactics and skill if I were you...It's by no exaggeration that I say that a good chuck of the community and Eugen (If I dare add that) sit-up and listen to pretty much everything he says...

He's pretty good...

Random
Captain
Posts: 1509
Joined: Thu 31 Jan 2013 19:05
Contact:

Re: Destruction is still broken

Postby Random » Wed 8 May 2013 04:13

Tigga wrote:
Random wrote:I would however support getting some victorypoints proportional to the income, but 1:1 is way too high imo. I would sugest something like .15-.25 of income added to the victorypoints(along with higher points to achieve obv).

I suggested 1:2.5, so 40%. I'm not really sure where exactly the point should be on the line, and it really depends on how much of a change the people who would be making the change want to make. If you double the target score then it'd take a luttle under an hour to reach the 3000 point target with 9 income with 1:2.5 and no kills. With 1500 kills in half an hour and 9 income the game would take about half an hour. This seems about right to me.

Random wrote:And if you want a rematch just ask.

Did we play? The game I played today which partially prompted this post wasn't against you. I also am not particularily keen on a rematch against him. The game was dull and I very nearly quit out at one point due to being bored (I was up a lot of income and up on kills ~650 to ~500 at this point. It was about half an hour in and my opponent had shown not one hint of agression in almost the entire game). Instead I decided to attack and actually lose because I wanted to see some people shoot at other people and I'm not patient enough to sit around doing nothing for over half an hour in an unranked game. I just don't find it enjoyable.


I think 40 % is a little bit high, but it`s just a feeling, I`d have to play a couple games to have a better opinion.

And yes we did play a game that almost exactly played out like this at the end of the first beta, apparently this is more common than I thought : ).

Tigga
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2446
Joined: Tue 5 Jul 2011 02:46
Contact:

Re: Destruction is still broken

Postby Tigga » Wed 8 May 2013 04:17

Random wrote:I think 40 % is a little bit high, but it`s just a feeling, I`d have to play a couple games to have a better opinion.

And yes we did play a game that almost exactly played out like this at the end of the first beta, apparently this is more common than I thought : ).

Aha! I almost certainly posted a very similar rant thread just after that as well! For me it's a game-breaker at the moment. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to enjoy W:ALB a whole lot if ranked mode is destruction as it was in W:EE.

KillaJules
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 507
Joined: Sat 5 Nov 2011 03:20
Contact:

Re: Destruction is still broken

Postby KillaJules » Wed 8 May 2013 04:47

In Destruction mode, whenever one side owns more sectors, a countdown timer should activate. The bigger the sector advantage that one faction has, the shorter the countdown timer should be.

e.g If Pact owns 5 sectors and NATO owns 4 sectors, then a long countdown timer should start. In this case, Pact would win when the timer runs out f course. If Pact takes another 2 sectors, including one of NATO's sectors, then the countdown timer to victory for Pact would drastically shorten.

This could encourage late-game counter offensives for the losing side and also encourage the winner to take more sectors if possible to reduce the oppositions opportunity to mount a counterattack. This could result in more fluid and interesting pacing.

If one side owns no sectors at all and the other side does hold sectors, then the side owning at least one sector automatically wins. So killing all command units wouldn't be necessarily, just scaring them off would be enough.


Just a thought.

leroy11
First Sergeant
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri 6 Jul 2012 15:23
Contact:

Re: Destruction is still broken

Postby leroy11 » Wed 8 May 2013 04:48

I dont get it, why is it over half an hour in? A 1v1 match that goes over 30 minutes seem tedious no matter what the settings. And if you are up on points he has to attack you or lose, if he doesnt know that then thats not a problem with destruction thats a problem with players (like Total D players who put a CV into a remote forest just to dragg things out, its not a TD mode problem)

Income = points is no solution, at present a person gets more kills and camps, with income=points you just get more income and camp. Not going to make both player fight more.

As for l2p comments, I get that its not helpful, but I also get where tehy come from, so often have losing people in game chat going on they was "about to win" or "would have won" or got a "tactical victory" etc etc Last game I played the loser team said "this is why destruction is broken".

Well! As soon as I seen a thread like "Destruction is still broken" I think of people spaming T-80s or plane spam etc around the map and "wining" by losing 100's of points more then me.

KillaJules
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 507
Joined: Sat 5 Nov 2011 03:20
Contact:

Re: Destruction is still broken

Postby KillaJules » Wed 8 May 2013 04:55

leroy11 wrote:Well! As soon as I seen a thread like "Destruction is still broken" I think of people spaming T-80s or plane spam etc around the map and "wining" by losing 100's of points more then me.


Historically, there have been many cases of the winning side suffering more losses then the defender.

There should be multiple approaches to victory. It should be possible to charge in, get a bloody nose and lose lots of units but win if you succeed to taking lots of territory. Likewise, losing territory might be acceptable if the goal is to delay and inflict as many losses as possible.

leroy11
First Sergeant
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri 6 Jul 2012 15:23
Contact:

Re: Destruction is still broken

Postby leroy11 » Wed 8 May 2013 05:02

There should be multiple approaches to victory. It should be possible to charge in, get a bloody nose and lose lots of units but win if you succeed to taking lots of territory. Likewise, losing territory might be acceptable if the goal is to delay and inflict as many losses as possible.


There are (or will be) multiple game modes. Destruction is about

My issue is with people who pick a game mode and proceed to play it like some other mode and then complain when I win. Like complaining about losing a chess game becuase they were playing checkers.

User avatar
Hob_Gadling
Captain
Posts: 1623
Joined: Tue 14 Feb 2012 00:15
Contact:

Re: Destruction is still broken

Postby Hob_Gadling » Wed 8 May 2013 05:04

leroy11 wrote:There are (or will be) multiple game modes. Destruction is about


Yes, but destruction isn't very good because

My issue is with people who pick a game mode and proceed to play it like some other mode and then complain when I win.


What's the alternative? Not play at all?

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 31 guests