Did you enjoy territory 5vs5 during this Alpha?

  • Did you enjoy territory 5vs5 during this Alpha?

    Did you enjoy 5vs5 territory battles during this Alpha test? 77
    1.  
      No (50) 65%
    2.  
      Yes (27) 35%
    The poll question is easy, Yes or No. Please discuss below your feeling and the things which influenced the option you chose.
    Just a Goon nobody..

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Forge ().

  • The anti-zerg mechanics that were implemented this test had more of an effect on this than I think people realize. The stack buffs when 4 people are focusing 1 target became really really strong. This meant the ideal comp was 2 healers because 4th DPS was more or less unecessary in a mirror comp.

    This created an enormous shift in GvG gameplay from the last test. Whereas the last test was actually focused on PvP and getting kills in GvG this test was much more survivability centric. This is obviously not the direction we want to be heading with this sort of game dynamic.

    My opinion obviously.
  • sand box games should be about as few rules as possible and leting the players figure stuff out on their own. 5v5s, anti-zerg buffs and all of these others new features are making this game less of an sandbxo and spiritual successor to UO and more like league of legends. im really sad in the direction this is going.
    [
    PRAETORIANS ] [ PvP ¥ PvE ¥ Crafting ¥ Farming ] [ Apply]

    ¥ "flectere si nequeo superos, acheronta movebo" ¥
  • DirtyTalk wrote:

    Tremendous gear dependence + an entire guild working tirelessly for a city to stay alive sitting on the sidelines watching + terrible combat = Non-realistic 5v5 Mechanic.

    It sounds good in theory, it doesn't work in practice. Period.

    If you want 5v5, go play Dota.


    I agree primarily with the point about the rest of the guild being forced to stand on the sidelines.
    Blodvaerd, Lord Commander
    Rangers of Celidon
    An RP - PVE / PVP, International Guild
    rangersofcelidon.enjin.com
  • ContraForce wrote:

    sand box games should be about as few rules as possible and leting the players figure stuff out on their own. 5v5s, anti-zerg buffs and all of these others new features are making this game less of an sandbxo and spiritual successor to UO and more like league of legends. im really sad in the direction this is going.


    Yep, but this is only the reflection of the type of gamers you find on this generation.
  • I'm going to take this thread in a new direction. You either like it or hate it. That being said it's def. not going to change. What can change though is the type of 5v5. I think it's safe to day the monolith control point system is stale and boring. I wouldn't mind seeing some different types so we can see how those work like a CTF, Team King of The Hill, Control Point without monolith, straight team death match.

    As it is now most fights seem to happen under or right in front of the towers with the defending team retreating behind the tower to push it off. Sure there were some teams with a gear advantage that could push people off but most monolith changes happened on a back cap when one team wasn't paying attention. I guess you could call that strategy but I think most people are here to duke it out not win or lose based on how sneaky your one guy is compared to theirs or if you can get a gear advantage to go ham on someone and tank the monolith.

    TLDR: can we get some different 5v5 types.

    Also wonder if SI would consider setting up a match making server and just let us que up for certain tier levels. So they could do like tier 4 and 5 for a month and you spawn in and instead of an chest there is one of those special anvils. Increase the start time to 3 minutes so people can pick their gear.

    Next month do tier 6-7.
  • Why do people always say that sandbox equals no rules? Thats simply not true and having no rules would ultimately hurt the game. Even UO had rules(murderer/criminal/innocent status for example).

    The idea behind 5v5 and anti-zerg restrictions is that large communities don't just dominate the game and create a "join them or leave out 90% of the game" scenario. I mean what would stop a streamer from taking his viewers and just completely dominating by sheer numbers? The MMO community isn't limited to computer freaks sitting in their basements anymore, it's a lot bigger and that means a lot more will & power to abuse them to death.

    I do think that the current system requires a lot of work especially in modes and general combat feel, but I also think that the potential behind the current system is pretty big. It just needs to be properly improved.
  • Maybe the way it could work is:

    1. It is still 5v5 but the battle for territory is segmented into multiple stages.

    2. Which each stage when fought produces fatigue. The loser losses more stamina than the winner.

    3. As each round is waged, each side can either keep tge same side or switch out to a different group of 5. Switching would erase the fatigue debuff from all previous rounds, unless that group of five participated in a previous round and lost.

    4. Fatigue from a loss remains for two rounds, is wiped clean if the next round is a win, or is compounded if two losses in row.

    5. Two victories in a row gets a moral boost and wipes out all previous fatigue.This would give an advantage to larger guilds who have groups of 5 in reserve, but if they suck or are really out classed in gear the defenders of a smaller guild might still pull off a victory. Maybe the number of rounds could be 5 rounds to capture or hold a territory.

    I believe this system or one like it maintains the 5v5, that I think the Devs won't depart from, but adds some advantage based on guild size. It also allows for more to participate, up to a maximum of 25, if the battle spans 5 rounds.
    Blodvaerd, Lord Commander
    Rangers of Celidon
    An RP - PVE / PVP, International Guild
    rangersofcelidon.enjin.com