Main > General Discussion
4v4, Black Sheep, or Diamond in the rough?
Unarmed Civilian:
I like 3v3 more.
Grouping up and personal decision-making is more vital than in 4v4, but you can afford to have a ship be a dedicated flanker and do shenanigans without risking as much as in Goldfish-Pyra v Pyra-Pyra. Good old 12 players versus 12 players.
Ideally to me, 3v3 would be the most common type of match in the game, with 2v2s in second, and 4v4s as the rare oddity.
4v4s to me are like 32 person servers in TF2. They're sometimes fun, but you better like chaos spam, and feeling like you can't change the tide at times. There's also the fact that half of the time they're running Crazy King, which I personally loathed as the most unfair and unbalanced gamemode (advantageous spawns, unintuitive plays heavily favoring anti-balloon builds) before Skyball took its place, and do not have a King of the Hill map, which is my personal favorite mode.
Daft Loon:
KOTH is coming to 4v4 :D , with the now renamed "Breach Occupation" map. The question is which of 3 reasons is responsible for the horrible mangling of suggested name and mode theme:
1 - They really insist on using a game mode themed name even though only 1 map will have the theme.
2 - We will soon be seeing the amazingly renamed "City occupation" and "Giant basket of sandstorms occupation" koth maps.
3 - They expect to be releasing more koth maps and want to start the theme with this one.
Things 4v4 needs to get beyond 'meh, at least it averages out the balance a bit'
-Something to make crazy king less of a scenic tour of the least scenic maps and more of an actual airship combat game.
-Some kind of fix to the inherent spawn camping of dunes and sepulcher
-Some medium sized maps
Atruejedi:
--- Quote from: Unarmed Civilian on November 07, 2016, 09:52:13 pm ---...but you can afford to have a ship be a dedicated flanker and do shenanigans without risking as much...
--- End quote ---
Disagree. I love flanking on Sepulcher and Dunes. It isn't a problem with the maps, map size, or game mode, it's a probably with a lack of experienced players in the lobby. Which is fine by me. I'm all about growing. I'll deal with it. 8)
--- Quote ---Ideally to me, 3v3 would be the most common type of match in the game...
--- End quote ---
I could deal with this, but I really do see 2 vs. 2 as cancer on the game because of the small player base essentially "promoting" stacking and stomping.
--- Quote ---4v4s to me are like 32 person servers in TF2. They're sometimes fun, but you better like chaos spam, and feeling like you can't change the tide at times.
--- End quote ---
Hm. I blame the map spawns for this one. Paritan, for example, desperately needs the spawns adjusted. I already logically and visually explained how to do this to Muse, so let's see if they take heed; as it is now it's an unfair clusterfuck (see here). But even Water Hazard has this problem: the initial spawns are absurdly close to each other, ESPECIALLY in 4 vs. 4 VIP... Muse just needs to show us all the spawns and give us an editor. We'll do the work for them!
--- Quote ---There's also the fact that half of the time they're running Crazy King, which I personally loathed as the most unfair and unbalanced gamemode (advantageous spawns, unintuitive plays heavily favoring anti-balloon builds)
--- End quote ---
Muse needs to #AuditTheSpawns. They've admitted they never really bothered thinking about how they could improve Crazy King and the spawn system, so even if we proposed changes, there's no infrastructure to accomodate those changes. Perhaps Alliance will change that. Hopefully. I rag on this issue here.
--- Quote ---...before Skyball took its place...
--- End quote ---
Don't get me started...
--- Quote ---...and do not have a King of the Hill map, which is my personal favorite mode.
--- End quote ---
GET ME STARTED! #YoureWelcome
--- Quote from: Daft Loon on November 07, 2016, 10:20:36 pm ---KOTH is coming to 4v4 :D , with the now renamed "Breach Occupation" map. The question is which of 3 reasons is responsible for the horrible mangling of suggested name and mode theme:
1 - They really insist on using a game mode themed name even though only 1 map will have the theme.
2 - We will soon be seeing the amazingly renamed "City occupation" and "Giant basket of sandstorms occupation" koth maps.
3 - They expect to be releasing more koth maps and want to start the theme with this one.
--- End quote ---
See above link. And I still hate all of the VIP map names. Groan.
--- Quote ---Things 4v4 needs to get beyond 'meh, at least it averages out the balance a bit'
-Something to make crazy king less of a scenic tour of the least scenic maps and more of an actual airship combat game.
--- End quote ---
I actually really enjoy it SOMETIMES... when the spawns don't instantly fuck one team. It has tons of potential, it just needs the spawn system revamped.
--- Quote ----Some kind of fix to the inherent spawn camping of dunes and sepulcher
--- End quote ---
...Hm... perhaps "randomize" the Dust Storm? Instead of just rows 5 and 6, have it alternate randomly through rows 3/4 and 7/8 after the initial middle rows to force the relocation of fleets. Less predictable. I know I'm constantly telling allies to stay the hell out of rows 5/6 and get comfy in rows 4 and 7, so this could work (and screw me in the process, but all in the name of gameplay #ChristFigure).
--- Quote ----Some medium sized maps
--- End quote ---
#CanyonCantWait... Been begging for Canyon as 3 vs. 3 VIP and 4 vs. 4 VIP and DM for... months? Also no reason we can't have 3 vs. 3 Labyrinth KOTH... And why don't we have that Battle for the Ball map turned into a DM map called Graveyard? Essentially it would be a larger Duel at Dawn! You guys need to email this petition and spread it among your clan mates and the community at large:
click me click me #AdaptTheMaps petition click me
Daft Loon:
--- Quote from: Atruejedi on November 07, 2016, 11:31:16 pm ---
--- Quote ---Things 4v4 needs to get beyond 'meh, at least it averages out the balance a bit'
-Something to make crazy king less of a scenic tour of the least scenic maps and more of an actual airship combat game.
--- End quote ---
I actually really enjoy it SOMETIMES... when the spawns don't instantly fuck one team. It has tons of potential, it just needs the spawn system revamped.
--- End quote ---
Fixing the starting point random bias would be good for Refinery in 3v3 but the 4v4 maps will still be far too large to be anything but tedious.
--- Quote from: Atruejedi on November 07, 2016, 11:31:16 pm ---
--- Quote ----Some kind of fix to the inherent spawn camping of dunes and sepulcher
--- End quote ---
...Hm... perhaps "randomize" the Dust Storm? Instead of just rows 5 and 6, have it alternate randomly through rows 3/4 and 7/8 after the initial middle rows to force the relocation of fleets. Less predictable. I know I'm constantly telling allies to stay the hell out of rows 5/6 and get comfy in rows 4 and 7, so this could work (and screw me in the process, but all in the name of gameplay #ChristFigure).
--- End quote ---
The dust storm is just a secondary contribution to the main problem - a team that camps in their spawn essentially re-spawns 60s or so faster gaining a large advantage over anyone trying to actually attack. The best I can think of is having some extra spawn points that activate based on which rows teams have ships in ex - if blue are all located in 6/7/8 and red advance up to 4/5 they gain some spawn points in 4/5. Or maybe just giving both teams some spawn points in 4 and 5 respectively.
Unarmed Civilian:
--- Quote from: Atruejedi on November 07, 2016, 11:31:16 pm ---
--- Quote from: Unarmed Civilian on November 07, 2016, 09:52:13 pm ---...but you can afford to have a ship be a dedicated flanker and do shenanigans without risking as much...
--- End quote ---
Disagree. I love flanking on Sepulcher and Dunes. It isn't a problem with the maps, map size, or game mode, it's a probably with a lack of experienced players in the lobby. Which is fine by me. I'm all about growing. I'll deal with it. 8)
--- End quote ---
what
I think you misread or I miscommunicated. In my opinion, grouping up and personal decisions matter more the fewer ships there are, as you make a larger contribution. Larger ship counts let you have flankers without worrying as much about not being grouped up. Flanking is even more advantageous in 4v4 than 3v3 and 2v2, since you lose less firepower from your main fleet to have a flanker.
I'm not sure if you think that I think flanking is bad or something, but I love flanking. I have very average reactions and technical skill in all games, so I rely the surprise factor and flanking to make up for it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version