Guns Of Icarus Online
Info => Feedback and Suggestions => Topic started by: Jereven on January 26, 2014, 02:50:21 pm
-
I've had a number of Crazy King matches that have employed tactics similar to one of these two:
"Don't kill them, just disable them."
or
"Stop repairing, we're suiciding."
This is primarily tied to the spawn system -- dead ships come back at full health and often can spawn closer to the next point than they would be if they just turned tail and started flying there. While killing enemy ships and surviving is not the primary objective of Crazy King, I think something is inherently wrong with a system that sometimes promotes NOT killing enemy ships, and something is definitely wrong with a system that encourages running into mines deliberately for the free "teleport".
I think adding a bit of an additional penalty to death could discourage these tactics some and, additionally, might solve some of the general issues that exist with normal KOTH as well. Perhaps something like this:
If a red ship is destroyed while either it or its blue team attackers are relatively near the active capture point, adjust the standings as if the blue team had been sitting on the point uncontested for X seconds.
This means that:
1. If the red team has full control of the point, or the point is in "tug of war", move the point X seconds worth towards the blue team's favor. (This includes going from full red circle
2. If the blue team has full control of the point, immediately increase their score by X points.
I feel like this would help solve some of the problem -- there is incentive to kill an enemy ship (even though they may get a favorable spawn), and additional incentive to stay alive. While suicide remains an option, the time required to fly out of range of the point first should negate a lot of its usefulness.
Thoughts?
-
I think we should remove the new spawn system from all Crazy King maps and make it semi-random instead, or allow chooseable spawns but make them rotate on the map too.
The Disable-tactic seems alright to me but suicides are just dumb, as well as enemies who die being rewarded by spawning closer to the next point.
The dying ships should always have to choose a respawn-location on the opposite side of the next-to-activate CP
Additionally: Revert Anglean Raiders back to Resource Race. This map is still broken beyond anything reasonable because there are no chokepoints, cover or anything around 4 of the 5 CPs. Only point A has some structures that get in the way. (The Oilrig is too small to count as good cover) It's just open air. And reducing the tick-points to 200 just made the map even worse. Now there is hardly a point to fighting for a balloon. If somebody has captured it it more often than not has ticked down to 100. Now count in that there's one defender, who cannot be taken down in under one minute, meaning there's just 40 resources left on the point. It takes another 20 to capture.
-
I say the spawns in crazy king only unlock when you have control of a point and only for in the vicinity of that point, otherwise it goes random.
Anglean is won by whoever caps D. The distance between C and D is the greatest so respawning ships that just wait by D can often times cap unopposed. You can't burn enough fuel to go from one side to the other. But Anglean does have chokepoints and it has cover. Just like Refinery. Just Refinery has a few more clouds and structures.
Winning Anglean without capping D requires you to be damn good at killing and advancing. But most likely you'll only gain about 50 points per point as it just takes too long to kill the ships that are blocking. Instead of relying on the larger gain at D, you rely on more smaller gains with chance large gains if the other team messes up.
-
My opinion on that matter:
- tactical suicides are stupid. Also the engie achievement for the map requires to not die more than once during anglean matches - which is literally asking the captain(and the engineers) to play inefficiently with the current game mechanica.
- I like Frazzles idea of letting players spawn at the oposite site of the next spawn point - regardless of the team.
- I liked the old cap limit better. Now its all about blocking point as long as possible and coordinated attacks are barely ever seen.
- game starts are often heavily biased and give one of the teams a headstart of roughly 150 points
- Im like the ck anglean better than the ressource race
- the anglean capture point order should be altered
-
It seems like Crazy King needs to have the old moving points, and raid on the refinery was more dynamic with the longer point times and moving points. Also, Anglian Raiders should have an option for Crazy King and Resource Race.
-
It seems like Crazy King needs to have the old moving points
The old moving points?
-
But Anglean does have chokepoints and it has cover.
Where are there chokepoints in any place but the passage around point A and around the two large ice-spikes in the south and west?
You can go from NW to NE in a pretty much straight line. From NE to SE it's just a small curve around a mountain piece but no chokepoint.
NW to SW, that ice-spike is easy to bypass and you have enormous room on both sides so that you aren't even forced to be close to an enemy.
The only half way tight spot would be SW to SE, but you can bypass that as well with ease.
And about the cover? Which of the four outer points allows you to properly hide behind anything while being on the point? The oilrig is basically just a single tower that is useful.
The Battleship requires you to sink to almost water level to do anything.
The village is just a crater and doesn't hide you and so does the oilpump.
The only real cover is the cannon-support at A, which is also partially-see-through, so you are just safe from fire, not sight.
-
Overall I think the spawn system is fine, as it only -sometimes- helps to die or kill. The different teams have spawns at different sides of the map. If the next cap point is on the opposite side of your spawn, suicide is not going to help you. Where if the next cap point is on the opposite side of the enemies spawn, it'd be more beneficial to kill them.
I kind of like the concept of wounding an enemy, but not killing them outright; as that's often much harder to accomplish than just finishing them off. Trying to leave them disabled for a bit is a risky game, because there's a good chance they're still going to try and take you out.
However, suicide or getting killed on purpose is always lame. I've run into situations where I would look back on a recent engagement and realize it would have been much more advantageous if we lost. This really shouldn't happen, even if it's only some of the time (spawns on different sides of the map).
One thing that could help is much longer respawn times. And while I think the spawn system overall is OK, it would work better if the spawn points changed along with the active points. So around a minute left, the spawn points would shift to the opposite side of the map from the next point. (eg: if the NE point is active, the spawn points are in the SW (or NW and SE) for the teams. At 60 seconds left on the active point, and it will switch to the NW point, the spawns shift to the SE (or NE and SW) of the map. Keeping them roughly as far as possible and giving neither team a spawn advantage.
Other interesting alternatives are giving the ships buffs or debuffs depending on how long they live or how much they die. For example, a ship that continues surviving in the match will have it's maximize speed increase at certain intervals. Dying would reset this. This makes ships very much not want to die, and also to destroy the enemy ships. A harsher system might debuff ships for dying. Perhaps spawning them with reduced hull health on each death.
-
I would really not want to see killstreak rewards, because they cheapen the game and make for more lopsided matches and harder comebacks.
-
I don't like the idea of buffs/debuffs based on survivability. It seems non-obvious, and puts you at an even greater disadvantage if you happen to start off poorly.
I still think the suggestion in my opening post would be viable, relatively intuitive, and possibly helpful in regular KOTH as well. It also continues to work along with any other changes (e.g. spawn changes)
-
But Anglean does have chokepoints and it has cover.
Where are there chokepoints in any place but the passage around point A and around the two large ice-spikes in the south and west?
You can go from NW to NE in a pretty much straight line. From NE to SE it's just a small curve around a mountain piece but no chokepoint.
NW to SW, that ice-spike is easy to bypass and you have enormous room on both sides so that you aren't even forced to be close to an enemy.
The only half way tight spot would be SW to SE, but you can bypass that as well with ease.
And about the cover? Which of the four outer points allows you to properly hide behind anything while being on the point? The oilrig is basically just a single tower that is useful.
The Battleship requires you to sink to almost water level to do anything.
The village is just a crater and doesn't hide you and so does the oilpump.
The only real cover is the cannon-support at A, which is also partially-see-through, so you are just safe from fire, not sight.
Well literally there are no chokepoints on any of the CP maps except for Scrap and that one is just the mouth of the naut. Only one way in or out. Every point in Refinery has multiple entrances and exits and so does Anglean. Just Refinery has one famous point between E and A which is what you are probably obsessed about. Which is not really any different than the C-D passage for Anglean.
Only other point on Refinery would be the C-D route but even then there are multiple entrances and exits. It is just in a corner so easier to put your back to a wall.
Now if you consider clouds as capable of setting up chokepoints then you have many more on both Refinery and Anglean. The passage from B-C on Anglean is ripe for ambushes due to the clouds. D-E as well has a mountain ridge in the way which serves as a means to force a team into a grind. Of all the Anglean points, only B is the only very exposed one with littler cover.
Refinery, A is totally exposed from 3 sides. B would be super exposed without the clouds. C, again has clouds to help it but is very open. Same with E. D, is probably the only point with the least exposure.
The only major reason to favor Refinery is thanks to the buildings since you can hide in some but if your whole goal of CP battling is to just hide then I don't know if you are playing the right game. The hiding on point C, D, and E are pretty much exploits tbh. Ships shouldn't be able to do it and likely one of these days Muse will patch that out.
-
Just Refinery has one famous point between E and A which is what you are probably obsessed about. Which is not really any different than the C-D passage for Anglean.
Only other point on Refinery would be the C-D route but even then there are multiple entrances and exits. It is just in a corner so easier to put your back to a wall.
Refinery, A is totally exposed from 3 sides. B would be super exposed without the clouds. C, again has clouds to help it but is very open. Same with E. D, is probably the only point with the least exposure.
The path from C to D is blockable, since, even though you have multiple routes, most of them are quite narrow and interrupted by groundspikes.
There are some good spots to deploy mines.
The building at point D itself allows entrance to the point from only two directions.
Additionally one can stop people from coming from the south by putting a ship into a passage near B and from the west at E. (which favours the red team I think?)
At point A, B, C, D and E can one sink a bit lower to hide behind some metal constructions or fly behind one of the several towers (that only don't exist on C)
B would be just moderately exposed without clouds, on C that is correct.
D has a lot of metal in the way and E also has towers.
-
The only issue I have with the OP suggestion is that it would turn the capture point maps more into DM's. It would just promote even more combat around the control points, making your ability to destroy your enemies the largest factor contributing to success. Rather than using coordination and tactics to outmaneuver your enemies to gain control of the point.
For instance,
Under the current system, you might send one or two ships to capture the point, while the remaining ships attempt to slow down or distract the enemy. This division of labor requires a lot of coordination and trust between captains. When the next point is about to activate, teams can change their tactics according to the situation. Sending at least one ship to contest the point, while the others continue running interference; with roles constantly changing.
If kills helped push the capture meter or score, teams would just clump up and rush each point together. Essentially returning to DM tactics of 'kill the enemy to win'.
I think the only way to keep the essence of a control point map while fixing the problem is to always ensure that deaths are not advantageous. If you know your enemy won't spawn next to the point, you can feel safe to destroy them, instead of just maiming them; and you're less likely to feel the desire to end your own ship, or let the enemy finish you. There's an number of ways to do this, such as changing the spawn locations depending on which point is active (and how much time is left on it). As ships tend to head to the next point well before the current point stops being active.
-
Here are a few radical ideas...
1. Have a dead period when the match starts. No point is active, and no indication is given as to what the next point will be. After 60 seconds or something, the first point will activate. This prevents one team from having an advantage on spawn, and encourages both teams to head towards the center of the map to fight over who will have the shortest possible route to all available points. The alternative would be to make the center point always active first, so no team gets an advantage.
2. Stop the points from being in alphabetical order. Whoever owns a point when the timer ends (both teams if no team controls the point on timer end) gets a pop-up telling them which point is next. 30 seconds later the other team is informed of the next point and it is displayed on the map like normal. This means you will want to fight to the last moment to control a point. This stops the current system of completely abandoning a point if there is less than 100 seconds left to it. As the controlling team, you can't leave point and risk not knowing where to go. As a capturing team, you want to try to get in and and take that advantage away from your enemy so you can get to the next point first. The notified team can then split up and send decoys to other points to try to lure the enemy away from the actual next point while they don't know where it is going to be.
3. Make the point timer only active when a team controls the point. The full amount of points must be collected by the 2 teams combined. There will be no points where neither team collects any resources before the point moves on. This will help reduce the amount of time some crazy king maps are currently taking.
4. Bring back resource race!!
-
Warning: Wall of quotes ahead.
The only issue I have with the OP suggestion is that it would turn the capture point maps more into DM's. It would just promote even more combat around the control points, making your ability to destroy your enemies the largest factor contributing to success. Rather than using coordination and tactics to outmaneuver your enemies to gain control of the point.
My thought is that the penalty would be large enough where killing ships is encouraged, but not so large where it becomes the overriding factor. Plus the killing of ships isn't going to directly affect your score unless you already hold the point (at 100% full). I was thinking around 10 seconds worth of "uncontested" per kill.
If kills helped push the capture meter or score, teams would just clump up and rush each point together. Essentially returning to DM tactics of 'kill the enemy to win'.
If you only have 2 ships going directly to the point and the other 1-2 going to the next point or running interference, you're still limited to losing those 2 ships and that 10-20 points or so. Furthermore, if the enemy team decides to 4v2 you on the point to secure those kills and essentially farm points that way, you're easily going to secure the next point with your other 2 ships -- a far greater point advantage overall. So there is still incentive to split your forces, especially against anyone who doesn't.
Limiting the affect only to the region near the active point means that there is still no penalty for running interference, even if you're killed in the process.
I think the only way to keep the essence of a control point map while fixing the problem is to always ensure that deaths are not advantageous. If you know your enemy won't spawn next to the point, you can feel safe to destroy them, instead of just maiming them; and you're less likely to feel the desire to end your own ship, or let the enemy finish you. There's an number of ways to do this, such as changing the spawn locations depending on which point is active (and how much time is left on it). As ships tend to head to the next point well before the current point stops being active.
Changing spawn locations and my original suggestion aren't mutually exclusive, and in fact can complement each other nicely. One perk of my idea though is it's theoretically easier to implement and balance overall, as it can be one sweeping mechanics change rather than having to examine each spawn point and potentially having to add and balance more of them.
Here are a few radical ideas...
1. Have a dead period when the match starts. No point is active, and no indication is given as to what the next point will be. After 60 seconds or something, the first point will activate. This prevents one team from having an advantage on spawn, and encourages both teams to head towards the center of the map to fight over who will have the shortest possible route to all available points. The alternative would be to make the center point always active first, so no team gets an advantage.
+1 to the dead period idea. It might not encourage teams to head to the center though -- making a gamble on 2-4 of the 5 points by sending a ship to each is also a possibility. (This isn't a Bad Thing(tm), though.)
2. Stop the points from being in alphabetical order. Whoever owns a point when the timer ends (both teams if no team controls the point on timer end) gets a pop-up telling them which point is next. 30 seconds later the other team is informed of the next point and it is displayed on the map like normal. This means you will want to fight to the last moment to control a point. This stops the current system of completely abandoning a point if there is less than 100 seconds left to it. As the controlling team, you can't leave point and risk not knowing where to go. As a capturing team, you want to try to get in and and take that advantage away from your enemy so you can get to the next point first. The notified team can then split up and send decoys to other points to try to lure the enemy away from the actual next point while they don't know where it is going to be.
I'm generally not in favor of amplifying any advantage the currently winning team might already have, and this would do precisely that. I also feel that accepting a minor defeat to try for a victory elsewhere should remain a valid strategy, and this hinders the "try for victory elsewhere" approach.
Due to the current nature of CP, there's always a time where a point is a lost cause simply because there's no way to turn it back before the countdown expires/enemy team wins, even if it was completely uncontested the entire duration.
3. Make the point timer only active when a team controls the point. The full amount of points must be collected by the 2 teams combined. There will be no points where neither team collects any resources before the point moves on. This will help reduce the amount of time some crazy king maps are currently taking.
I actually liked the 90 minute Crazy King game we did for Iron Fork last week, but I agree that most people don't expect games to take nearly that long. That said, I don't think this would work with the current timer durations (you wouldn't even visit all 5 points on the map in a match) -- but it could if they were reduced.
The flipside is that battles in the form of "Just don't let them cap" are pretty exciting, at least for me.
4. Bring back resource race!!
Before my time, so no opinions here ;)
-
In case no one has explained resource race to you, all 5 points were active at once, and the first team to 1800 points won. So you would send a ship to each point instead of taking all your ships to one point. Depending on how teams divided, you could have each ship fighting 1v1 duels for a point to cap it, or you could have 1 battle raging all game, while the 2 free ships from each side cap one point each, then rotate to the next one and take it back from the enemy. It was interesting. A nice change of pace from the current system.
Maybe a nice balance between not having resource race and not giving the holding team a bigger advantage would be to enforce a dead period on every point (not long, just 20-30 seconds or so) before activating a random point. This encourages teams to take risks and send a ship to every point, or to meet at the center to have a short route to any point. You can make an all out attack on a low timer point to try to take it back, because if you fail you can still re-spawn before the next point activates.
This would sort of help re-balance teams after each point. You couldn't just wreck your opposition at the first point then roll that advantage through the rest of the game.
It would also bring back a little of the resource race feel of "I am responsible for this point. My team is depending on me. I can't die here and let them down" if your team takes the route of splitting up to sit on 3 of the 5 possible points.
-
I'm just against killing influencing the contesting of capture points. Sure you could try splitting your team, but the best tactic would be to have everyone on the point defending it. Each kill you get when they try to take the point adds to your score. Then just zerg to the next point as it's about to become active. To counter this, you'd have to bring your whole team to try and take a point, because anything less than they have, and you're at a huge disadvantage. Of course you could give up on the point and move your ships to the next one, but you know that all of the enemy ships are going to be heading there next.
Splitting your team isn't really advantageous in this situation. You can have two hold the point, and the other two head to secure the next one; but then you don't get points for killing them outside of the control zone, and risk running into the whole enemy team working together, easily defeating your split group.
Right now there's a large focus on reaching the point first, and then worrying about controlling it. You can still zerg around with your whole team, but a small delay through interference can let the other team capture the point, then you have to fight for control over it, which is another tough long battle, and when you finally win, it's just about to change over.
To have the system put into place, kills at the point have to be worth it. If it barely does anything, and the best way to win is to reach the point first and hold it instead of murderlating, why put it in? It wouldn't discourage suiciding by itself either if it only counted when they're near the point.
----
Changing how the spawns work is the simplest solution without bringing extra mechanics into play. Although it's probably the most boring. I do like some of Redria's ideas on how to spice things up, especially the first one.
Resource race was a lot of fun, but there wasn't a lot of actual combat, so it was rather boring for the crew. Most players would just jump from point to point, trying to cap them all, generally the teams just chasing each other in circles with combat once in a while. I'd love if it came back with some changes to encourage actually defending points instead of skipping around and capping as many as you can (That's mostly blamed by the achievement system, and probably why a lot of capture point achievements seem way out of whack. It used to be much easier to capture several of them in one game).