Slaughterlines - Feedback/suggestions

[Shake0615]

My suggestion: don't be lazy and make a new map that is actually conducive to deathmatch-style PvP. There's almost no reason to leave mid so 90% of the map is completely wasted.

[Mutemutt]

Yep, my thoughts exactly. 72 is way too much to have fighting up at the middle. We need a smaller number of people per match or more reason to spread out across the map.

[Ophie-Mio]

I'm not actually a fan of how the battle high system works. To me, when I first heard about it, I figured that it would be better off as the direct opposite.

Instead of the people who were already doing good getting the battle high and continuing to slaughter the opposing teams, it would have been more interesting to me if the opposing teams got it instead. Giving the boost to the weaker teams would then make the #1 team a target.

This sort of strategy happened in Assassin's Creed multiplayer where the first person to come out ahead and get a kill got more people targeted to them and they had to survive against more people. Once they died, they were balanced again.

It just seemed to me that it was just a kind of death fest with no real strategy besides the whole "Don't cross the line" thing where all melee got hosed. I would prefer a system where if the ranged dps are dominating, it turns the tables against them. If they still win out, they get the ego boost and if they lose, the buff goes to them next.

[Fadigre]

This sort of strategy happened in Assassin's Creed multiplayer where the first person to come out ahead and get a kill got more people targeted to them and they had to survive against more people. Once they died, they were balanced again.

I'd appreciate at least bonus points for shutting down somebody with Battle High or Battle Frenzy, it'd add another layer of strategy to both the offending and defending teams!

[Mutemutt]

This sort of strategy happened in Assassin's Creed multiplayer where the first person to come out ahead and get a kill got more people targeted to them and they had to survive against more people. Once they died, they were balanced again.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Assassin's Creed's multiplayer also give a bonus for killstreaks? So both games helped the winning players keep winning in a way. It's worth mentioning that slaughter does have a comeback mechanic in the fact that the losing teams build their adrenaline faster. So, I suppose that any of the melee could take advantage of their adrenaline boost to quickly kill the people on a battle high and erase their buff. Well, at least I think that idea wrecking that buff is enough put that particular enemy at the top of the kill list.

[Ophie-Mio]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Assassin's Creed's multiplayer also give a bonus for killstreaks? So both games helped the winning players keep winning in a way.

It did, but with 3-4 more people hunting just you, it was really hard to keep the streak. The issue I'm seeing in Slaughter is that it gives the winners more to keep winning and it literally allows them to keep slaughtering people. Adrenaline just didn't seem enough to really break the battle high or battle frenzy. To me, personally, it just seems like it should be switched.

[Nalien]

I'd appreciate at least bonus points for shutting down somebody with Battle High or Battle Frenzy, it'd add another layer of strategy to both the offending and defending teams!

I was saying as much the moment the preliminary patch notes were released. Couple that with people being spread out and the team which is better at scouting and communicating has a far bigger advantage than Battle Fever could ever give.

[Buff_Archer]

I don't know everything that was factored into the equation, but I took out a BLM with Battle High and the message that was like- An Order of Twin Adder person has defeated a member or Maelstrom with Battle High or something like that. And then I had it and showed on the map. So I think that Battle High does transfer somehow, based on that and the fact it displays a message.

What I would like to see added:
How about throwing a few Morbols in you can kite and turn on a crowd? Vs the static drones where someone calls out the same spawn timer every game. Would give tanks a use for enmity skills if they could try to outkite each other. Maybe whoever defeats a monster outside of mid gets an item in their Inventory in the special item tab that disappears after battle if they don't use it and which spawns that monster upon use. Run into where the other two GC's are fighting, drop a Morbol, and run.

What I'd like to change:
Unnecessary waiting due to GC locked queueing and PVP rank. Ok so unlike all other instanced content, Frontlines is the ONE instanced thing that has the potential to allow players to actually play vs wait and wait and wait for no good reason except, oh yeah, lore. Some people might like that aspect but the player base feels overwhelmingly like they'd rather spend more time playing the game than killing time waiting to play the game. I know I used the word 'wait' here a lot but that's because I have to do a lot of waiting and it's tedious and no one likes it. I get that if I queue for Stone Vigil as DPS or something, then there is a legitimate delay until someone who queues in each role is matched up with me. But this is the first mode of game play that should be able to kick an instance off as soon as enough people have queued up to start it but no we have to wait so much longer than that because of this artificially imposed restriction. The people have spoken.

[Synestra]

They need to make this either only 8v8v8

24 TDM is kinda fun but 72 is just mindless zergfest where everyone is competing against eachother in kills, also why did they remove 48man mode? that was the most balanced amount of players in secure mode that made it super fun.

PS: If you REALLY want to have fun in slaughter you need a full premade party, then that modes all nifty things and meta starts to shine.

[Atreus]

24 TDM is kinda fun but 72 is just mindless zergfest where everyone is competing against eachother in kills, also why did they remove 48man mode? that was the most balanced amount of players in secure mode that made it super fun.

PS: If you REALLY want to have fun in slaughter you need a full premade party, then that modes all nifty things and meta starts to shine.

You might be a small minority that enjoyed the 48-man Secure. Now that it's brought up though, 48-man Slaughter might not be so bad with so much of the action happening at the top.