Slaughter... What do you think?

[DividedSky]

I gave up on that other thread. It was a lost cause. Panda is killing these discussions right now :/. We need more legitimate critique of the system and positive feedback for potential changes.

[Atreus]

20 wins from ADS yes, yes I do. Especially with 60+ minute queues nowadays.

Don't worry we gotchu Zanzhiz <3

[AntiSocialPanda]

Nope. You don't want to own up to anything you've said. But sure, move along.

Fine ... it's quite troubling dealing with the mentally impaired but I'll indulge you.
Do I think people that complain about Slaughter are bad? Yes. Maybe not all but enough.
And no I didn't agree with someone complaining about Slaughter, I agreed with someone complaining about Squares handling of PvP. Two entirely different things.
And yes, Square is treating us like second class citizens, not because we have to grind for gear, but because they refuse to fix or even address PvP problems. See Hyrist post above. This is a fact. My post has nothing to do with this discussion, but you brought it up because you're incapable of following a simple flow of logic or read a sentence correctly. Am I clear now?

[Atreus]

I think people aren't grasping the full scope of 72 Slaughter, honestly.

The Alpha (a) bots on the 3 exterior Bases are worth 15 Points Each Plus a Team Wide damage buff. Technically, you could abandon mid entirely after the first add (y) and rack up 45 kills worth of points by taking all 3 of the side objectives. iirc the center one is worth about 30 plus a hp/mp buff, so you actually make out better overall prioritizing the side objectives and attempting to take 2.

The problem is co-coordinating your team to do this and the center winds up being a clustered mess of feeding kills to CC/Cometeror combos.

It's actually that lack of cohesive teamwork that makes 24 man slaughter feel so much better as it's there is a lot easier time working with 7 others, than 23 others to work together. Slaughter is objective based. It's just that players do not value the objectives as much as they should. It's a new mode though so it might catch after people become more accustomed to it.

You're right. It's just the "objectives" themselves aren't valuable enough to put value on them, if that makes sense. Yes you can win matches with them, yes they can help, but so does dominion of the top and waiting for the other teams to come back up their pads and crushing them. Death = you lose the buffs they give you anyway. I've seen plenty of matches we won where we didn't get a single one of those alpha nodes. Should the alpha nodes be worth more? Maybe. Should those alpha nodes be up from the beginning of the match to get teams splitting initially? Absolutely.



EDIT:

snip

Go ahead and name-call. You're the one backpedaling out of your own bloody statements lol. Why use Hyrist as a resource? It's second-priority because it IS second priority, doesn't mean they aren't making adjustments based on feedback. Didn't you say we're moving along?

[Hyrist]

True. But the first version tanked for a reason. I have no problem with a PvE centric game. If this game had no PvP I would still play but if Square is going to implement PvP they should at least show some level of interest in making it as fluid as possible, or else why even have it? To appease us? Putting in a half-hearted PvP system wont make anyone happy, it'll just make the few of us who do enjoy it frustrated.

I'm not entirely sure I understand the details of your criticisms at this point, however.

Slaughter holds depth to it. It needs refinement, yes. However that Refinement is reliant just as much on the aspect on how players are playing the mode as it is on balance adjustments to the content. In my experience thus far PvP's lack of depth has more to do with players herding into crowd mentalities rather than work on the strategies that are in place. Cometeor spam is useful because players all hurtle together - when the mechanics of Frontline benefit most when the players spread to other objectives and function as three separate units.

Can we blame SE for the poor utility use of its players and those who capitalize on it? Malestrom in the morning is so dynamically different than Malestrom in the evening because of how much easier it is to focus objectives and get the appropriate roles. I think both need to be addressed.

You're right. It's just the "objectives" themselves aren't valuable enough to put value on them, if that makes sense. Yes you can win matches with them, yes they can help, but so does dominion of the top and waiting for the other teams to come back up their pads and crushing them. Death = you lose the buffs they give you anyway. I've seen plenty of matches we won where we didn't get a single one of those alpha nodes. Should the alpha nodes be worth more? Maybe. Should those alpha nodes be up from the beginning of the match to get teams splitting initially? Absolutely.

30 points is nothing to snuff at. You'd have to suffer an entire wipe of the alliance and more to lose that amount in kills. But as far as camping someone else's incoming pads. That's just a matter of having your tanks lead up the jump and baiting out cometeors and sleeps. Also, having one party defending that section and engaging the enemy directly when it comes time for your team to return also prevents the camping. Target attack the Magic DPS with your tank and other DPS and have your healers spread apart from one another while the front group engages. To better facilitate this you can have your tank-heavy party stay on the center or swap a tank for more DPS on the exterior objections as it should take only one tank each to secure the objective.

What I see happening most is that only one party is running off to the objective and gaining 15 points, instead of contesting two.

There are other things I see that are poorly thought out on return. Remaining on mounts when you're using the jump pad. There are a lot of things that are preventable with just a little bit of forethought. But the combat is new and it's very loose. However, teamwork will win out if you're playing intelligently - which is my main point.

On the feedback: I can see this working, as well as simply having more alpha nodes spawn or perhaps the Beta ones spawn outside. Obviously the system can be improved upon. I just feel it may be prudent to wait a bit for the players to improve first so we can narrow out more concise adjustments. New mode-new meta. Let the meta sort out a bit.

[Atreus]

snip

You're pointing out tactics that help prevent this and that, and yeah in a perfect world everyone is on the perfect job for the task.

What I see happening most is that only one party is running off to the objective and gaining 15 points, instead of contesting two.

And on our end, our other two teams are just cleaning up the top and preparing to wipe the returning teams.

You can argue that multiple ways to win is a good thing, but there's still far too much emphasis on the middle, even with those side alpha nodes.

[Exsequens]

Its a sack of shit. 72 man is literally no skill, 100% caster LB. Cometeor brings all the wins the yard. Honestly when both GC team up to take down the other its kinda shit.

Okay I might be a bit annoyed at that point but to be honest 24man Slaughter is pretty good but 72man is just a cluster fuck.

[faq]

Especially with 60+ minute queues nowadays.

Agreed. Queues are bad.

[Hyrist]

When you brake it down into brass taxes. This is a matter of opinions.

You're arguing a preference against emphasis into the center area - where that very well be the design intent. I'm pointing out tactics that display how deviating from the baseline mental stragity actually is helpful for success in spite of the center-focus.

What makes your tactic or my tactic work all boils down to execution. Even if you succeed in securing kills on the returning camp, you risk overextending yourself to the third team and getting wiped by them. My team's done this before and it wound up handing the win to the team who went and got the outside mobs.

Tactical arguments aside my debate is that the reason why the mode feels too one-dimensional is that people are just figuring out tactics to win as I said before, the Meta is fresh. I agree on the point that more emphasis on the exterior will help flush out more tactics than the ones that are available. What I am asking for is time to figure out where exactly those adjustments should go as we've just gotten this new thing.

For example, one way to add more value to the exterior mobs is to prevent that buff from wearing off on death. Therefore, even if you do get killed on the return, you still have to worry about the long term consequences of a team grabbing two stacks of the offensive buff. It all depends on how the gameplay settles, and it hasn't yet.

[AntiSocialPanda]

Slaughter holds depth to it. It needs refinement, yes. However that Refinement is reliant just as much on the aspect on how players are playing the mode as it is on balance adjustments to the content. In my experience thus far PvP's lack of depth has more to do with players herding into crowd mentalities rather than work on the strategies that are in place. Cometeor spam is useful because players all hurtle together - when the mechanics of Frontline benefit most when the players spread to other objectives and function as three separate units.

Can we blame SE for the poor utility use of its players and those who capitalize on it? Malestrom in the morning is so dynamically different than Malestrom in the evening because of how much easier it is to focus objectives and get the appropriate roles. I think both need to be addressed.

Right again. I'm not faulting SE for Slaughter though. It's like you said, it has a deeper level to it but most people are incapable of seeing it. My general problems with PvP is outside of Slaughter, the typical: casters being interrupted all the time, blah blah blah, etc. It's been said a dozen times. But I will say those LBs need a nerf lol.