Incoming nerfs/changes

[Stormrider]

Doesn't this mean that drop from 1600 to 1800 first place can't truly be pushed at the end? Those last 200 points are the hardest to get. If it was to speed up the matched more points per tick per base would speed up the game. This seems like, a give up you aren't going to make up 200 points difference at the end.

[KayVonTrarx]

The drop in points makes Ice & Base points more important which make Shatter less PVP focused. I've been frustrated because even now, trying to direct people to focus on the PVE aspect pisses off the kill-focused people in the team. That's not their fault either because we're here to fight people not ice.

Trying to reconcile PVE to win versus PVP to stop the leading GC is difficult. Small ice is popping up every minute pulling people away from the core group or bases are getting stolen. I've made bad or ineffective calls as Shatter is much harder to coordinate. Pretty much resolved to not call until I'm more experienced in it.

In Seal Rock, getting an objective meant killing people. It was perfect for both people wanting kills and people wanting to win.

Teamfights are the fun part of PVP & Shatter just doesn't encourage them. Unless you have an overwhelming skill advantage over the others like the GC stacking going on with transfers but that's not the fault of Shatter.

[Thekk]

The drop in points makes Ice & Base points more important which make Shatter less PVP focused. I've been frustrated because even now, trying to direct people to focus on the PVE aspect pisses off the kill-focused people in the team. That's not their fault either because we're here to fight people not ice.

Going to reuse the numbers I posted in another thread.

The points available on the maps are the following:

• 4 large crystals (300) and 18 small crystals (70), for a total of 2460 or an average of 820 per company
• 2 points per 3 seconds of outpost control (or 40 per minute)
• An overall increase of 5 points per kill (+10 for a company, -5 for another)

There are multiple crystal spawn patterns, but the most common ones have the last crystals spawning at either 8:00 or 10:00. If they take 2 minutes to kill, then the match will be 12 to 14 minutes old when it happens. That would give a company around 560 points in the best case (14 mins and no control change)

Currently, that gives us the following breakdown:

• Crystals : 820/1800 = 45,6%
• Outposts : 560/1800 = 31,1%
• Kills : 420/1800 (requires 84 kills/death) = 23,3%

The thing is this is only if the match ends with the last crystal. In reality, that's rarely the case and the result is that outposts generate more points and kills less. If the game lasts the whole 20 minutes, the spread is going to be closer to 45/45/10. Games that last that long usually do because there's not much fighting going on and that is reflected.

With the 1600 limit, the numbers are now:

• Crystals : 820/1600 = 51,2%
• Outposts : 560/1600 = 35%
• Kills : 220/1600 (requires 44 kills/deaths) = 13,8%

With this limit, it is very unlikely that the match will ever last 20 minutes as the potential crystal (820) and outpost (800) points bring us over it. If the objective is to make matches end nearly after the last crystal is destroyed, then it's one way to achieve it. However, the spreads clearly show that PvP which already has a marginal part in the total end score is going to matter even less. You could very will win with very minimal fighting, which wasn't possible before and it feels like that misses the point.

In my opinion, a better option would have been to increase the overall points gained from a kill to 10. The result of that would be to reduce the number of kills/deaths needed to 42 (about the same as what will be needed after the change) without increasing the overall importance of crystals, which is already pretty high (some would argue too high). That also makes it more enticing to engage other teams instead of hiding in a corner until the next crystal spawns.

Currently it doesn't feel like it's even worth it trying to attack someone at a crystal because they'll generate more points in the time it takes you to kill them than you will killing them.

All this might boils down to cultural differences between NA/EU and Japan. I remember someone saying that our Seal Rock matches were bloodbaths compared to theirs. This change caters to that mindset and clashes with ours.

[KayVonTrarx]

Currently it doesn't feel like it's even worth it trying to attack someone at a crystal because they'll generate more points in the time it takes you to kill them than you will killing them.

All this might boils down to cultural differences between NA/EU and Japan. I remember someone saying that our Seal Rock matches were bloodbaths compared to theirs. This change caters to that mindset and clashes with ours.

I've heard their PVP scene had much more people but didn't know about the playstyle differences. I wonder what they've been saying about Shatter over on their forums.

It might be a cultural thing but I hate having to choose defensive playstyles to win. I've been criticized for being overly non-confrontational in calls but can't find it in myself to argue in alliance chat to prove exactly what you've showed with the math. Not PVPing wins matches in Shatter.

[Thekk]

Well the thing is that right now you do have to fight at some point or you won't get enough points so you either try to get as many kills as you can between the large crystal spawns or end up having to fight at the end, often ending in a 1v2 if you are in the lead. With the change, just the kills you get left and right will be enough and it will allow for an even more defensive strategy.

One problem is that you have to choose between attacking the crystal or attacking the enemy, with the first option netting a lot more points. It is very unlikely you will wipe a team in the amount of time it takes to destroy a crystal. At most, you will kill half the group and even that is generous. In that case, you would get 120 points and they would get 240 (300 - 60). You would need to kill 20/24 to break even. If kills were changed to +20/-10, it would take 10 to break even. That might encourage people to contest.

In contrast to Shatter, Seal Rock required you to fight over the objective to have a chance at capture. We went from having to both fight and achieve objectives to fight or achieve objectives and that's not a very healthy situation in my opinion.

* Just a disclaimer that I started playing late and have very limited experience with the Cartenau Frontlines (a few odd 24 man matches from roulette) so I can't really comment on how they compare to the current situation.
However, from what I've seen, the large nodes actually did considerable damage to the players which would open up opportunities for kills. That kind of risk is absent from Shatter. The addition of a damage reflect from the crystal which has been mentioned in one thread could be a nice way to spice things up if it applied to everyone.

[Februs]

* Just a disclaimer that I started playing late and have very limited experience with the Cartenau Frontlines (a few odd 24 man matches from roulette) so I can't really comment on how they compare to the current situation. However, from what I've seen, the large nodes actually did considerable damage to the players which would open up opportunities for kills.

This is accurate, but the risks were steeper than just that when Secure was in its prime. In the earliest days, when we had full matches of 72 players, there were actually six capture points in addition to drone spawns. So, players had to split their alliances across the map to try and hold as many capture points as possible while also trying not to fall behind in drone destruction. You needed a majority presence to take and hold a capture point, so combat was nearly constant at the peripheral capture points (the ones which were not directly in front of the GC bases). In many instances, the only way to even take one was to completely wipe out the enemy, but dedicating large forces of players across the map left you thin. Variant tactics were also viable, because the amount of points generated from them was much higher than in 24-man matches. A team could, potentially, ignore drone spawns in favor of capture point dominance and still be a contender for victory. Combat was necessary to actually win, but the risk and reward ratio was much steeper.

Honestly, I feel bad for the newer breed of players who missed those 72-man Secure matches. They had their faults, but the 24-man matches are completely different by comparison, and Shatter is just a joke. It really is a shame that SE didn't keep that game mode relevant so that newer players could experience it.