Remove Shatter and Secure from the rotation.

[Valence]

That is like, your opinion. It's PvP. The replayability is the situations people put you in.

Only partially, especially in FLs because FLs turns into a zerg where crowd movements tend to always follow the same script. I have played old Secure, it was exactly like this, with the exact same patterns every time. This isn't a hazard that current Shatter also always plays the exact same no matter what. There is some replayability in the fact that yes, at the micro level you'll move differently which is already a huge gain compared to the pve we're getting, and if that satisfies you, then that's great for you. I however see zero negative with having adjustment and some rng at the macro level to shake the script and change macro patterns. This is what makes Seal Rock and Onsal better to me.

So I do indeed stand by that opinion.

[Divinemights]

Only partially, especially in FLs because FLs turns into a zerg where crowd movements tend to always follow the same script. I have played old Secure, it was exactly like this, with the exact same patterns every time. This isn't a hazard that current Shatter also always plays the exact same no matter what. There is some replayability in the fact that yes, at the micro level you'll move differently which is already a huge gain compared to the pve we're getting, and if that satisfies you, then that's great for you. I however see zero negative with having adjustment and some rng at the macro level to shake the script and change macro patterns. This is what makes Seal Rock and Onsal better to me.

So I do indeed stand by that opinion.

Isn't this best demonstrates this type of thread to suggest ban a certain mode is absurd, pointless, and no developers will consider this as feedback?
If you like a mode, in your eyes everything will be merits to you; but that do not applies to everyone
This is sole reason Frontline modes on a rotation where everyone get their own day to enjoy
You can sugar coating Seize or me sugar coating Secure; we would never reach an agreement because we are on polar opposite; and community is on polar opposite
Again, what is the point of this thread?
If it is the day of mode you don't like, just go play something else instead force down everyone's throat

[Teno]

Only partially, especially in FLs because FLs turns into a zerg where crowd movements tend to always follow the same script. I have played old Secure, it was exactly like this, with the exact same patterns every time. This isn't a hazard that current Shatter also always plays the exact same no matter what. There is some replayability in the fact that yes, at the micro level you'll move differently which is already a huge gain compared to the pve we're getting, and if that satisfies you, then that's great for you. I however see zero negative with having adjustment and some rng at the macro level to shake the script and change macro patterns. This is what makes Seal Rock and Onsal better to me.

So I do indeed stand by that opinion.

The crowd movements don't really matter as an individual, you can single out enemies from crowds and this is partly where the fun comes from. Plus crowds as you mentioned them vary greatly from game to game.
Also the node rng allows diversity.

[Valence]

The crowd movements don't really matter as an individual, you can single out enemies from crowds and this is partly where the fun comes from. Plus crowds as you mentioned them vary greatly from game to game.
Also the node rng allows diversity.

Hard disagree on Shatter's crowd movements. They're always pretty much the same and following a script.
I haven't played new Secure enough so I will refrain from judging it, but I think it has better potential by offering different avenues even without the rng Seal Rock and Onsal have. It was a lot easier in the older Secure to change one's own patterns depending on where you wanted to go (like Shatter v1.0), but the fact remains that there is a fixed node spawn timer that forces every team into middle movements at regular intervals and forces a certain rigidity at specific times.

[Mawlzy]

I was hoping that Secure would at least allow for skirmishes from smaller groups on the flags, but people will 99% of the time run away/not engage even when they outnumber the opposition. Watching 6 people flee while 2 enemies cap a flag never ceases to be sad, or the amount of times I would jump in to take on 3 people knowing there were 4 right behind me a moment ago only to end up dead as they STOOD THERE A WHOLE 40 SECONDS WAITING FOR THE JUMP PAD TO ACTIVATE made me stop trying to actually fight at flags, and I just treat it as the mount carousal it was clearly intended to be. And then all that waiting to get to mid just to shoot at nodes and drones, whoohoo...

Somehow Secure makes people want to play even less PVP than Shatter, and I didn't think that was possible.

This is why I've given up on Secure. Maybe the map has potential, but it seems to attract the same group of people who do not want to PvP that like Shatter.

The flags are particularly maddening because, once you've flipped one, the buff should allow the defending team to hang onto it with a significant numerical disadvantage.

Instead the enemy winks in the general direction of the flag and everyone runs away.

[Atreus]

This is why I've given up on Secure. Maybe the map has potential, but it seems to attract the same group of people who do not want to PvP that like Shatter.

The flags are particularly maddening because, once you've flipped one, the buff should allow the defending team to hang onto it with a significant numerical disadvantage.

Instead the enemy winks in the general direction of the flag and everyone runs away.

I stand by it, the best iteration of Secure was 2.0's release and it was ruined when they added points to kills and extra speed to mounts. Used to be that points were solely from holding points and busting nodes. It basically created a culture where each flag had a group of 8 fighting for it at all times and "deathblobbing" wasn't really a good strat.

[Divinemights]

I was hoping that Secure would at least allow for skirmishes from smaller groups on the flags, but people will 99% of the time run away/not engage even when they outnumber the opposition. Watching 6 people flee while 2 enemies cap a flag never ceases to be sad, or the amount of times I would jump in to take on 3 people knowing there were 4 right behind me a moment ago only to end up dead as they STOOD THERE A WHOLE 40 SECONDS WAITING FOR THE JUMP PAD TO ACTIVATE made me stop trying to actually fight at flags, and I just treat it as the mount carousal it was clearly intended to be. And then all that waiting to get to mid just to shoot at nodes and drones, whoohoo...

Somehow Secure makes people want to play even less PVP than Shatter, and I didn't think that was possible.

I don’t think this behavior has anything to do specifically with Secure—it’s just how people tend to act in any mode.
You’ll often see this happen more frequently when 90% of the alliance is made up of ranged jobs.
These backline players are much more likely to abandon melee teammates who are already engaged in combat and immediately chase the next objective as soon as it appears.
After playing over 20,000 Frontline matches, I’ve come to use this pattern as a reliable indicator of what kind of alliance I’m in.

[Valence]

I was hoping that Secure would at least allow for skirmishes from smaller groups on the flags, but people will 99% of the time run away/not engage even when they outnumber the opposition. Watching 6 people flee while 2 enemies cap a flag never ceases to be sad, or the amount of times I would jump in to take on 3 people knowing there were 4 right behind me a moment ago only to end up dead as they STOOD THERE A WHOLE 40 SECONDS WAITING FOR THE JUMP PAD TO ACTIVATE made me stop trying to actually fight at flags, and I just treat it as the mount carousal it was clearly intended to be. And then all that waiting to get to mid just to shoot at nodes and drones, whoohoo...

Somehow Secure makes people want to play even less PVP than Shatter, and I didn't think that was possible.

I think the jump pads were the worst addition to the mode, and that's what I was afraid of even before they released it. People don't need to commit to the sides anymore. Makes everybody at a jump away from everything, which also encourages zerg blobbing even more.

[Divinemights]

I think the jump pads were the worst addition to the mode, and that's what I was afraid of even before they released it. People don't need to commit to the sides anymore. Makes everybody at a jump away from everything, which also encourages zerg blobbing even more.

This also leaves your own primary outpost vulnerable to being captured.
That’s the main reason it now provides an occupation damage buff and is positioned farther from the spawn point.
The 15-second invulnerability on respawn has become largely irrelevant, as it typically expires by the time players reach the main outpost.
If your team is aligned with Horde Stompede, you’ll often see a single enemy player repeatedly capturing main outpost—forcing your entire alliance to scramble between the outer node and main outpost.
This kind of distraction can significantly impact your team's overall score.