Showing Posts For franandlaura.1382:
So – why not consider a debuff for having too many players from the same server in close proximity to each other. Say, anything over 25 gets an “overcrowded” or a “constricted” condition that reduces offensive stats.
This would force commanders to separate and deploy forces strategically around the maps so as not to gain the condition.
And what would you do if 3 randoms would decide to follow your 23 man raid, wait you would be 26. Can you force them not to ? or you accept to play against the enemy with the debuff ?
So an alert commander would see that his/her crew was getting the condition for being too large and take appropriate steps according to the situation.
The commander could:
- split the team into two 10 – 15 player groups and assault different parts of the map,
- assign a small squad to go flip camps and intercept enemy players who have died and are running back to their squads,
- instruct the new players to go scout the enemy, refresh siege, kill yaks, tap keeps and towers, or supplement forces on a different map,
- create a “bait squad” to draw the enemy out / lead the enemy into traps,
and on and on…
To me this sounds a lot more interesting than just rolling the blob around the bag farm.
And I’ve witnessed some very talented commanders playing this game. I think they’re up to it.
I’m sure something like this has been mentioned elsewhere, but I’ll toss it in anyway:
Seems to me the solution is not to make it easier for a small party to take on a blob – the solution is to discourage blobbing altogether.
So – why not consider a debuff for having too many players from the same server in close proximity to each other. Say, anything over 25 gets an “overcrowded” or a “constricted” condition that reduces offensive stats.
This would force commanders to separate and deploy forces strategically around the maps so as not to gain the condition.
As it is now, you can pump up the outnumbered folks all you want—the blob rolls on.
Loved the video – nearly pulled out my old “hammer pants” and did the air walk.
yeah but is this going to fix your 0.5 kdr that’s the real question here
Anyone else think they see a connection between a high kdr and a server’s habit of hiding behind walls? I think I do… :0
Yes… it’s inversely proportional. The less you hide behind walls, the higher your KDR.
Actually I think it’s directly proportional to the amount of time you spend camping JPs =D.
You should make sure your connection and game client is stable. There’s many ways to do this.
You mean like disabling background processes, running traceroutes, or resetting and connecting directly to the router? Yes – I’ve red the connectivity help page.
The dishonor system itself, is working as intended.
So it’s your belief that Anet intended to alienate players who are disconnected through no fault of their own. Meanwhile just today someone posted this in the PVP forum:
“I have noticed a large increase in the amount of afkers in unranked, today I had 3 matches in a row when someone in my team went afk when we were less than 50 points behind (they were 3 different people). " Add that to the litany of players complaining about this issue
Working as intended…?
The best suggestion I saw was to give the team who has the DCd player(s) a buff similar to the WvW Outnumbered buff, 25% reward track gain, and a pip-saver. Which, I think is an amazing idea personally, because Dishonor is usually enough for people to stop afking or to sort their connection out. So instead buff the remaining team in terms of reward.
I agree with you here. Anet definitely needs to find a more proactive solution to this issue. Just slapping everyone who disconnects with “dishonorable” and “desertion” hasn’t worked.
@Haleydawn I disagree that it’s working as intended. I still see qq all over the forums about PVP disconnecting and AFKing. That would not be the case if it were working as intended. Likewise, people who were disconnected through no fault of their own are being punished. That, I doubt very much, is what ANet intended.
The solution is to adjust the incentive so that people who DC or AFK don’t receive daily credit and PVP points for the match.
This happened to me this morning.
Seconds after the start of an unranked PVP match, I got “The game client lost its connection to the server. Please wait a few minutes before restarting the the client and trying again.”
I Logged back in and finished the match. After the match I was slapped with a “dishonorable timeout” and a “desertion” in my game history.
I see this on the GW2 Wiki: " Relogging, or changing characters during a match does not grant dishonorable, with some exceptions."
So why did I get a dishonor timeout and desertion mark for a random DC?
Anet needs to fix the random disconnect problem before enhancing punishments for leaving.
Earlier today I started an unranked PVP match only to receive the dreaded “The game client lost its connection to the server” message literally seconds after the match started. I reconnected as quickly as I could, finished the match and still managed to be third in points for my team, but I got a “dishonor timeout” and a “desertion” result in my games played anyway.
So I’d hate to get a 24 hour ban or some other nonsense because Anet’s client dropped me randomly from a match … right?
Players afk-ing is a symptom of the reward system—which grants credit for the match even to players who just stand around and do nothing. I think it’s a pretty easy fix: Anet just needs to include a “points earned” threshold in order for a player to get credit for a match. Capping, killing, and supporting earn points. Standing around or leaving gets you zilch.
Just my 2.5