test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Capture and Hold, really boring now.

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
edited June 2010 in PvP Gameplay
Does anyone find that playing Capture and Hold is really boring now?

I can't exactly pinpoint any definite 1 fault to why it's boring now, I can list a couple though.

First, it's all about the mob squad now. Individuals cannot take anyone by surprise by much now and thus you can quickly hit a location, take out any defenders quickly and steal the location.

Secondly, with the hugely enhanced survivability, holding a point is now easy. Just heal and resist till the mob squad arrives.

Thirdly, because it's all about the mob squads, if the 2 mob squads dont' meet, both sides end up exchanging locations and games become extremely long and drawn out.

As a result, I'm seeing people getting bored and just giving up, letting themselves be killed, except for the premade which joins and they decide they want the kills for the points/ego/pride/whatever and thus they win.


Maybe I just need a lot more games, but from the few days of playing Capture and Hold, it's really getting strained.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    I think a large part of the problem is that the map is too small for the speed at which we can travel. It promotes groups circling around in packs, and the response to this is to have your group travel in a pack as well. Then the two packs collide and get caught up in an endless deathmatch (usually while one player slips away and captures a majority of the locations unchallenged).

    A larger map with really spread out locations would encourage teams to leave a couple of vessels at each point, each taking responsibility for a single objective since travel time becomes too significant to be worth moving around much. Shouldn't this be the point of Capture and Hold? There are plenty of maps that encourage entire groups to throw themselves at one another. C&H maps should be about smaller scale battles (2 on 2 or 3 on 3 at each location).

    Finally, I think people get discouraged because the current capping and scoring system seems broken. This is an example of something I see often on the scoring front:

    Blue owns 2 locations.
    Red owns no locations.
    All the remaining locations are contested (according to the icons).
    For some reason, Blue is losing resource points and Red isn't. No, that isn't a typo.

    I see that sort of situation all the time, and because it makes no sense to me I often wonder "is this thing even working?". Then there's the process of capturing a point, or capping. Because there's no feedback on how the cap is progressing, any player parked at the location for a bit finds themselves wondering if the node is broken. Should I stay longer and see if it's really broken? Should I go now and not waste anymore time in case it is broken? Decisions, decisions. There needs to be a way to tell which way the cap is going, and how it's progressing, and how long until it's completed.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Contested doesn't mean no point gains. 2 Blue and 3 Reds till one isn't contested. It's not the color which gives points. Many times I see people just fly through them to flip from color to white. It doesn't have any affect on scoring.

    I would like a cap status as well.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Bostish wrote:
    Contested doesn't mean no point gains. 2 Blue and 3 Reds till one isn't contested. It's not the color which gives points. Many times I see people just fly through them to flip from color to white. It doesn't have any affect on scoring.

    That's the problem. The moment you go to an uncontested location ( x ) , it changes to your side's symbol and the colors are white and striped red or blue (depending again on your side). But your team doesn't own that location until it becomes a solid color. Let's say Blue, for ease.

    So then, as a Blue player, you see locations that are white and striped red. Are they like the point you just took - in the process of being captured by the red side, but still not owned? Or were they already red and now being contested by a blue player? From a distance it's difficult to tell what is actually happening because the indicators for "owned, but contested" and "neutral, but being captured" are exactly the same. Maybe this is more a problem for FvF or KvK where the symbol itself doesn't change (except for it's color). I just happen to do those types of C&H maps the most.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Florence wrote:
    DAs a result, I'm seeing people getting bored and just giving up, letting themselves be killed, except for the premade which joins and they decide they want the kills for the points/ego/pride/whatever and thus they win.


    Maybe I just need a lot more games, but from the few days of playing Capture and Hold, it's really getting strained.

    If the pattern you describe is repeated then one side needs to rethink its tactics. If they know doing X leads to Y and Y is an unfavourable outcome than don't do X. I've had some fast and very close Salvage games following the patch and they have been good fun. If people leave because they cannot think of a new strategy then they have lost the game on a tactical level. It is unfortunate if the quitters come from your side but that is the risk of entering a competitive game.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    there really has to be done something, it is in most cases boring because of many reasons stated above.

    a few changes i would like to see to that map:

    1. more statistics like cap points taken, maybe dmg taken, shield dmg and heal. this would improve the overview of who contributed to the team, always being a good motivation.

    2. eventually something like side missions that can grant points like in the assault map. points taken could for example produce recources that can be beamed aboard the ship, and be taken back to the base. although this could also be an idea for other pvp maps. but on this map for example it could also be linked to other bonuses: sensor array could reveal opponents position, ship thing (sry forgot the name) could spawn npc ships, starbase give extra points, asteroid min recource points...

    3. build in a time limit like 30 min for example, and after that different win conditions, like most points or recources, decide the game. or well change win conditions completely, but somehow make it more involving and interesting.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Doryshan wrote:
    If the pattern you describe is repeated then one side needs to rethink its tactics. If they know doing X leads to Y and Y is an unfavourable outcome than don't do X. I've had some fast and very close Salvage games following the patch and they have been good fun. If people leave because they cannot think of a new strategy then they have lost the game on a tactical level. It is unfortunate if the quitters come from your side but that is the risk of entering a competitive game.

    The point is sometimes, we do organize. And then guess what? The games become so long and drawn out, people get bored and just decide that they want to throw the game anyway.

    Haven't you seen enough games where each side has a small group that is organized, and the rest of the players just begs them to quit and finish the match already?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Yesterday I was really confused by the capture points. I couldn't figure out what state they were in and if they working at all.

    It was an FvF map and I was on the red team (for the first time as a Fed in a Capture and Hold match). Enemy contacts are stil in red. But my own flag is suppoed to be red, right? Right? Really? is this flag working? Do I flip it? Why are we more players, win most if not all engagements, and are still losing points? Is this flag flipping to my side? Or is it already done?

    We won in the end. I am not quite sure how. Maybe because we captured all points for a moment.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Yesterday I was really confused by the capture points. I couldn't figure out what state they were in and if they working at all.

    It was an FvF map and I was on the red team (for the first time as a Fed in a Capture and Hold match). Enemy contacts are stil in red. But my own flag is suppoed to be red, right? Right? Really? is this flag working? Do I flip it? Why are we more players, win most if not all engagements, and are still losing points? Is this flag flipping to my side? Or is it already done?

    We won in the end. I am not quite sure how. Maybe because we captured all points for a moment.

    I agree that the system of taking points and what the progress is on the point could be a LOT clearer. Perhaps with a little timer bar above the faction symbol.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    I've never liked Capture and Hold. The design of the map encourages not fighting the enemy team. That's stupid and broken. Defending the nodes should be meaningful, assaulting them rapidly should be possible. As it is, the right way to win is to roll around in a giant group capturing lightly- or undefended nodes, avoiding major engagements as much as possible.

    Major engagements are the whole goddamn point of PvP. Maps should encourage fighting.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Dekkameron wrote: »
    I agree that the system of taking points and what the progress is on the point could be a LOT clearer. Perhaps with a little timer bar above the faction symbol.

    And I won't even bring up the "common" mmo.. almsot every game I have played CnH including non MMO's have a progress bar of some sort. So I concur to your comment!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    The only thing that really bothers me about Salvage Op is when it sometimes degrades into a kind of "Musical Badges" type scenario.

    The match is designed as a Capture and Hold game, and is most effectively won when a team does exactly that.

    Just my opinion, but I've always thought that the best strategy for Salvage Op. was to capture the 3 positions nearest each other and then spend the rest of the match defending those positions.

    For the red team that would mean grabbing the Asteroid Refinery, the Wrecked Shipyard and the Destroyed Station in the center. For the blue team just substitute the Astrogeology Lab for the Refinery.

    Played that way, the incentive is to battle it out with the other team over the "third badge". If one team has 3 the other can only have two.

    Granted, when playing with pick up groups (as I most often do), it's often difficult to come up with even that degreee of coordination. But I do often wonder why so many people seem to fly straight for the badge "in the cloud", it's the most isolated and therefore most difficult to defend.

    And I do think it's about time we saw some new PvP maps. Seems the only two anyone wants to play are Salvage Op and Cracked Planetoid. Anyone else's graphics card have a tough time with Solar Wind?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    LeLund wrote:
    Anyone else's graphics card have a tough time with Solar Wind?

    I don't queue that one for that reason.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    LeLund wrote:
    Anyone else's graphics card have a tough time with Solar Wind?

    No, but the howling sound annoys the heck out of me and for that reason I don't queue for it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Part of it is the scoring, I've done it a million times and think I know how it works. I do not believe it takes a solid color to score, Ive seen two solids score nothing while 3 stripes did score. I think solid just indicates you have it as much as you can and will take a while to lose, stripes mean you have it but could lose it quickly. It should be more clear because thats just what I think is going on, I could well be totally wrong.

    Second is people get tunnel vision on the super tanks and the team just follows a heal spammer out into the abyss. tons of times I fly around the entire map looking for teammates only to see them all off in the nowhere in a never ending fight. When on my whale half the time my goal is to get as many people as I can to follow me to where I want them to go.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Dekkameron wrote: »
    I agree that the system of taking points and what the progress is on the point could be a LOT clearer. Perhaps with a little timer bar above the faction symbol.

    Yeah, I think each point should be represented in a pie-graph like display like this. A HUD window would contain 5 of these pie graphs, one per point. And each graph for a point is a progress bar split in half. Red progress on left, blue on right, and once you fill half the bar the color changes from white-blue or white-red to the solid color, and the center becomes a solid color on the marker.

    Or put a 2D representation of the same graph/marker over the cap point to let you see it from afar.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    ambience wrote: »
    Yeah, I think each point should be represented in a pie-graph like display like this. A HUD window would contain 5 of these pie graphs, one per point. And each graph for a point is a progress bar split in half. Red progress on left, blue on right, and once you fill half the bar the color changes from white-blue or white-red to the solid color, and the center becomes a solid color on the marker.

    Or put a 2D representation of the same graph/marker over the cap point to let you see it from afar.

    Is it wrong that it makes me fuzzy inside that you bothered to spend about 20 minutes on MS paint making those lol
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Dekkameron wrote: »
    Is it wrong that it makes me fuzzy inside that you bothered to spend about 20 minutes on MS paint making those lol

    he could have done it in 2 minutes?^^ but although i don't think it makes it clearer for me - thx ambience:D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Dekkameron wrote: »
    Is it wrong that it makes me fuzzy inside that you bothered to spend about 20 minutes on MS paint making those lol

    Excel actually lol. Paint would have taken too long. I just popped in 8 cells with 45 inside and then plotted a pie chart like that and then changed the colors and titles on 5 copies of the chart.

    The other alternative is a bar like this:

    Neutral:
    ##########

    Red Capping/losing (100% on left, 0 on right)
    ##########

    Blue Capping (100% on right, 0 on left):
    ##########

    Red Control:
    ##########

    Blue Control:
    ##########
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Wow, and I would look incompetend or newbish when I admitted I had trouble understanding the flags. :)

    Seems I am not alone.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    ambience wrote: »
    Yeah, I think each point should be represented in a pie-graph like display like this. A HUD window would contain 5 of these pie graphs, one per point. And each graph for a point is a progress bar split in half. Red progress on left, blue on right, and once you fill half the bar the color changes from white-blue or white-red to the solid color, and the center becomes a solid color on the marker.

    Or put a 2D representation of the same graph/marker over the cap point to let you see it from afar.

    This graph in 3d as the actual point would be perfect. instead of the currect white X, or trace of blue/red and solid blue/red.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Dekkameron wrote: »
    Is it wrong that it makes me fuzzy inside that you bothered to spend about 20 minutes on MS paint making those lol

    Have you seen my mspaint. That's art compared to my cracked planet strat diagram.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    On the issue of more PvP maps...they need to implement a single queue of each type on each side, period. Klingons would have 1 ground queue and 1 space queue. Feds would have 2 of each (FvF and FvK). When the queue popped a random map would be chosen.

    This would solve 1] people spread accross the queues, 2] maps like shanty town never getting used because they are at the bottom of the list, and 3] people in multiple queues leading to partial teams.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Bostish wrote:
    Have you seen my mspaint. That's art compared to my cracked planet strat diagram.

    Awesome stuff! :) Made me giggle like schoolgirl (which i'm not btw)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Thank you :):D
Sign In or Register to comment.