Background Image

New Match Timers

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Krage, Aug 15, 2016.

?

What do you think about the new objective system and timers

  1. Its great, win fast or lose fast.

    10 vote(s)
    18.9%
  2. Its ok, needs to be balanced I've seen it favor attackers

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. It's ok, needs to be balanced I've seen it favor defenders

    26 vote(s)
    49.1%
  4. It's a step in the right direction on paper but should be reworked (Examples below)

    4 vote(s)
    7.5%
  5. Not a good change, I dislike it.

    12 vote(s)
    22.6%
  6. I don't care either way.

    1 vote(s)
    1.9%
  1. Krage Krage Prefectus

    So the overall matches have been reduced in time to win/lose and given time expansions as points are captured. Specifically:

    -All of the existing game modes have been tweaked! Instead of starting with longer match times, all matches will now start with less time on the clock but capturing a point for the first time will add time to the clock. The reasoning behind this change was to end less exciting matches sooner and boost the intensity of close matches even more! Here is a rundown of the changes:​
      • Deadlock (formerly known as Tug of War)
    >Match timer at the start of a round: 8 minutes.

    >Time added per point captured: 5 minutes.
      • Supremacy (formerly known as Classic / Domination)
    >Match timer at the start of a round: 8 minutes

    >Time added per point captured: 5 minutes
      • Fortress/Stronghold
    > Match timer at the start of a round: 18 minutes

    > Time added per point captured: 12 minutes
    IMO It looks great in theory but in play it definitely needs some work. Right now all the Supremecy and Deadlock Maps favor the defenders since time is so short.

    I've been in plenty of maps where the attackers on those maps can hold 2 out of the 3 objectives and still lose by a wide margin due to timers. They will need to match the point scoring to the new timers still I think since they are so slow to accrue.
  2. jeths jeths Ordinate

    I do kinda like this system, nothing as boring as getting roflstomped on maggon for 25min straight. It does still allow clutch comebacks (i've seen some) but i do agree that on domination maps, the timers are a bit too short.

    Yesterday i've had a game, eldar vs marines on torias, where marines held 2 points for the majority of the game and still lost, it was extremely close, but they still lost. I guess behaviour will have the necessary data to tweak it, but i like the system overall
    Krage likes this.
  3. XavierLight XavierLight Well-Known Member

    The timers will be tweaked bases on feedback and results.

    That said, I like the idea a lot and the few matches I played were fun and very close wins or losses. It will need adjustments but those will come with time.
    Krage likes this.
  4. GreyNight ArtemK Arkhona Vanguard

    Harkus should have timer increase by 3-4 minutes by each destroyed gate or its unplayable. Overtime should be added on deadlock and harkus ASAP for mid-game captures.

    I'd also add overtime for domination if point can increase time but that's just me.
    Iyan and Krage like this.
  5. The new timers can be seen good on certain map like olipsis / blackbolt/pegasus. It avoid to have one sided match where you are farmed.

    But on Harkus and certain very well defended map like Maggon and the other new one, the timer is too short to mount a proper attack except if you are playing in team.
    Krage likes this.
  6. It's been my tap out point, for me the new timers make the game far too rushed, untactical, and more of a grind. I don't consider it a bonus that the match can be lost in 8 minutes as an attacker, we're supposed to enjoy the fight, it shouldn't be some quick grind for the meta/quick xp gain. I still had fun even with balance issues because you could fight to the bitter end, but I'm pretty meh about it right now. I want bigger longer battles, not little skirmish sprints.
    duffmek, ArtemK and Krage like this.
  7. Tarl68 TARL68 Arkhona Vanguard

    for the love of the gods ... why???

    the matches needed to be longer not bloody shorter .... I dont play games so I can queue for the next match quicker, I play games so I can play the damn game
    ArtemK and Krage like this.
  8. Krage Krage Prefectus

    I am so conflicted on it.

    I like the idea of shit matches being broken up fast but then again you're probably gonna be in the same match with the same people against a premade or something since it just queues you again with everyone else.

    Then I love the idea of long ass battles even if the odds are stacked since I still get consistent gameplay without sitting in queue.

    I think, for me, this quick match stuff would feel much better in an open world or at least where it would push your team back or forward on the map to adjacent territories to feel more like a world battle...right now its just ending to start the same thing all over again since everyone hits the queue together.

    Still, I will admit, I am pleased they are trying different things that are new, at least new to me. Never seen this concept before.
  9. Lerdoc Katitof Well-Known Member

    Timers are a step in right direction.

    Problems start when the teams are equal and points go back and forth-that is attackers auto loss.
  10. Arkhan Recruit

    I don't like the new system.
    The game should be more of a tactical shooter.
    Playing as attacker now feels more like you have to rush to the next point like crazy.
    And as defender winning matches feels somehow like cheating because the attackers have such a rough time.
    Njord-Halfhand likes this.

Share This Page