This is too much of a point difference...

Dangerx17Dangerx17 Member Posts: 126 ★★
in General Discussion


This really just shows how speed is better than an actual better fight, I'm only rewarded 2,000 more points for about 16% more health but my opponent was rewarded 6,000 more points for finishing 50 seconds faster that's a bit much

I'm over the fact of taking a loss so it's not about win or lose for this it's just the way how points are ran in this mode are not balanced
«1

Comments

  • solopolosolopolo Member Posts: 890 ★★★
    My concern here is much less about the time difference but the hp difference. The score difference as far as time is 100% fair here considering you nearly trippled their time. Meanwhile he more than tripled your hp lost, so I feel like that should yield at least a slightly higher point difference. I do think time should be worth more than hp though, since factors such as suicides, immunities, defenders guaranteeing damage, etc. can play a factor in hp differences that the player can't do much, if anything, to change. However time spent is largely based on player skill.
  • AverageDesiAverageDesi Member Posts: 5,260 ★★★★★
    solopolo said:

    My concern here is much less about the time difference but the hp difference. The score difference as far as time is 100% fair here considering you nearly trippled their time. Meanwhile he more than tripled your hp lost, so I feel like that should yield at least a slightly higher point difference. I do think time should be worth more than hp though, since factors such as suicides, immunities, defenders guaranteeing damage, etc. can play a factor in hp differences that the player can't do much, if anything, to change. However time spent is largely based on player skill.

    "Tripled health difference lose" is a meaningless term. If someone ends in 100% health and opponent on 99.9% , the health difference ratio is infinite. It's the numerical difference that counts and is better so
  • GiuliameijGiuliameij Member Posts: 1,849 ★★★★
    solopolo said:

    My concern here is much less about the time difference but the hp difference. The score difference as far as time is 100% fair here considering you nearly trippled their time. Meanwhile he more than tripled your hp lost, so I feel like that should yield at least a slightly higher point difference. I do think time should be worth more than hp though, since factors such as suicides, immunities, defenders guaranteeing damage, etc. can play a factor in hp differences that the player can't do much, if anything, to change. However time spent is largely based on player skill.

    Not completely true on the time part. Suicides play a HUGE role in the time to kill someone. That is mostly why they are so popular in arena. You basically only need 2/3 the time per fight. So the hp lost ofsets the time you save.
  • DoosraDoosra Member Posts: 360 ★★★
    Dangerx17 said:



    This really just shows how speed is better than an actual better fight, I'm only rewarded 2,000 more points for about 16% more health but my opponent was rewarded 6,000 more points for finishing 50 seconds faster that's a bit much

    I'm over the fact of taking a loss so it's not about win or lose for this it's just the way how points are ran in this mode are not balanced

    This is maybe just to nullify quake I guess
  • Dangerx17Dangerx17 Member Posts: 126 ★★
    TheBair123 said:


    i agree with you in that time should not be this much of a factor in the game mode, but in this scenario, the time difference was very great. albeit, i think the score should've been closer, but i think a loss here is justified. you and your opponent both kept over 3/4 of your health, but you definitely kept a good bit more. although, your opponent used A LOT less time than you, and that tipped the scale

    I agree with the fact that he finished way faster it's just the amount of points he got in return to me finishing with more health, in a situation where the A.I decided to just swipe back constantly and not throw their special I'm pretty much guaranteed the loss because of that even tho I come out of the fight with more than 90% health it's a bit much considered it depends on the kind of A.I u get instead of the good gameplay u do
  • Colinwhitworth69Colinwhitworth69 Member Posts: 7,470 ★★★★★
    As long as we’re all playing by the same rules, I’m good. But that 29 second fight looks suspect. I’ve battled some top players in the game and no one has finished a fight that quick.
  • GinjabredMonstaGinjabredMonsta Member, Guardian Posts: 6,489 Guardian
    Colinwhitworth69 said:

    As long as we’re all playing by the same rules, I’m good. But that 29 second fight looks suspect. I’ve battled some top players in the game and no one has finished a fight that quick.

    I've done a fight in about 30ish seconds in battle grounds. Depends on who use and who you're against
  • AverageDesiAverageDesi Member Posts: 5,260 ★★★★★
    Colinwhitworth69 said:

    As long as we’re all playing by the same rules, I’m good. But that 29 second fight looks suspect. I’ve battled some top players in the game and no one has finished a fight that quick.

    It's domino.
  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Member Posts: 9,264 ★★★★★
    Kabam Miike said:

    OP: Thank you for the feedback on scoring. While I do think that this one is a fair outcome become of the large difference in time, we will be giving our team feedback on scoring as a whole, and I will include this.

    Miike is scoring likely to be a rigid system with minor tweaks over time, or is it something you’re planning on altering fairly dramatically season on season to spice things up? (If BGs end up having seasons or something similar). Not that there’s one that’s better than the other necessarily, I’m just curious

    Or is this up in the air and yet to be decided?
  • The_man001The_man001 Member Posts: 624 ★★★
    Scoring is perfectly fine for me in battlegrounds. Like time is the most imp thing in this battles. The faster u finish just proves how aggressive u are and that deserves great amt of points. That's why in this battlegrounds champs that k.o. Fast are top favourites.. Cgr ghost aa ht etc...

    But here the 29s domino fight on this node is really sus
  • The_man001The_man001 Member Posts: 624 ★★★
    The_man001 said:

    Scoring is perfectly fine for me in battlegrounds. Like time is the most imp thing in this battles. The faster u finish just proves how aggressive u are and that deserves great amt of points. That's why in this battlegrounds champs that k.o. Fast are top favourites.. Cgr ghost aa ht etc...

    But here the 29s domino fight on this node is really sus

    I don't know much details but for parameters that should decides more points in order 1. Killing the opponent
    2. Time
    3. Health remaining of the attacker
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Member Posts: 7,233 ★★★★★
    Werewrym said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    OP: Thank you for the feedback on scoring. While I do think that this one is a fair outcome become of the large difference in time, we will be giving our team feedback on scoring as a whole, and I will include this.

    I very much disagree with this. In the photo above the OP most definitely should have won. In the opponent's score, the time counts for a little over 20% of his total points... That is an insane contribution from the timer. The OP clearly has the better matchup and the results show that he was the better player in this round, with much less health lost, but because Thing is a tankier champion to fight against and inherently takes longer to fight he loses. How does that make any sense at all?

    I know I have expressed this opinion many times now but I don't understand how the data that has been acquired by now doesn't show that the time scoring only incentivizes poor matchups and fast gameplay. It is extremely unhealthy for the gamemode in the long term. Time means nothing in this game and often times the best matchups for fights take longer than the brute force method. Unfortunately that doesn't translate well in the current system and we either use brute force method or lose.

    It is the most frustrating thing to lose matches and the final scoreboard clearly shows that you are the better player.
    They incentivize nukes everywhere lately. I hated the AW tie breaker being time as well. Then they wonder why most of the community doesn't care or even understand how to judge utility champs most of the time and only get excited for whoever the next nuke is.
  • TyEdgeTyEdge Member Posts: 3,141 ★★★★★
    You took 175% longer and only had 16% more health. Lol.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,709 ★★★★★
    Kabam Miike said:

    Werewrym said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    OP: Thank you for the feedback on scoring. While I do think that this one is a fair outcome become of the large difference in time, we will be giving our team feedback on scoring as a whole, and I will include this.

    I very much disagree with this. In the photo above the OP most definitely should have won. In the opponent's score, the time counts for a little over 20% of his total points... That is an insane contribution from the timer. The OP clearly has the better matchup and the results show that he was the better player in this round, with much less health lost, but because Thing is a tankier champion to fight against and inherently takes longer to fight he loses. How does that make any sense at all?

    I know I have expressed this opinion many times now but I don't understand how the data that has been acquired by now doesn't show that the time scoring only incentivizes poor matchups and fast gameplay. It is extremely unhealthy for the gamemode in the long term. Time means nothing in this game and often times the best matchups for fights take longer than the brute force method. Unfortunately that doesn't translate well in the current system and we either use brute force method or lose.

    It is the most frustrating thing to lose matches and the final scoreboard clearly shows that you are the better player.
    @BitterSteel put this really well in another thread, so I'll share that here: "The objective at the moment isn’t “beat the opponent”. It’s “get more points than the opponent”. Those points come from beating the opponent yes, but also how fast you do it and how much health you have at the end."

    There are multiple priorities to juggle here, and choosing defenders you think are going to slip up the opponent or lead to longer fights is definitely a part of one strategy that you can choose to employ.
    Have to say I agree in this case. It's not the same as other game modes. There are multiple factors to keep in mind. It may take some time to adjust priorities, but it also allows for more cases on both sides.
  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Member Posts: 9,264 ★★★★★
    Kabam Miike said:

    Werewrym said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    OP: Thank you for the feedback on scoring. While I do think that this one is a fair outcome become of the large difference in time, we will be giving our team feedback on scoring as a whole, and I will include this.

    I very much disagree with this. In the photo above the OP most definitely should have won. In the opponent's score, the time counts for a little over 20% of his total points... That is an insane contribution from the timer. The OP clearly has the better matchup and the results show that he was the better player in this round, with much less health lost, but because Thing is a tankier champion to fight against and inherently takes longer to fight he loses. How does that make any sense at all?

    I know I have expressed this opinion many times now but I don't understand how the data that has been acquired by now doesn't show that the time scoring only incentivizes poor matchups and fast gameplay. It is extremely unhealthy for the gamemode in the long term. Time means nothing in this game and often times the best matchups for fights take longer than the brute force method. Unfortunately that doesn't translate well in the current system and we either use brute force method or lose.

    It is the most frustrating thing to lose matches and the final scoreboard clearly shows that you are the better player.
    @BitterSteel put this really well in another thread, so I'll share that here: "The objective at the moment isn’t “beat the opponent”. It’s “get more points than the opponent”. Those points come from beating the opponent yes, but also how fast you do it and how much health you have at the end."

    There are multiple priorities to juggle here, and choosing defenders you think are going to slip up the opponent or lead to longer fights is definitely a part of one strategy that you can choose to employ.
    Weird to say I agree with myself, but yeah, I think that the point systems are rules that are set then we play to them. If we place a Thing because we know he’ll take longer then that’s strategy playing to the rules that are set. Same with bringing a fast attacker.

    The great thing (as you answered in this thread Miike) is that these points are flexible and can be tweaked if needed. So if the game mode needs a fresh points system you could just tweak Attacker health remaining to be more important and voila, meta is changed, people bring in regenerating champs to capitalise on the points system.

    Each points system will have different strengths and focusses, I just personally hope that we see these explored enough to keep the mode exciting, and if this beta is anything to go by, I’ll be finding this exciting and playing BGs for a long time. I’m in no doubt when I say it’s the best thing added to MCOC ever (second only to Mr Negative).
  • WerewrymWerewrym Member Posts: 2,830 ★★★★★
    Worknprogress said:

    Werewrym said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    OP: Thank you for the feedback on scoring. While I do think that this one is a fair outcome become of the large difference in time, we will be giving our team feedback on scoring as a whole, and I will include this.

    I very much disagree with this. In the photo above the OP most definitely should have won. In the opponent's score, the time counts for a little over 20% of his total points... That is an insane contribution from the timer. The OP clearly has the better matchup and the results show that he was the better player in this round, with much less health lost, but because Thing is a tankier champion to fight against and inherently takes longer to fight he loses. How does that make any sense at all?

    I know I have expressed this opinion many times now but I don't understand how the data that has been acquired by now doesn't show that the time scoring only incentivizes poor matchups and fast gameplay. It is extremely unhealthy for the gamemode in the long term. Time means nothing in this game and often times the best matchups for fights take longer than the brute force method. Unfortunately that doesn't translate well in the current system and we either use brute force method or lose.

    It is the most frustrating thing to lose matches and the final scoreboard clearly shows that you are the better player.
    They incentivize nukes everywhere lately. I hated the AW tie breaker being time as well. Then they wonder why most of the community doesn't care or even understand how to judge utility champs most of the time and only get excited for whoever the next nuke is.
    Yeah, I really don't like it. I'll take a Nimrod, or Omega Sentinel any day over Hercules or even Kitty. Not saying those champs are bad, and I can appreciate some good nuking here and there (especially in AQ). But for gamemodes like AW and BGs I was really hoping for a higher emphasis on utility.
  • Crys23Crys23 Member Posts: 849 ★★★★
    Werewrym said:

    Worknprogress said:

    Werewrym said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    OP: Thank you for the feedback on scoring. While I do think that this one is a fair outcome become of the large difference in time, we will be giving our team feedback on scoring as a whole, and I will include this.

    I very much disagree with this. In the photo above the OP most definitely should have won. In the opponent's score, the time counts for a little over 20% of his total points... That is an insane contribution from the timer. The OP clearly has the better matchup and the results show that he was the better player in this round, with much less health lost, but because Thing is a tankier champion to fight against and inherently takes longer to fight he loses. How does that make any sense at all?

    I know I have expressed this opinion many times now but I don't understand how the data that has been acquired by now doesn't show that the time scoring only incentivizes poor matchups and fast gameplay. It is extremely unhealthy for the gamemode in the long term. Time means nothing in this game and often times the best matchups for fights take longer than the brute force method. Unfortunately that doesn't translate well in the current system and we either use brute force method or lose.

    It is the most frustrating thing to lose matches and the final scoreboard clearly shows that you are the better player.
    They incentivize nukes everywhere lately. I hated the AW tie breaker being time as well. Then they wonder why most of the community doesn't care or even understand how to judge utility champs most of the time and only get excited for whoever the next nuke is.
    Yeah, I really don't like it. I'll take a Nimrod, or Omega Sentinel any day over Hercules or even Kitty. Not saying those champs are bad, and I can appreciate some good nuking here and there (especially in AQ). But for gamemodes like AW and BGs I was really hoping for a higher emphasis on utility.
    You can nuke things fast with Nimrod too. Got a 26 sec fight with him. Obviously he does that just in certain mathchups.
    Also got a 23 sec nuke with Ghost.
    Anyway, I think scoring is pretty good right now. It actually isn't bad running suicides. Of course, the masochism node helps on defense, shrugging the debuffs at the start, healing occasionaly to mitigate recoil. Most other nodes would make the defenders much easier to kill when running suicides.
    What kabam has to do is rotate the nodes. And also consider adding something for attackers too, from time to time. Like a boost for a certain class, certain tag, champs with armor, something to help with the node on defense.
    The possibilities to mix and match all these variables are endless. Have to keep the mode fresh and everyone on their toes
  • WerewrymWerewrym Member Posts: 2,830 ★★★★★
    Crys23 said:

    Werewrym said:

    Worknprogress said:

    Werewrym said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    OP: Thank you for the feedback on scoring. While I do think that this one is a fair outcome become of the large difference in time, we will be giving our team feedback on scoring as a whole, and I will include this.

    I very much disagree with this. In the photo above the OP most definitely should have won. In the opponent's score, the time counts for a little over 20% of his total points... That is an insane contribution from the timer. The OP clearly has the better matchup and the results show that he was the better player in this round, with much less health lost, but because Thing is a tankier champion to fight against and inherently takes longer to fight he loses. How does that make any sense at all?

    I know I have expressed this opinion many times now but I don't understand how the data that has been acquired by now doesn't show that the time scoring only incentivizes poor matchups and fast gameplay. It is extremely unhealthy for the gamemode in the long term. Time means nothing in this game and often times the best matchups for fights take longer than the brute force method. Unfortunately that doesn't translate well in the current system and we either use brute force method or lose.

    It is the most frustrating thing to lose matches and the final scoreboard clearly shows that you are the better player.
    They incentivize nukes everywhere lately. I hated the AW tie breaker being time as well. Then they wonder why most of the community doesn't care or even understand how to judge utility champs most of the time and only get excited for whoever the next nuke is.
    Yeah, I really don't like it. I'll take a Nimrod, or Omega Sentinel any day over Hercules or even Kitty. Not saying those champs are bad, and I can appreciate some good nuking here and there (especially in AQ). But for gamemodes like AW and BGs I was really hoping for a higher emphasis on utility.
    You can nuke things fast with Nimrod too. Got a 26 sec fight with him. Obviously he does that just in certain mathchups.
    Also got a 23 sec nuke with Ghost.
    Anyway, I think scoring is pretty good right now. It actually isn't bad running suicides. Of course, the masochism node helps on defense, shrugging the debuffs at the start, healing occasionaly to mitigate recoil. Most other nodes would make the defenders much easier to kill when running suicides.
    What kabam has to do is rotate the nodes. And also consider adding something for attackers too, from time to time. Like a boost for a certain class, certain tag, champs with armor, something to help with the node on defense.
    The possibilities to mix and match all these variables are endless. Have to keep the mode fresh and everyone on their toes
    I guess I completely disagree with the fact that suicides should be viable in this mode. The fact that running suicides actually works tells me that the scoring is broken.
  • GoddessIliasGoddessIlias Member Posts: 706 ★★★★
    Werewrym said:

    Crys23 said:

    Werewrym said:

    Worknprogress said:

    Werewrym said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    OP: Thank you for the feedback on scoring. While I do think that this one is a fair outcome become of the large difference in time, we will be giving our team feedback on scoring as a whole, and I will include this.

    I very much disagree with this. In the photo above the OP most definitely should have won. In the opponent's score, the time counts for a little over 20% of his total points... That is an insane contribution from the timer. The OP clearly has the better matchup and the results show that he was the better player in this round, with much less health lost, but because Thing is a tankier champion to fight against and inherently takes longer to fight he loses. How does that make any sense at all?

    I know I have expressed this opinion many times now but I don't understand how the data that has been acquired by now doesn't show that the time scoring only incentivizes poor matchups and fast gameplay. It is extremely unhealthy for the gamemode in the long term. Time means nothing in this game and often times the best matchups for fights take longer than the brute force method. Unfortunately that doesn't translate well in the current system and we either use brute force method or lose.

    It is the most frustrating thing to lose matches and the final scoreboard clearly shows that you are the better player.
    They incentivize nukes everywhere lately. I hated the AW tie breaker being time as well. Then they wonder why most of the community doesn't care or even understand how to judge utility champs most of the time and only get excited for whoever the next nuke is.
    Yeah, I really don't like it. I'll take a Nimrod, or Omega Sentinel any day over Hercules or even Kitty. Not saying those champs are bad, and I can appreciate some good nuking here and there (especially in AQ). But for gamemodes like AW and BGs I was really hoping for a higher emphasis on utility.
    You can nuke things fast with Nimrod too. Got a 26 sec fight with him. Obviously he does that just in certain mathchups.
    Also got a 23 sec nuke with Ghost.
    Anyway, I think scoring is pretty good right now. It actually isn't bad running suicides. Of course, the masochism node helps on defense, shrugging the debuffs at the start, healing occasionaly to mitigate recoil. Most other nodes would make the defenders much easier to kill when running suicides.
    What kabam has to do is rotate the nodes. And also consider adding something for attackers too, from time to time. Like a boost for a certain class, certain tag, champs with armor, something to help with the node on defense.
    The possibilities to mix and match all these variables are endless. Have to keep the mode fresh and everyone on their toes
    I guess I completely disagree with the fact that suicides should be viable in this mode. The fact that running suicides actually works tells me that the scoring is broken.
    As someone who was too lazy to turn off suicides, I quite like it that suicides are viable in the mode. There’s been several matchups that I only lost due to having suicides, and several that I probably would not have won without suicides. I think that when suicides are active you definitely have to think a whoooole lot more during draft, and since my thumbs suck, I’ll take more thinking if it gives me a slightly better chance. In short, while I don’t think the scoring in the format is perfect, (I would make health remaining for both champions worth less imo) I think it’s good enough that lots of strategy is involved regardless of mastery setup.

    P.S. Masacre is the best attacker in the format I will die on this hill
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Member Posts: 7,233 ★★★★★
    Werewrym said:

    Crys23 said:

    Werewrym said:

    Worknprogress said:

    Werewrym said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    OP: Thank you for the feedback on scoring. While I do think that this one is a fair outcome become of the large difference in time, we will be giving our team feedback on scoring as a whole, and I will include this.

    I very much disagree with this. In the photo above the OP most definitely should have won. In the opponent's score, the time counts for a little over 20% of his total points... That is an insane contribution from the timer. The OP clearly has the better matchup and the results show that he was the better player in this round, with much less health lost, but because Thing is a tankier champion to fight against and inherently takes longer to fight he loses. How does that make any sense at all?

    I know I have expressed this opinion many times now but I don't understand how the data that has been acquired by now doesn't show that the time scoring only incentivizes poor matchups and fast gameplay. It is extremely unhealthy for the gamemode in the long term. Time means nothing in this game and often times the best matchups for fights take longer than the brute force method. Unfortunately that doesn't translate well in the current system and we either use brute force method or lose.

    It is the most frustrating thing to lose matches and the final scoreboard clearly shows that you are the better player.
    They incentivize nukes everywhere lately. I hated the AW tie breaker being time as well. Then they wonder why most of the community doesn't care or even understand how to judge utility champs most of the time and only get excited for whoever the next nuke is.
    Yeah, I really don't like it. I'll take a Nimrod, or Omega Sentinel any day over Hercules or even Kitty. Not saying those champs are bad, and I can appreciate some good nuking here and there (especially in AQ). But for gamemodes like AW and BGs I was really hoping for a higher emphasis on utility.
    You can nuke things fast with Nimrod too. Got a 26 sec fight with him. Obviously he does that just in certain mathchups.
    Also got a 23 sec nuke with Ghost.
    Anyway, I think scoring is pretty good right now. It actually isn't bad running suicides. Of course, the masochism node helps on defense, shrugging the debuffs at the start, healing occasionaly to mitigate recoil. Most other nodes would make the defenders much easier to kill when running suicides.
    What kabam has to do is rotate the nodes. And also consider adding something for attackers too, from time to time. Like a boost for a certain class, certain tag, champs with armor, something to help with the node on defense.
    The possibilities to mix and match all these variables are endless. Have to keep the mode fresh and everyone on their toes
    I guess I completely disagree with the fact that suicides should be viable in this mode. The fact that running suicides actually works tells me that the scoring is broken.
    Definitely not a fan of this either. Seemed those of us that choose to not use them would actually have an advantage for once but yet again it's just another DPS above all mode
  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Member Posts: 9,264 ★★★★★
    Worknprogress said:

    Werewrym said:

    Crys23 said:

    Werewrym said:

    Worknprogress said:

    Werewrym said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    OP: Thank you for the feedback on scoring. While I do think that this one is a fair outcome become of the large difference in time, we will be giving our team feedback on scoring as a whole, and I will include this.

    I very much disagree with this. In the photo above the OP most definitely should have won. In the opponent's score, the time counts for a little over 20% of his total points... That is an insane contribution from the timer. The OP clearly has the better matchup and the results show that he was the better player in this round, with much less health lost, but because Thing is a tankier champion to fight against and inherently takes longer to fight he loses. How does that make any sense at all?

    I know I have expressed this opinion many times now but I don't understand how the data that has been acquired by now doesn't show that the time scoring only incentivizes poor matchups and fast gameplay. It is extremely unhealthy for the gamemode in the long term. Time means nothing in this game and often times the best matchups for fights take longer than the brute force method. Unfortunately that doesn't translate well in the current system and we either use brute force method or lose.

    It is the most frustrating thing to lose matches and the final scoreboard clearly shows that you are the better player.
    They incentivize nukes everywhere lately. I hated the AW tie breaker being time as well. Then they wonder why most of the community doesn't care or even understand how to judge utility champs most of the time and only get excited for whoever the next nuke is.
    Yeah, I really don't like it. I'll take a Nimrod, or Omega Sentinel any day over Hercules or even Kitty. Not saying those champs are bad, and I can appreciate some good nuking here and there (especially in AQ). But for gamemodes like AW and BGs I was really hoping for a higher emphasis on utility.
    You can nuke things fast with Nimrod too. Got a 26 sec fight with him. Obviously he does that just in certain mathchups.
    Also got a 23 sec nuke with Ghost.
    Anyway, I think scoring is pretty good right now. It actually isn't bad running suicides. Of course, the masochism node helps on defense, shrugging the debuffs at the start, healing occasionaly to mitigate recoil. Most other nodes would make the defenders much easier to kill when running suicides.
    What kabam has to do is rotate the nodes. And also consider adding something for attackers too, from time to time. Like a boost for a certain class, certain tag, champs with armor, something to help with the node on defense.
    The possibilities to mix and match all these variables are endless. Have to keep the mode fresh and everyone on their toes
    I guess I completely disagree with the fact that suicides should be viable in this mode. The fact that running suicides actually works tells me that the scoring is broken.
    Definitely not a fan of this either. Seemed those of us that choose to not use them would actually have an advantage for once but yet again it's just another DPS above all mode
    I think one thing I disagree with here is that non-suicides users *do* have an advantage over suicides users. Suicides in this mode isn't all up-side and no down, you lose health through recoil, double edge and liquid courage all costing you points and your defender loses health faster through those same mechanics. Right now, people with suicides are gambling that doing the fight with 60% more attack outweighs the downsides of losing points through attacker health and your defender having less overall health due to recoil and poison/bleed.

    I think the thing that is making suicides such a viable tactic right now is masochism. It gets rid of the bleed *and* poison, meaning your defender doesn't lose that massive chunk of health due to willpower not scaling with base health but suicides debuffs do. Once the node is changed, you can bet your bottom dollar that suicides will show up less and less.

    At the moment, the gamble is that recoil alone won't make the fight too easy, the mode isn't quite long enough for recoil to be a big enough detriment, but once the bleed and poison come back with a new node, that is going to start people losing matches and bye bye suicides.

    I think because this is the only view we have of battlegrounds and suicides apparently dominate it, we are (kinda rightly) worried that suicides shouldn't dominate. But that's only because the node that's been chosen is pretty pro-suicides. Imagine if the node that had been chosen was heal block, or encroaching stun, or special delivery. It would be a pretty different story.

    Not to mention, I'm sure the points will be tweaked to try different things. As the mode is flexible enough to alter the system with little fuss.
Sign In or Register to comment.