Helistin Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Alderann is this = Whoever takes left/right first. The mid is rarely taken, as teams will have stealthers in wait to finish the last interrupt. Generally, assassin/shadow tanks simply weren't nerfed enough to discourage anyone to stop playing them. They are still the ultimate objective player, offering the most CCs, pulls, guards and the ability for a tank to stealth (lol?). Very true. Voidstar is awful also for partly the same reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaroneus Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I don't mind losing against teams who outplay us skillwise. I do however hate losing to comps we just can't beat. Both losses happened on alderaan. Both times they stacked tanks and unlike us, had a sin to either stop us from capping our side turret / get their turret first. It's extremely frustrating. And just so you know: Our comp includes 2 dps commandos and a dps scoundrel. Clearly we're not simply steamrolling because of our setup. I know what you mean. But you're talking about 2 games out of 109. Everybody hates losing to compositions they can't beat. After seeing the rise of the pyrotech and teams of 3-4 of them, you know what people on my server are doing? Re-rolling vanguards. In your case, pick up a couple shadows. I would also argue that playing smart is skill, and having the game plan to send the tanks with force speed to the sides is playing smart. Obviously this team has practiced either together or individually, and they're buying into a system that at least one of them thinks works. It sounds like skill to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owynyo Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 It sounds like skill to me. I'm not saying they're bad. In fact I commend teams who work out strategies. But as I said strategies that outplay you and strategies that you just can't beat because you lack a certain class are two different stories. Imagine you running into a guy with an AK-47 while you're only armed with a knife. He's skilled with his AK and puts you down with one bullet. Did you have a chance? No. That's what it feels like playing Civil War against such teams. Plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raphezir Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Being outplayed because the other team has a class youre lacking is why you think about your setup. What you want to have is: a: there shouldnt be anything unique to any class OR b: warzones where tools doesnt matter good luck with that If you cant send a Shadow/Assassin, send a Sage/Sorc and switch postions later. Go with him and stop whoever is going to interfere him. You have two stuns, stealth detection and a pull. If you have no stealhter to hold a turret at all, youre steup is just weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaDwurschT Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 However, the main problem here is obviously the warzone mechanic. The team, which is able to get their turret first, wins the game if both opponents are even gear- and skillwise. That is the annoying part here. Civil war is just badly designed. If you can get your turret first with an Assassin (or nerf their sprint to death and instead get your turret with sentinel-speed - doesn't matter at all) you win the whole Wazone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lpsmash Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Oh a 2k Assault Vanguard. You must be good. /bow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaroneus Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I'm not saying they're bad. In fact I commend teams who work out strategies. But as I said strategies that outplay you and strategies that you just can't beat because you lack a certain class are two different stories. Imagine you running into a guy with an AK-47 while you're only armed with a knife. He's skilled with his AK and puts you down with one bullet. Did you have a chance? No. That's what it feels like playing Civil War against such teams. Plain and simple. sorry if i'm coming off jack ***-ish, i'm not meaning to be. I do agree with you to a certain extent as my only counter argument (or tip i guess?) is adaptation. like if you're going up with a guy with an ak-47, and you have a knife, well perhaps you should get an ak-47 as well. Other than that I'm just trying to play devil's advocate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owynyo Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 Oh a 2k Assault Vanguard. You must be good. /bow Thanks. I think I'm fairly decent. Now go and be butthurt someplace else. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaDwurschT Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 sorry if i'm coming off jack ***-ish, i'm not meaning to be. I do agree with you to a certain extent as my only counter argument (or tip i guess?) is adaptation. like if you're going up with a guy with an ak-47, and you have a knife, well perhaps you should get an ak-47 as well. Other than that I'm just trying to play devil's advocate. I think we've moved beyond the point of class-discussion here. Plese don't bring the topic back on the agenda so one can focus on the essential problems here - which is obviously the easiness of defending the side-turrets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standhaft Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) okay deleted Edited July 5, 2012 by Standhaft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaroneus Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I think we've moved beyond the point of class-discussion here. Plese don't bring the topic back on the agenda so one can focus on the essential problems here - which is obviously the easiness of defending the side-turrets. I have no idea what you are talking about. How was I off-topic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owynyo Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 Losing to a team where 2 players were only battlemaster equipped and only 2 players had full gear (including mods) and the rest not even complete war hero gear, is a) because of the higher skill of the enemy team b) OBVIOUSLY OVERPOWERED Curbobe, nobody in our guild is saying we should've won this game. But you know damn well why you chose to roll with 2 tanks and have a sin on the enemies side node. There's no way any team can capture a side turret against a well organised team, ever. And let's be honest, having 2 tanks and 2 other classes in mid who all can taunt does make it nigh impossible to cap mid, too. But the sole fact that warzone mechanics allow teams to abuse certain classes/setups is a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standhaft Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Curbobe, nobody in our guild is saying we should've won this game. But you know damn well why you chose to roll with 2 tanks and have a sin on the enemies side node. There's no way any team can capture a side turret against a well organised team, ever. And let's be honest, having 2 tanks and 2 other classes in mid who all can taunt does make it nigh impossible to cap mid, too. But the sole fact that warzone mechanics allow teams to abuse certain classes/setups is a problem. I doubt there is any game, or any meta game, that does not favorize a certain team composition. At least from the games I have played. The meta game (usually) changes when the game is progressing but since BioWare "balances" only in big patches (1.1,1.2,1.3) it is pretty hard to say its an abuse. It is just better. Move on with the meta, or don't. Thats not the choice of the players you are playing against. Stealth is a part of this meta game. There are 2 options at the moment, move on and do not change anything or do something regarding tactics or team setup. I have not played enough rated warzones to say something is OP or something is not OP or to develop some tactics that involve something different than sending 1 left and right and the other 6 to mid without having a bad starting situation. You focus a little bit too much on why you lost that game and not how you could improve your tactics in this specific warzone. I also doubt there is no perfect way to balance 8 classes, where 2 are with stealth and 3 are able to taunt and guard. In my opinion you should only be able to taunt if you are in tank stance. Alderaan is in general, in my opinion, a bad designed warzone since win or loss are usually determined way too early. Novare coast is a better design, although I dont like it either. Also regarding class balance, when we are on topic, our class HAS to be nerfed in the near future. No doubt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milezski Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I think Curbobe´s statement was a little hasty which was why we asked him to delete it. Obviously the game was a very close one ( no team being able to get middle because it´s very hard to overpower ) and was only won because of setup, seeing that both teams seemed to be evenly matched apart from that. Of course different setups make it way way easier to win certain warzones, but it is also part of what makes you take a look at your setup and think about how you will fare in this or that warzone, trying to find a optimal compromise (a thing that is positive and negative... being a tactical instrument but forcing people to reroll just for optimal compositions) . Those setups more often than not will leave certain specs / classes completly out, which is a shame and should definitely be visited again by bioware (see Op Tanksins / Assault Vanguard or Defense Guardian in PvP). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaDwurschT Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) Again, I can only respond the way I did before. I think we've moved beyond the point of class-discussion here. Plese don't bring the topic back on the agenda so one can focus on the essential problems here - which is obviously the easiness of defending the side-turrets. If you had no shadow the same problem would still exist. We honestly don't wanna discuss any specific game or opponent. It's just about a mechanism preventing civil war from beeing a viable warzone in terms of competitiveness. Edited July 5, 2012 by MaDwurschT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owynyo Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 I doubt there is any game, or any meta game, that does not favorize a certain team composition. At least from the games I have played. The meta game (usually) changes when the game is progressing but since BioWare "balances" only in big patches (1.1,1.2,1.3) it is pretty hard to say its an abuse. It is just better. Move on with the meta, or don't. Thats not the choice of the players you are playing against. Stealth is a part of this meta game. There are 2 options at the moment, move on and do not change anything or do something regarding tactics or team setup. I have not played enough rated warzones to say something is OP or something is not OP or to develop some tactics that involve something different than sending 1 left and right and the other 6 to mid without having a bad starting situation. You focus a little bit too much on why you lost that game and not how you could improve your tactics in this specific warzone. I also doubt there is no perfect way to balance 8 classes, where 2 are with stealth and 3 are able to taunt and guard. In my opinion you should only be able to taunt if you are in tank stance. Alderaan is in general, in my opinion, a bad designed warzone since win or loss are usually determined way too early. Novare coast is a better design, although I dont like it either. Also regarding class balance, when we are on topic, our class HAS to be nerfed in the near future. No doubt I agree with everything. And we did try to come up with tactics for civil war. It's not the first game we lost to a tanky setup with a shadow/sin . And let's be honest, unless we change our setup there's little chance for us to compete against teams like yours who have the luxury to have a very good setup, whether it was by design or by accident, that does not concern me. I'm sure you'll do well in the future as you do have some very good players (Especially liked the way your healers moved). (But you'll agree that even the best gear doesn't help if you face a team with the best dps classes/setup in general). I don't know if this meta game, as you called it, is for me anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pureeffinmetal Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Now that's awkward. http://i.imgur.com/zmAsK.jpg 107-2 and you come to the forums about the 2 losses to cry about it? You're just asking to get flamed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standhaft Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) 107-2 and you come to the forums about the 2 losses to cry about it? You're just asking to get flamed. Umm, yeah. Dunno how to express it politely.. The other game you lost on alderaan the enemies were just lucky (I saw the screenshot). By looking at the stats, deaths etc.. That was one game out of literally hundred. How many games did you win vs. R A W on alderaan who also have a shadow tank, or EraZe who also have an outstanding shadow? Edited July 5, 2012 by Standhaft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Averran Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Hello everyone, We have recently had to clean up a number of posts in this thread that were in violation of our Rules of Conduct and wanted to remind everyone to stay on topic while avoiding the following: Personal Attacks or Insults. Creating posts for the purpose of derailing the topic, eliciting negative reactions or spreading false information. Replying in a manner that adds nothing constructive to the conversation. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter and will continue to monitor the conversation. Above all else please remember that we are here to help with issues that come up, you need not respond to them and extend the argument. In short, report don't respond. This thread is not being closed, please feel free to carry on so long as you abide by the forum rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owynyo Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 Umm, yeah. Dunno how to express it politely.. The other game you lost on alderaan the enemies were just lucky (I saw the screenshot). By looking at the stats, deaths etc.. That was one game out of literally hundred. How many games did you win vs. R A W on alderaan who also have a shadow tank, or EraZe who also have an outstanding shadow? A shadow (tank) in itself is not the problem. It's the warzone mechanic if the enemy team has multiple tanks and can hold mid, or any turret for that matter, forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standhaft Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) A shadow (tank) in itself is not the problem. It's the warzone mechanic if the enemy team has multiple tanks and can hold mid, or any turret for that matter, forever. Then I got your opening post wrong Send assassin to own side node and cap faster than enemy and/or send assassin to enemy side node and prevent them from capping it first. Then turtle in middle - you win. (Stacking tanks and PTs/Maras helps a ton. Before you say it only works in Civil War - imagine facing this team in Huttball. Yeah, they can pull your tank into the fire many, many times. And did I mention they have a guarded sin tank? Don't think I did. Attacking in Void Star? Good luck getting past the tanks and the maras. Edited July 5, 2012 by Standhaft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaDwurschT Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 Then I got your opening post wrong Discussion has moved on. While the open post was - of course - about shadows one has recognized it's not the primary problem here. So with all do respect, quoting the opening post on page 5 doesn't make any sense at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjkdollarbanny Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 just check out online on the screen that autor posted. 9 guys. his "marvelous" score is for winning 1 same noobs ( maybe pug) team over and over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synxos Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 Now that's awkward. http://i.imgur.com/zmAsK.jpg you just pwnd him. on a side note, I love how your current ranking, is higher than your highest ranking.... GG BW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earsrgood Posted July 8, 2012 Share Posted July 8, 2012 Is this not just part of the game? Different set ups have different advantages. Is this QQ because you lost 2 RWZs against a better team? I can't stand QQing about class imbalance, if u have played an MMO long enough before you will know every class has its day. I am enjoying my vanguard at the moment but know I will be hit with the nerf bat soon. That's how it sounds to me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts