06-15-2011, 08:01 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-15-2011, 08:03 PM by Capt ARGH!.)
[quote name='Surrey' timestamp='1308154927' post='275789']
[quote name='Capt ARGH!' timestamp='1308089784' post='275752']
when players have to be afk they tend to float instead of fly safe
increasing the amount of safe zones and making them quicker to fly to would decrease the amount of afk floating as players passing a safe would just park there instead
[/quote]
I'm sure increasing the number of safe zones and making them open would increase the amount of people using safe... but that doesn't make it a good idea. If you add more safe zones and make them simple to access then it's just going to promote people constantly running in when being chased or out of reps/rockets. It will become nearly impossible to chase down a turret, or a high bounty. The amount of people using it to afk will maybe increase very slightly, where the amount of safe zone laming will increase dramatically. The trade off is a terrible one. Catering to the few people who think it's too difficult or time consuming to spend the 20 seconds to fly to a safe zone at the expense of the current game play is a very bad idea. It's pretty unanimous that people already want to see a smaller map to prevent the ease that running/greening is right now, so keeping this size map and adding more safe zones would not only allow for constant running/greening (especially in a small populated zone) but also add in the ease of just popping into a safe zone when you run out of specials and waiting out anyone trying to kill you. It's just not good for game play at all.
[/quote]
these are good points.. appart from the 20 second thing.. it's an underestimate.
RE: the trade off is terrible.
yes i agree, from your point of view, it would be terrible -if you imagine a map riddled with open safe zones.
(which is an interesting concept actually and could provide some refreshing game play.)
But i get what youââ¬â¢re saying; you don't like 'lamer tactics'. ok fair enough. i feel this comes under the: players want the safes removed from the strategy of game play as i mentioned in post 1.
i'm saying: more safes please. i'm not saying i want a million of them. just a couple more in good places. well designed. ...
lameness is actually something i like to some extent and try to be good at: rocketing in stealth firing a line of bullets at a point on radar is something i try to do well, some would say that's lame.. it's still a skill and enjoyable and worth getting good at if you want to take out a turret.
i draw the lameness-line at spiders mine repping... that's tiresome. but if we take that as the baseline of lame-dom should we not cater for play above that base line?
as i've said i remember plenty of exchanges based around safes and find the challenge of killing a player who's using a safe as a shield entertaining and the win satisfying. i also enjoy being that guy who's using the safe. usually these battles flip between hunter and hunted. it's good stuff and fun to play.
that part of the game is now gone. save in a couple of idiot box's, one of which is a de-evolved version of the castle, which isn't that great to play, and the other, J12 has no way out.
I say that more well designed open safe areas would be - on balance - GOOD for game play and chaos. if it were done carefully and in moderation.
really what triggered me into starting this thread is when i was killed again AFK and made me think.. why should that happen. why shouldn't i just be allowed to park in 2 seconds, answer the door and come back .. ever had a postman wait at the door with a parcel for 30 seconds?
HI!!, sorry i've been a while getting to the door, i had to park my space ship.
[quote name='Capt ARGH!' timestamp='1308089784' post='275752']
when players have to be afk they tend to float instead of fly safe
increasing the amount of safe zones and making them quicker to fly to would decrease the amount of afk floating as players passing a safe would just park there instead
[/quote]
I'm sure increasing the number of safe zones and making them open would increase the amount of people using safe... but that doesn't make it a good idea. If you add more safe zones and make them simple to access then it's just going to promote people constantly running in when being chased or out of reps/rockets. It will become nearly impossible to chase down a turret, or a high bounty. The amount of people using it to afk will maybe increase very slightly, where the amount of safe zone laming will increase dramatically. The trade off is a terrible one. Catering to the few people who think it's too difficult or time consuming to spend the 20 seconds to fly to a safe zone at the expense of the current game play is a very bad idea. It's pretty unanimous that people already want to see a smaller map to prevent the ease that running/greening is right now, so keeping this size map and adding more safe zones would not only allow for constant running/greening (especially in a small populated zone) but also add in the ease of just popping into a safe zone when you run out of specials and waiting out anyone trying to kill you. It's just not good for game play at all.
[/quote]
these are good points.. appart from the 20 second thing.. it's an underestimate.
RE: the trade off is terrible.
yes i agree, from your point of view, it would be terrible -if you imagine a map riddled with open safe zones.
(which is an interesting concept actually and could provide some refreshing game play.)
But i get what youââ¬â¢re saying; you don't like 'lamer tactics'. ok fair enough. i feel this comes under the: players want the safes removed from the strategy of game play as i mentioned in post 1.
i'm saying: more safes please. i'm not saying i want a million of them. just a couple more in good places. well designed. ...
lameness is actually something i like to some extent and try to be good at: rocketing in stealth firing a line of bullets at a point on radar is something i try to do well, some would say that's lame.. it's still a skill and enjoyable and worth getting good at if you want to take out a turret.
i draw the lameness-line at spiders mine repping... that's tiresome. but if we take that as the baseline of lame-dom should we not cater for play above that base line?
as i've said i remember plenty of exchanges based around safes and find the challenge of killing a player who's using a safe as a shield entertaining and the win satisfying. i also enjoy being that guy who's using the safe. usually these battles flip between hunter and hunted. it's good stuff and fun to play.
that part of the game is now gone. save in a couple of idiot box's, one of which is a de-evolved version of the castle, which isn't that great to play, and the other, J12 has no way out.
I say that more well designed open safe areas would be - on balance - GOOD for game play and chaos. if it were done carefully and in moderation.
really what triggered me into starting this thread is when i was killed again AFK and made me think.. why should that happen. why shouldn't i just be allowed to park in 2 seconds, answer the door and come back .. ever had a postman wait at the door with a parcel for 30 seconds?
HI!!, sorry i've been a while getting to the door, i had to park my space ship.