SilentMethod

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
is silent still talking?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hai

[/ QUOTE ]
.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hai2u2

[ QUOTE ]
is silent still talking?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hai

Insulting and wasting time ftl indeed.

Good discussion so far though.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just put on your tinfoil hats, gather around the campfire and ban it from your ladder. Let the Devs worry about adding more wing sets in the game and not nerfing a power to fit the needs of a few whiney pvp SGs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its late so let me be blunt, go [censored] yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think anyone really cares about sonics in zones, although I do know of one evil [censored] on Victory who will perma cage you until you give up and leave the zone. You know who you are *cough*W-Des*cough* .


[/ QUOTE ]
Hey... I haven't done that in a while... >_>

[/ QUOTE ]

I used to go into zones on my mind/ff when heroes would mob-gank villains and cage the villains they were about to kill. I'd even send them a friendly tell, letting them know they're free to leave the area without harm >.>

I see. That makes a good bit more sense, at least, though I'm still not sure that cage is so brokenly overpowered as to merit changes.

I have no objection to the claim that there isn't a "specific" counter to cage (as you accurately put it), but I wouldn't support some sort of change because:

1) Diminishing returns still applies; bring whatever team you want, but the fact that one with an excessive amount of cagers isn't going to be successful against one that doesn't (or rather, one that uses cagers in moderation), inherently demonstrates that cage powers alone are not game-breaking.

EDIT: One could say that cage powers "in moderation" coupled with other key team elements is a very powerful lineup, but finding a good lineup is what PvP's been all about. There's a reason we generally don't run scrappers and dark defenders

2) Yes, there's no specific counter, I agree. But between diminishing returns (above), and (as you also pointed out) the fact that one person caged is one person the other team can't get a kill on, and the fact that general counters can and have been used to reduce the effectiveness of cages... I don't see where the power is broken. It's simply outside the norm in one aspect, but not in an aspect that makes it uber or explotive and thus not in an aspect that needs change.

3) This is a bit more subjective and speculative, so disregard if you wish, but I'm generally anti-change on issues like this, as long as there isn't a glaringly exploitive or bugged power. Countless examples of change being a bad thing exist; look what happened when the debt-capped blasters of PvE complained about Defiance but like I said, that's kind of a side point.

Again, I don't do the whole personal attack on the forums deal, so I'll leave those parts alone.

Objectivity is (or.. should be, I'd hope) what determines which arguments hold weight, which isn't something that either of us decides.

"l2p n00b" is a fairly inaccurate oversimplification of my point of view. I'm just trying to keep possible counters from going overlooked.

[ QUOTE ]
There's no objective reason for cages to be the only powers in the game that cannot be reactively countered. If you think there is, I'm interested to hear why.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's the argument now -- reactive counters -- then I'll agree that there is no reactive counter (obviously) to being caged. I'm not arguing in favor of cages being "the only powers in the game" with no reactive counter; I'm arguing against interfering with cages because there doesn't seem to be anything broken about it, given that there are other, non-reactive counters to at least substantially cut back on the effectiveness of caging. I'm unsure as to why those counters aren't "enough", since some of them can be used by everyone (and all of them can be used in certain cases, like for instance, on a storm team).

[ QUOTE ]
So far, all I've heard is "because it'll make my powers suck and I don't want that". Which, in my book, "doesn't seem to hold any weight".

[/ QUOTE ]

I've also been exclusively (except using my lol-mind/ff once for fun) on the receiving end of cages, so that's not an argument you've heard from me. I'd also agree with you that it doesn't hold any weight since that's about as subjective as it gets

[ QUOTE ]
There are plenty of suggestions that do require teams to give something up to beat cage. Some are wasting their best buff on a caged person (cage resist to AB) or bringing a less common set (cage resist to O2, or decreased duration to a TA debuff). One of the most popular suggestions doesn't actually nerf cage at all, rather it nerfs only the tactic of permacaging by providing suppression or decreasing returns. Most people just think there should be some sort of direct counter to cage, just as there is to every other effect. Burst damage? Heals. Slows? SB or thaw or AB. TK or TP foe? ID. Holds, sleeps, etc? CM and Clarity.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since you didn't include "Being perma-caged? <list of things I've already mentioned>", I can only conclude that you're seeking some sort of reactionary counter and disregarding the other forms of counter. Yes, cage doesn't have a reactionary counter -- once you're in, you're in it for the full duration. Is that the problem with cage? Why would that be a problem? It's a "penalty" for not pre-empting in some fashion, like dying to a spike is a penalty for not stocking up on resistance beforehand.

The only other thing I can conclude is that you listed a bunch of applicable buffs as counters. Is your issue with cage that there's no "set and forget" buff? That the only ways to counter it (aside from massive defense buffs / ToHit debuffs on the cagers to make the power miss altogether, which are still valid counters as well) is looking out for oneself instead of waiting for a buffer teammate to make his/her buffing rounds? If so, I'm afraid I don't understand why that's a problem. It seems to bring diversity to the areas of disruption and debuffs.

The point is that there are counters, they're just difficult and take practice to implement. Cages are a good strategy for the same reason anything else is; the actions to counter it are difficult to master. If that is the problem with cage -- that players don't want to take the time to try out and practice mastering the existing counters -- then... eh. That would be a sad state of affairs

[ QUOTE ]
Back in the day people considered more than one cager on a team to be cheesy. Two cagers a team being one of the most standard line ups (meaning on average 1/4 of the people don't actually get to play in most of the match), would be considered out of hand. To say nothing of the 4 cager line up Freaks brought to beat OS, which even by todays jaded standards seems to cross the line for most people. Pretending that something's only out of wack if people bring 8 cagers to an 8v8 is silly and I think you know it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh. I've always been in favor of teams exploring lineups if it's done for the sake of trying something new (as opposed to, for instance, for the sake of manipulating scores in order to make "random" map selection not random any more), even if they end up getting labeled as silly.

Whether or not someone bringing 2 cagers or 4 cagers or 8 grav/ff's is out of whack doesn't seem relevant, and I wasn't trying to imply that we'd only have an issue with cage if people started bringing teams like that. But the "point" that the lineups of today would be considered "cheesy or cheap" by yesterday's standards doesn't seem to hold any weight. If they would be considered cheating or exploitive, then sure, that would be more relevant to discussion of changing something in the powers.

But the fact that teams have discovered new, effective lineups involving cagers doesn't point to a problem that only the devs can fix. It points to an obstacle for opposing teams that exploration and practice of the existing counters can help them to deal with.

[ QUOTE ]
But now that we're seeing 2-4 sonics + grav cages on a single team, is nobody else seeing that it might start getting out of hand in the near future?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see it getting out of hand. Bringing more cagers has costs to support and damage, which again has been one of the strongest indirect counters to caging because it's a check on the cage's power.

I'd welcome teams to bring 8 sonics or grav/ff's, if that's what you really think we're headed toward, but I highly doubt that that (or anything even remotely close to "out of hand") is going to be a successful lineup.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
..The last sentence does answer "yes" to whether or not there are counters to being caged.

[/ QUOTE ]
Too bad that's not the question I asked. I said "directly" and/or "reactively". To which the answer is "no". You keep re-phrasing my question to give the answer you want to give instead of answering the question honestly. That's a very old and cheap debate tactic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on your definition of "direct," I guess. There's no "reactive" counter to cage aside from waiting it out and preparing for the next one, but all the counters I've talked about seem to be direct ones (what else would they be?).

And despite Fallspark's post being a little over the top, honestly, I can see the point he was trying to make. I know there are teams and players already using successful counters to minimize the effectiveness of cage as much as they currently can without resorting to "we need some kind of change." That's evidence that at least some team lineups (i.e. the example of stormies) and at least some strategies are already working, as counters to cage. Isn't that enough? What more is needed?

Further, the recent suggestion (inspirations) would allow every team to have the ability to virtually nullify cages. At second glance, that seems like an awfully broad leap. So, for example, sure, you practically must bring a kin (hero-side) to counter slows, but you can bring any kind of lineup you want and still be able to nullify cages.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...Seriously, I don't do the whole "personal attack on the forums" thing, and I'm not trying to act or fool or be high and mighty. I'm not sitting here with a thesaurus, I'm typing how I usually type when I make an argument. Please don't let things devolve to a debate over my word choice.

[/ QUOTE ]
Then you may want to choose your words a little more carefully to avoid the seeming condescention. You appear to have a fairly firm grasp of the English language, so one might assume that you are intentionally conveying that tone. If you say you're not, I'll take you at face value.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dunno what else to say. I'm not trying to be condescending.

Finally, quick note, it seems pretty cage-nerf-esque to give resist to cage to orange inspirations as opposed to, say, break frees. The end result would be teams stocking up on oranges as they (more or less) already do, barely changing their playstyle at all, and gaining cage immunity for at least half a match.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It'd be terrible if a single break free freed you from cage... that would honestly neuter the power.

[/ QUOTE ]

unfortunately like most other forms of mez in the game

[/ QUOTE ]
Then make it 3-4 BFs. Whatever. Some way to react to being caged > no way to react to being caged.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's what would honestly satisfy the people concerned with the way cages work now, then I don't see why not. It's extreme enough to the point where either cage targets would neuter their own damage resistance (fewer oranges) and/or damage (fewer reds), or accept being caged.

It seems like sacrificing one's own damage output and survivability in exchange for five 30-second get-out-of-Cage-free cards is a foolish tradeoff, so it likely wouldn't have any practical effect aside from appeasing people who are unhappy with the existing pre-emptive counters to cage.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

...Correct, I didn't answer your question; I usually don't answer questions based on faulty assumptions.

[/ QUOTE ]
What faulty assumption, exactly?

Are you saying a *direct* counter to cage exists exists? Or even a way to *react* to the cage effect? And if not, then why should it stay that way when every other power in the game has a way to directly and/or reactively counter it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.. again, I've already given several ways to counter being permanently caged. There's no way to "react" to it; once you're caged, you're caged. Next step is to learn from that and be more prepared to pre-empt it next time. But it can be pre-empted, which has been my point all along in listing the possible counters for it that already exist and have been used.

..The last sentence does answer "yes" to whether or not there are counters to being caged.

To answer the other question, it follows from the counters above that cage is not unique.. every disruptive tactic can be marginalized in one way or another. Refusing to bring or use the necessary tools (phase, Hurricane, etc) to counter cages does not mean that they don't exist.

[ QUOTE ]
Stop blowing smoke and answer the question. (and stop with the high and mighty act, you're not fooling anyone, and it's assinine).

[/ QUOTE ]

...Seriously, I don't do the whole "personal attack on the forums" thing, and I'm not trying to act or fool or be high and mighty. I'm not sitting here with a thesaurus, I'm typing how I usually type when I make an argument. Please don't let things devolve to a debate over my word choice.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Like I said, the only argument I've seen in favor of "doing something" to cage that holds any objective substance is the one that cages have no viable counter, and hopefully the above comments address that clearly enough.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's the crux of the matter, and no, your above comments *don't* address that clearly enough.

Every "counter" you suggest is a generic counter that can be applied to any situation and any AT/powerset/player/etc. Every power in the game has a way to be directly countered in some way. Cage does not. Many believe it should.

Why do you believe it should remain unique and without a way to counter it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because the counters I listed can be used against all other tactics.. doesn't make them invalid counters.

You said it clearly and accurately yourself, they're generic counters. If you take away generic counters like breaking line of sight and evasion, then things like AS (among other things) also have "no" counters. It's not unique at all, it's just something that takes a little more practice and skill to counter.

Not to mention, there's still the obvious counter that it's not as unique and powerful as claimed. If 8 cager teams could run the field in PvP matches, I'd agree that there's something broken and in need of a fix, but they can't. That fact in and of itself is a check on the "power" of the cage power.

[/ QUOTE ]
You still haven't answered my question. Why do you believe that cages should be the only power in the game without a direct counter?

[/ QUOTE ]

...Correct, I didn't answer your question; I usually don't answer questions based on faulty assumptions. Again, you put it perfectly yourself: counters exist, "generic" (as you termed them) or not.

[ QUOTE ]
Breaking LOS is a direct counter for AS, the same way it is for taunt. It's reactionary and allows a player with skill to avoid being affected, or to reduce the effects of that power. With cages, once you're caged, you're caged, there is no way to react to minimize the effect. That's what most people are taking exception to and what you've failed to justify so far with your arguments.

[/ QUOTE ]

Breaking LoS is a generic counter that still applies here... unless you've gotten caged while NOT in the LoS of a cager before, which I've never seen happen. The fact that you need to be pre-emptive about it doesn't render it not viable.

But even if you toss aside the LoS argument, there are still other things I've listed that have apparently gone untried by those clamoring for a cage nerf. Hell, I tried it myself the other day:

There was a fairly lopsided match where we ended up going rogue, and I noticed that every time I would go (on my kin) to try to solo the other team's kin, their grav troller would come cage me. After this happened twice, I put two and two together and then phased after dealing damage to the kin for a third time. Grav troller comes by, apparently fired something at me (I honestly don't even know what the grav cage animation is), I unphased and went back to soloing the kin.

Yeah, it's a simple, isolated example. But it's a perfect illustration of what you can try. I'm just concerned that I'm seeing the same pattern of suggesting counters and then having those counters virtually ignored as if they don't exist and haven't been successfully used by other players, with practice.

It'd be terrible if a single break free freed you from cage... that would honestly neuter the power.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Like I said, the only argument I've seen in favor of "doing something" to cage that holds any objective substance is the one that cages have no viable counter, and hopefully the above comments address that clearly enough.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's the crux of the matter, and no, your above comments *don't* address that clearly enough.

Every "counter" you suggest is a generic counter that can be applied to any situation and any AT/powerset/player/etc. Every power in the game has a way to be directly countered in some way. Cage does not. Many believe it should.

Why do you believe it should remain unique and without a way to counter it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because the counters I listed can be used against all other tactics.. doesn't make them invalid counters.

You said it clearly and accurately yourself, they're generic counters. If you take away generic counters like breaking line of sight and evasion, then things like AS (among other things) also have "no" counters. It's not unique at all, it's just something that takes a little more practice and skill to counter.

Not to mention, there's still the obvious counter that it's not as unique and powerful as claimed. If 8 cager teams could run the field in PvP matches, I'd agree that there's something broken and in need of a fix, but they can't. That fact in and of itself is a check on the "power" of the cage power.

RE: Shocker , I came from a town mostly of hicks (aka anywhere in Pennsylvania not named Philly or Pitt), so I'm trying not to sound like my roots >.>

Nah, again, not trying to sound high-minded.. just trying to avoid misinterpretation.

Yeah, it'd skew fights that typically involve attacking key targets by allowing the empaths and other buffers to hyperbuff those key targets after a death. Seems like it'd slow down gameplay and lower scores.

Not saying that's good or bad, but... sounds like an unnecessary change.

[ QUOTE ]
And I really cant say that I understand your AR argument. From what I can gather, you are following the rule of thumb of buff under performing sets / powers instead of nerfing the overpowered ones. So your suggesting that every power in the game be made so that it doesnt have a counter? 1-shotting people with blaze wouldnt be a good idea IMO

[/ QUOTE ]

It was sarcasm.. kind of a joking parallel to the "taunt has counters but cage doesn't" argument

And yes, admittedly, some of the counters to a good cager are not always viable, but only in a somewhat similar fashion to death evasion and TK evasion (among other things) not always being viable.

From what I've seen, the argument with possible substance here is the one that cage has no counters. My problem with accepting that is that it doesn't seem like a lot of the methods have been given a fair shake by those attacking them.

[ QUOTE ]
Killing the cager might make things slightly more difficult, but all he has to do is use one power on you every 15 seconds, which is not that hard to do. This is also forcing your entire team to change their focus, and most likely go after the less ideal option.

[/ QUOTE ]

Foremost, the latter part of that kind of subjectively assumes that all teams would rather farm something other than sonics.

But the real issue I have (again, going back to the counters not being given a fair shake) is that no, that's not "all" killing a cager does; it also takes away their Adrenalin Boost every time they get it, as well as their Hasten/Geas when they use it. Not to mention, they have to deal with OAS time and re-toggling their toggles, as well as catch up on any buffs they missed out on while trying to evade the incoming damage. That's a pretty significant counter, if you ask me.

Even disrupting the cagers is an option. I'm not saying 4 storms, 2 ff's, 2 emps is a must, but I'm certainly saying that RI from rads can make something of a difference in the short run, but more noticeably, a few Hurricanes can make caging a futile effort, especially for builds missing any of the following: Tactics, Aim, Power Build Up, Geas.

Even Phasing and evasion are still viable.. phasing, in particular. Emps, blasters, rads (as an example, not a sweeping generality that covers everything, of course) all have cyclical jobs... emps get particularly busy during an enemy spike, blasters and rads get particularly busy during their own spike. Not that they're never doing anything else, but it's certainly viable to phase in or hide from line-of-sight between one of those cycles in order to avoid a cage.

The subject isn't what happened to tankers a year or two ago, nor is it what will happen to the poor people who rolled sonics if cage were to be completely neutered altogether. Those topics make for great discussion but aren't exactly arguments.

Like I said, the only argument I've seen in favor of "doing something" to cage that holds any objective substance is the one that cages have no viable counter, and hopefully the above comments address that clearly enough.

Passing that, we're back to the unfun argument, which is a subjective one, so it's one that can't really be debated or put into objective rules. There's no rule against ruining someone else's fun, and if "unfun" is what caging honestly does to some people (I've been near-perma-caged on my blaster before.. can't say it was legitimately "unfun," but that's my own subjectivity, right?), then I don't know what else to say. But it's not another team's problem to accomodate those players' negative experience, nor is it the game's problem requiring dev intervention for the same purpose.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My perspective regarding the OAS normalization wasn't an attempt to reward luck over skill, it was an attempt to further the quite obvious goal of OAS in the first place.. protecting the player who just respawned and preventing matches from becoming regular farms of the same one un-saveable player.

[/ QUOTE ]

A reference to clarify this point... a simple look in the direction of game theory shows predictability to be the absolute worst possible trait when someone's "out to get you," which is exactly the case in duels and team matches alike.

Viewed in that light, unpredictability seems to be the only "actual" protection OAS can offer... if you take that away, then any time a player dies, they're a guaranteed unbuffed sitting duck 10 seconds (or whatever it's "normalized" to) after their respawn.

[/ QUOTE ]


What would you think of changing the OAS 0-20 seconds random luck to anything normalized is better (moving things from luck to skill ftw), but what would you think of switching the current OAS mechanic to the PvP enabled mechanic that happens in zones? This would allow MMs set up time, let people get buffed, and happen at a regular rate so people don't get screwed by a string of bad OAS timers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh. I'm pretty much indifferent toward that, objectively. I can see the benefits of a change like that, or rather, I can see how it would make some people happy.

Subjectively speaking, I'd say it actually results in an overprotection... some degree of unpredictability seems fitting, if nothing else, to keep things from becoming 100% mechanical.

Defense and -ToHit is definitely not a BS argument. Have fun caging someone against a storm team with 2 or 3 Hurricanes on you... or while you've got RI on you when trying to hit a double-power-boosted-Fort Blaster.

With respect to timing, it's not a far leap in logic if you're being perma-caged to assume that when one drops, another one's coming. I can think of at least one JAL player who does this from time to time and manages to avoid being perma-caged... perhaps it's not as difficult as you think.

You know how sometimes you'll go to spike someone, maybe get off one Blaze if you're lucky and then someone calls "he's just running/jumping away" and that it's a futile chase? Pre-emptively avoiding an incoming cage (anticipating the next one, the same way as above) is an option, though admittedly it disrupts your own actions.

...Then again, so does running away from a TK, for instance. So "yes that's an option, but it's a bad one because it disrupts your gameplay" isn't a valid argument.

And please don't nitpick my word usage, nitpick my arguments instead I'm not trying to be high-minded, just trying to avoid misinterpretation.

I wasn't saying that you specifically said cages were OP; I was saying that some people said that.

Subjectivity insofar as "it's not fun" arguments, have no place in an objective rule. I wasn't "up" on the happenings involving storm team rules when the ladder first came around, but I imagine a similar argument was used.

I know people argued that it's not fun to play against storm teams, and there were allegations that there was no counter to a bunch of stormies and that they were overpowered, but the subjective "it's not fun" turned out to be irrelevant in the final decision, and the "there's no counter" argument turned out to be completely wrong.

The parallel to Taunt is a cookie-cutter argument that you could support any issue with... well, let's see, most epic shields that squishies get, have counters to Lethal damage (defense or resistance), regardless of any other effects (some resist fire as well, some resist cold as well, etc). This puts Assault Rifle at a disadvantage just like Taunt is, so we should give all hero shields some direct counter to all other damage so that it's on par with other damage types. ...Right?

If someone spends a match perma-caged, sorry, that's just how it goes. My advice would be to use any one of the counters I've listed before (disrupting opposing cagers and/or their support; using phase before an incoming cage; stacking defense on oneself or stacking -ACC on enemy; general evasion) to try to lessen the cager's effects.

As for the -fun value? Everyone's out to have fun on their own, but of course, the other team isn't going to bend over backward for you if you're not having a positive game experience, whether you're being TK'd, farmed, slowed, mezzed, or in this case, caged. That's just how it goes.

[ QUOTE ]
five dollar words aside

[/ QUOTE ]

Indubitably!

(to quote Fricti0n)

[ QUOTE ]
My perspective regarding the OAS normalization wasn't an attempt to reward luck over skill, it was an attempt to further the quite obvious goal of OAS in the first place.. protecting the player who just respawned and preventing matches from becoming regular farms of the same one un-saveable player.

[/ QUOTE ]

A reference to clarify this point... a simple look in the direction of game theory shows predictability to be the absolute worst possible trait when someone's "out to get you," which is exactly the case in duels and team matches alike.

Viewed in that light, unpredictability seems to be the only "actual" protection OAS can offer... if you take that away, then any time a player dies, they're a guaranteed unbuffed sitting duck 10 seconds (or whatever it's "normalized" to) after their respawn.

Not to nitpick or start fights (though that's already been done, forum PvP for the win eh?), but:

[ QUOTE ]
Caging, as it is now, is really really dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't get me wrong, subjective opinions are fine, but it doesn't do an awful lot of good in furthering your point when you try to use them to, well, further your point. The fact that cages aren't fun for the people being caged, should be irrelevant to this discussion. That's the whole point of objective rules.

[ QUOTE ]
The argument that keeping someone perma-dead does the same thing is ridiculous. There are counters to being killed. There is no direct counter to being perma-caged.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the contrary, there are counters, which are nearly identical in nature though require a bit more "extreme" effort and good timing: phasing, high amounts of defense / toHit buffs on the opponents, general evasion and staying out of range, et cetera.

I can see someone pointing out, "Well, those counters are way more extreme and difficult to perform," which isn't a valid counterargument because it's not like there are objective match-deciding points for caging players like there are for defeating players.

Furthermore, a lot of the arguments "against" cages in general seem to point out how amazingly broken and powerful the cage is. Such an argument is self-defeating in actual practice... yeah, people have said "why don't you run 8 cagers if they're so good?", which led to sarcastic "we never thought of that before" responses, but seriously: if it's as brokenly good as you claim it is, why not run 8 cagers?

...You don't, because bringing a cager inherently has costs associated with it that make bringing more than "a few" impractical. It balances itself out; all that remains is to learn how to counter the lineups that you face.

A better question is whether defense caps exist. None of the messing around in Mids that I've done has ever produced a cap... if there is one, it's insanely high to the point where it's probably almost unreachable.

Just speculation on my part, but, yeah. Also, two cents, I don't think there should be status and status resist caps.

EDIT: If anything would produce a defense cap, it'd probably be 7-stack Vengeance. Wonder what the numbers on that, are?

[ QUOTE ]
i think dying is annoying and ruins my fun ( i pay to play ) so
the DEV should make death suppresion so no one can kill me
more than once per 3 minute or add death +res to oranges
thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

Regarding what RoboBug said, no, I doubt #3 would make cages obsolete, but I see the argument in favor of #3 as strangely parallel to the sarcastic argument presented above.

There's no reason to change what's already working just fine -- there are effective counters to cagers as a whole, already, among which are taking out the cagers (or the support buffing them), phasing before you're about to get re-caged, or general evasiveness to force opposing cagers to chase you across the map.

I honestly don't see what's wrong with the cage the way it stands now. It's simply another tactic -- a good one, at that -- and the team that counters it best and utilizes its own benefits, will win. How's that different from any other tactic?

Being spiked and killed makes you unable to play, too, for a similar duration of time... that's just how it goes. Taking players out of play is the definition of getting your team the advantage... or something like that. It's late. I'm tired. ;[