D6 Taunter limitation proposal
By
black_barrier,
Posted on: 2010-04-09 08:27 in Everything about PvP
So wait are you referring to tank taunt or brute taunt?
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/6685529/3-hot-and-vex-3
Quote:
Actually a valid question (even if meant as a troll), what, exactly is a taunter? Is it a tank or brute? Is it anyone with a taunt inclufding pool powers? What about a tank w/o taunt in his build?
|
Originally Posted by Borderline Boss
So wait are you referring to tank taunt or brute taunt?
|
Infinity and Victory mostly
dUmb, etc.
lolz PvP anymore, Market PvP for fun and profit
WAT BOUT SCAPORZ AND WAT BOUT IF U HAF BUT NOT USE IT HRMM!? AM I STIL BE FERFIT IF I AM NOT USE!?
Hrmm!?
Quote:
Now that U2BG ran off the Renegades, I think we are safe to assume no one is going to bring scrappers to matches anymore.|
Originally Posted by perilX
WAT BOUT SCAPORZ AND WAT BOUT IF U HAF BUT NOT USE IT HRMM!? AM I STIL BE FERFIT IF I AM NOT USE!?
Hrmm!? |
-Kiri
Limiting ATs or powersets is a step in the wrong direction. Some powers (ala sharks) have forced it but Taunt is not one of those powers. If we start this, we might as well limit the number of Psi/Ems on a team because that's why we have taunters in the first place.
Limiting the numbers of taunters is a bad idea. If you go down that route you'll be catering to the teams that want nothing but Emps and Psi/Ems which is boring as hell. Can we please keep a little variety?
I propose to limit psi ems per team !!!!tuuuu maaach daaaaaam
Quote:
Ok, seriously did you think before you wrote that or did you just spew nonsense and just click "Submit Reply"?|
Originally Posted by Mercury_Down
Limiting ATs or powersets is a step in the wrong direction. Some powers (ala sharks) have forced it but Taunt is not one of those powers. If we start this, we might as well limit the number of Psi/Ems on a team because that's why we have taunters in the first place.
Limiting the numbers of taunters is a bad idea. If you go down that route you'll be catering to the teams that want nothing but Emps and Psi/Ems which is boring as hell. Can we please keep a little variety? Nonononononononononononononononono! |
Factual Statements
1) Taunt is broken in the fact that on certain maps it can not be broken even if line of sight is broken
2) Taunt is broken in the fact that you can theoretically force a tie and play completely non competitively if you wanted, which is one of the reasons why stalkers are limited to two per match.
3) Taunt is no different then old school perma caging. If you are a halfway decent player you can completely eliminate 1 opposing player from the match.
Personal feelings regarding taunt:
1) Tauntbots are an excuse for putting bad players into a team environment (re: Kat). If you cant survive or evade, we can put you on a sack of large HP where you can autofollow 1 person with 1 power on autofire.
2) Having to bring another taunter to counter an opposing team's taunter is kinda retarded, you basically force two people to fiteclub the entire match. If anyone watched the first BoBC vs U2BG you would know what I mean, it was absolutely hilarious watching the taunters race around the map.
3) If you are on a taunter you are not learning evasion, you are not learning locking, you are not learning to pursue... You are basically learning bad habits that will just bring down your skill.
I think limiting taunters to 2 per match is a good idea imo. Taunters would still be a serious threat if played correctly, and they could still be countered with a damage heavy team.
-Kiri
Quote:
errr|
Originally Posted by Emo_Bitter
Proposing that in D6 matches we limit the usage of Taunters to 2 to ensure the value of play is retained for those who D6 was designed and intended for. This has been an ongoing debate and will eventually be brought up. If this goes to a captain vote and I am not there I want to go on record that I VOTE YES TO LIMITING D6 TO 2 TAUNTERS.
|
this was discussed in vent, and afaik, our team said no limiting anything.
Quote:
4) Adding a Taunter to a lineup removes offensive potential. (Different from i12, when adding a cager added debuff potential).|
Originally Posted by IcyKiri
Ok, seriously did you think before you wrote that or did you just spew nonsense and just click "Submit Reply"?
Factual Statements 1) Taunt is broken in the fact that on certain maps it can not be broken even if line of sight is broken 2) Taunt is broken in the fact that you can theoretically force a tie and play completely non competitively if you wanted, which is one of the reasons why stalkers are limited to two per match. 3) Taunt is no different then old school perma caging. If you are a halfway decent player you can completely eliminate 1 opposing player from the match. |
5) Taunt is not suppressing, even though it should.
6) i17 does not have any pvp fixes, so anything you ban, it's gonna stick for a long time (I'm not in beta, so try kicking me).
Personal Feelings:
I have huge issues with these fiteclubby ideas regarding the limiting of ANY AT's in the ladder. These are high end matches. The underlying reason for any limits on ATs revolves around how lineup submissions are being handled.
All of these ******** problems would be solved if we simply set rigid time constraints on joining matches and actually enforced them. Don't submit your lineup, just have everyone in the match that's gonna play by 9.05PM, if you're lacking someone, at 9:05PM, GG, play with what you've got or get DQ'd.
The reason a team full of taunters is OP is because we are doing this retardo fiteclub **** where the knowledge required to counter such a team has no place.
Barrier, what you are proposing involving lineups would result in everyone logging in at 9:04 and joining the match so folks can't counter. What we have now is better than that.
Besides the double-blind lineups ads a bit of strategy in having to guess what your opponent would bring (or simply not to care and bring your best lineup).
Infinity and Victory mostly
dUmb, etc.
lolz PvP anymore, Market PvP for fun and profit
Quote:
This.|
Originally Posted by IcyKiri
3) Taunt is no different then old school perma caging. If you are a halfway decent player you can completely eliminate 1 opposing player from the match.
|
It's like the broken controller cages that got b& for issues and issues.
Quote:
By limiting taunters you are limiting the resources of teams. At least one of the teams (CIGAL and EP?) sometimes has issues having enough players show up with the right toons. By taking out their extra taunters you are taking away their option to play for a tie, which as much as you (or me) may dislike, it is a competitive decision. Taking away that option would give a clear advantage to the teams who can constantly field players with decent Psi/Ems, Emps and disruption.
|
Originally Posted by IcyKiri
Ok, seriously did you think before you wrote that or did you just spew nonsense and just click "Submit Reply"?
Factual Statements 1) Taunt is broken in the fact that on certain maps it can not be broken even if line of sight is broken 2) Taunt is broken in the fact that you can theoretically force a tie and play completely non competitively if you wanted, which is one of the reasons why stalkers are limited to two per match. 3) Taunt is no different then old school perma caging. If you are a halfway decent player you can completely eliminate 1 opposing player from the match. Personal feelings regarding taunt: 1) Tauntbots are an excuse for putting bad players into a team environment (re: Kat). If you cant survive or evade, we can put you on a sack of large HP where you can autofollow 1 person with 1 power on autofire. 2) Having to bring another taunter to counter an opposing team's taunter is kinda retarded, you basically force two people to fiteclub the entire match. If anyone watched the first BoBC vs U2BG you would know what I mean, it was absolutely hilarious watching the taunters race around the map. 3) If you are on a taunter you are not learning evasion, you are not learning locking, you are not learning to pursue... You are basically learning bad habits that will just bring down your skill. I think limiting taunters to 2 per match is a good idea imo. Taunters would still be a serious threat if played correctly, and they could still be countered with a damage heavy team. -Kiri |
Agree with barrier on this one.
As someone who spent a good 8 out of 10 minutes of matches in cages pre I12, I never complained about it here. You just had to get out of the cage, rebuff your teammates or make saves as you could.
The only stuff that should be limited or banned is bugged powers. If you want to make a case Taunt is bugged, and I believe barrier has, that's another story. I just hate limiting stuff to begin with, to be honest.
Not a captain, just my two cents. Psoma and Slax and Lib will decide for us after we've discussed it.
Questions about the game, either side? /t @Neuronia or @Neuronium, with your queries!
168760: A Death in the Gish. 3 missions, 1-14. Easy to solo.
Infinity Villains
Champion, Pinnacle, Virtue Heroes
Quote:
Agreed.
|
Originally Posted by Neuronia
Agree with barrier on this one.
As someone who spent a good 8 out of 10 minutes of matches in cages pre I12, I never complained about it here. You just had to get out of the cage, rebuff your teammates or make saves as you could. The only stuff that should be limited or banned is bugged powers. If you want to make a case Taunt is bugged, and I believe barrier has, that's another story. I just hate limiting stuff to begin with, to be honest. Not a captain, just my two cents. Psoma and Slax and Lib will decide for us after we've discussed it. |
Quote:
Yeah, that's not true.|
Originally Posted by Slax
Barrier, what you are proposing involving lineups would result in everyone logging in at 9:04 and joining the match so folks can't counter. What we have now is better than that.
|
Renegades used to keep people on multiple accounts logged in just in case of a contingency arising.
If I see 5 tanks roaming around from Divine's team, I'd happily just alt-tab to my stalker and solve the issue. I could also just keep Scribe logged on his stalker and ready to join the match in case we chose not to run a standard jump team, or rei on a fort. but shitomgthisrequiresthoughtzomg... BAN IT!
how things stand at this point, this league is only half a notch better than the **** we had to put up with in i13, when it was 1kb-ers, 2 emps, 2 stalkers; except that what a rule limiting taunters would accomplish would be to fully standardize teams to 2 emps, 3-5 blasters + maybe 1 rad/psi, 0-2 yourtokendisruptors (with dumb being the current exception to this rule, as they have always been).
also, as much as you know i <3 you kiri and pretty much all of your team, i find it laughable that the team with the most glad jav procs is the one asking for this change. this is akin to asking for a melee only fight by the train station, or sitting on a therm and asking for a no insps fight...
at this point, there is no need for forts. therm's are useless. running a kin is a liability because 99% of the kins in this game have downs syndrome. and bubblers have turned out to be highly situational along with mm's and the like.
the rules set up in this ladder make line-ups retardedly stale. and i'm pretty sure that's a great part of the reason for why most people are getting **** bored of this thing and planning on quitting the game when this thing is over.
I'm with merc on this one.
"By limiting taunters you are limiting the resources of teams"
To me playing for a tie is a legit/tactical move espicially if you don't have the right people on, (which is true in our case) since you get no points for losing. Adding the little variety we have in arena now, I'm againts limiting anything.
Quote:
I see your point but I don't think people learn much by just being farm targets, except that they die 3 sec faster then last time.
|
Originally Posted by IcyKiri
Yea, its no fun being blown out in practices, but it teaches you to lock fast, evade better, identify spikes/heal better, etc...
If you want to get better you have to practice against better opponents, not just make lame excuses.. -Kiri |
@Intro lolPvP
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by _Nanu_
I see your point but I don't think people learn much by just being farm targets, except that they die 3 sec faster then last time. |
i'm also blaming kat for all of that.
i'm always screaming for practice against u2bg and *ex's team.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by IcyKiri
Post Deleted
|
Unlike you (and maybe me) alot of our (CIGAL) team has limited resources (as far as play time and cash is concerned.) I was explaining the reason for bringing a taunter lineup not looking for sympathy or making "lame" excuses. Why so aggresive?
Clearly you are frustrated with having to play against a Taunt team, and it's understandable. You want to get as many points as you can, just like us.
If taunters go down to two then we'll adjust.
The minute they limit ANOTHER AT, is the minute i want a limitation on Psi/Ems.
We discussed limiting the number of taunters when we were writing the rules but at the time considered how many new players might show and as we know, Scrappers/Brutes are the most common characters amongst new PvPers. With the "everyone plays" rule, we ran into a situation where a team might have more than 6 players with only taunters.
Personally, I think taunters are pretty lame but I wouldn't say there is anything wrong with them being in play. If someone runs 3 taunters, 2 stalkers, Dom and a mezzer, who are we to say that it shouldn't be allowed? Sure, running all taunters/emps is obviously playing for a tie, but it is the nature of competition and SMD beat that lineup.
RE: Lineup submission. When Silit first proposed a rule of this kind I had one of those "duh" moments wondering why it hadn't been done before. Counter-picking was AAALLLLWWAAAYYSS lame. Always. It's a pretty brilliant rule IMO, for the reasons Slax stated.
And in regards to the skill vs taunt, I don't think they are remotely related. Z and h0j (and myself) play brute. Does that mean they are bad, can't evade, can't lock and rely on high HP? Not at all. Sure it's easier to survive on a brute, but it doesn't mean you put bad players on brute to avoid deaths. It's just another role on the team.
If someone can get a dev to say taunt is bugged then we can ban it (it doesn't suppress and doesn't break until 5s after LoS drop). Otherwise it's up to the captains to judge if sacrificing an offensive slot for a purely defensive one is worthy of limitation. Let's just say you can only play psi blasters, that way the better teams can ALWAYS win. That's really the issue, right?
Quote:
Good thing our team is what votes on these issues or someone might just take you seriously. :-)
|
Originally Posted by Emo_Bitter
Proposing that in D6 matches we limit the usage of Taunters to 2 to ensure the value of play is retained for those who D6 was designed and intended for. This has been an ongoing debate and will eventually be brought up. If this goes to a captain vote and I am not there I want to go on record that I VOTE YES TO LIMITING D6 TO 2 TAUNTERS.
|
Quote:
The difference being teams werent brigning almost a full team of cagers
|
Originally Posted by Neuronia
Agree with barrier on this one.
As someone who spent a good 8 out of 10 minutes of matches in cages pre I12, I never complained about it here. You just had to get out of the cage, rebuff your teammates or make saves as you could. |
Shenanigans
LotD - JaL - POWT/SMD - SoCo - AJs
Hallo i playd on team dat had 4 cagerz an we beat os ty!
Proposing that in D6 matches we limit the usage of Taunters to 2 to ensure the value of play is retained for those who D6 was designed and intended for. This has been an ongoing debate and will eventually be brought up. If this goes to a captain vote and I am not there I want to go on record that I VOTE YES TO LIMITING D6 TO 2 TAUNTERS.
Live : @Emo Bitter / @2Emo2Bitter
Test : @Bitter / @2Emo2Bitter
Facebook
CoHFaces
Myspace