Ladder Stuff - Stalker Restrictions Revisited
By
Borderline Boss,
Posted on: 2010-05-23 18:23 in Everything about PvP
How do you enforce it? If a shark gets thrown you lose? Where is the line? 8 stalker+impale is still gonna kill someone.
Quote:
Why would you ban anything?
|
Originally Posted by perilX
How do you enforce it? If a shark gets thrown you lose? Where is the line? 8 stalker+impale is still gonna kill someone.
|
Quote:
I think what he's saying is that you can have more than two Stalkers but only two of them can be sharking a given target. But yeah, that's gonna be difficult to police.
|
Originally Posted by perilX
How do you enforce it? If a shark gets thrown you lose? Where is the line? 8 stalker+impale is still gonna kill someone.
|
@macskull, @Not Mac | XBL: macskull | Steam: macskull | Skype: macskull
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
My suggestion was pretty much If you have 1 or 2 stalkers, anything goes. If you have 3+ more none are allowed to shark. So for enforcing it, if you get a line up with 3+ in it all you do is snap a screenie, like if t-strike was used, and go from there.
Yeah you could end up with impale spikes, but it'd be interesting to see if they would be worse than a psi spike that has the three hit package along with the ability to continue to follow it up for serious damage, where as stalkers pretty much drop hide and half their damage. (From much less range)
Quote:
seeing as our team is pretty much against any regulation in the ladder, and we're heavily outnumbered by the "ban shraks" carebears, i'm pretty sure we could get behind this as a happy medium.
|
Originally Posted by MrLiberty
My suggestion was pretty much If you have 1 or 2 stalkers, anything goes. If you have 3+ more none are allowed to shark. So for enforcing it, if you get a line up with 3+ in it all you do is snap a screenie, like if t-strike was used, and go from there.
Yeah you could end up with impale spikes, but it'd be interesting to see if they would be worse than a psi spike that has the three hit package along with the ability to continue to follow it up for serious damage, where as stalkers pretty much drop hide and half their damage. (From much less range) |
Quote:
There ya go barrier, go for it girl
|
Originally Posted by iLostCountBarrier
seeing as our team is pretty much against any regulation in the ladder, and we're heavily outnumbered by the "ban shraks" carebears, i'm pretty sure we could get behind this as a happy medium.
|
Live : @Emo Bitter / @2Emo2Bitter
Test : @Bitter / @2Emo2Bitter
CoHFaces
Myspace
Who in the world would be yag enough to run more than 2 Stalkers?
Quote:
cause that's less yag than running 6 psi/ems
|
Originally Posted by slickadelaphante
Who in the world would be yag enough to run more than 2 Stalkers?
|
I'm personally fine with trying stuff like this unless it starts having the opposite effect with line-ups...such as all line-ups requiring to have 4+ stalkers and 2 forts to be competitive, etc. If you're happy with Lib's idea/something close, I'd say either put it in the vote thread or bring it up in the vent meeting (that I think we're going to schedule soon). The reason I made the vote thread was so that most of us weren't all sitting around on vent with our eyes glazing over while a couple of people got into 2-hour debates; I figure the more we can work out here, the less time we have sucked out of us on vent.
Quote:
Probably why we have never done that, ever.
|
Originally Posted by iLostCountBarrier
cause that's less yag than running 6 psi/ems
|
Why do you think sharks are so OP?
Just a thought:
Could you try to make a ladder without **** restrictions and see if it gets exploited?
If we see less diversity with less restrictions - then the restrictions can be justified
Quote:
+1
|
Originally Posted by EmpireForgotten
Just a thought:
Could you try to make a ladder without **** restrictions and see if it gets exploited? If we see less diversity with less restrictions - then the restrictions can be justified |
Quote:
I promise you see 2 emps 6 stalkers or maybe the elusive 8 stalker team |
Originally Posted by EmpireForgotten
Just a thought:
Could you try to make a ladder without **** restrictions and see if it gets exploited? If we see less diversity with less restrictions - then the restrictions can be justified |
, first week of matches. And why wouldnt a team... 6 shraks is 3000 damage roughly.
Not even gonna lie, I would exploit the **** out of them.
Quote:
Word.
|
Originally Posted by perilX
Not even gonna lie, I would exploit the **** out of them.
|
Quote:
ok, cool, then instead of 6 psi/ems and 2 emps, we might consider bringing a few forts, and omg omg omg a mastermind or two? nooooo waaaai?|
Originally Posted by Daknah
I promise you see 2 emps 6 stalkers or maybe the elusive 8 stalker team
, first week of matches. And why wouldnt a team... 6 shraks is 3000 damage roughly. |
so go ahead.
go for the full stalker team.
oh but wait, you get all emo when people counter-pick. guess you'll need a rule for that.
Quote:
You seem to be the only one emo here.
|
Originally Posted by iLostCountBarrier
ok, cool, then instead of 6 psi/ems and 2 emps, we might consider bringing a few forts, and omg omg omg a mastermind or two? nooooo waaaai?
so go ahead. go for the full stalker team. oh but wait, you get all emo when people counter-pick. guess you'll need a rule for that. |
Quote:
no, im just the only one that doesn't want to make this fiteclub league 2.0.
|
Originally Posted by Daknah
You seem to be the only one emo here.
|
Quote:
Your definition of fiteclub seems askew to me.
|
Originally Posted by iLostCountBarrier
no, im just the only one that doesn't want to make this fiteclub league 2.0.
|
Quote:
fiteclub: adding your own little rule-set because you don't like the basic mechanics of the game (no popping, only melee duel plz, no more than 2 stalkers, no running, no switching)
|
Originally Posted by Daknah
Your definition of fiteclub seems askew to me.
|
Quote:
So we shouldnt add rules? hmmm TS and HD are on then? hmm your new system sure sounds like fiteklub to me.
|
Originally Posted by iLostCountBarrier
fiteclub: adding your own little rule-set to the game because you don't like the basic mechanics of the game (no popping, only melee duel plz, no more than 2 stalkers, no running, no switching)
|
Quote:
An argument for that could be made.|
Originally Posted by Daknah
So we shouldnt add rules? hmmm TS and HD are on then? hmm your new system sure sounds like fiteklub to me.
|
But if the last league didn't prove to you how the blind-line-up submission completely wrecked the roles of even more ATs when it came to high-end pvp matches, then there's no way you're gonna see things from my point of view.
i'm PERSONALLY ok with no ts no hd because I (MEMEMEMEME) believe they up the skill-ante, the game stops being a JUST damage spam. so yes, it's fiteclub. it's huge fiteclub.
if you can make an argument that states that playing a psy/em in a league match took more skill than playing a stalker with 4 forts up your *** much like in i12, then i might see things your way. i'd rather be challenged by countering teams than keep playing mf dice with line-ups.
Quote:
4 forts in i17 pvp would do nothing but disrupt its not i12 anymore barrier as much as I would have liked to play then and have it be that way now its not that way. Playing a Psi em now takes more skill then playing a stalker now I think we can all agree on that. If you are looking to up the skill ante removing the stalker limit is not a valid way of doing that. If stalkers were like vert and AS'd instead of throwing Sharks Id say maybe but its just that stalkers have ranged crits and thats all most use. There is alot of diversity even in the league unless you missed every match dUmb played... Running MMs and what not then there was Cigal with their cargo back room force bubble line ups, the addition to Doms to line ups, the running of 2 stalkers with your Psi Ems. Forts in line ups vs cigal and or dumb. Maybe you missed most of the matches I dunno but you seem to be missing alot of the aspects of the league line ups. |
Originally Posted by iLostCountBarrier
An argument for that could be made.
But if the last league didn't prove to you how the blind-line-up submission completely wrecked the roles of even more ATs when it came to high-end pvp matches, then there's no way you're gonna see things from my point of view. i'm PERSONALLY ok with no ts no hd because I (MEMEMEMEME) believe they up the skill-ante, the game stops being a JUST damage spam. so yes, it's fiteclub. it's huge fiteclub. if you can make an argument that states that playing a psy/em in a league match took more skill than playing a stalker with 4 forts up your *** much like in i12, then i might see things your way. i'd rather be challenged by countering teams than keep playing mf dice with line-ups. |
Lets do a mock line up here with what you suggested.
Team A: 2 emps 6 stalkers
Team B: 2 emps 4 Forts 2 stalkers (since nothing else can kill with just 2)
Match becomes a 4v4 2 emps 2 stalkers vs 2 emps 2 stalkers granted your forts will do a little damage to the other stalkers and those other stalkers will get some out of hide sharks off. Sounds like alot of fun to me. So much skill being showcased. If you wanna argue this maybe try to get the ladder be 4v4s
Just testing the waters;
What is the general consensus on banning more than 2 instances of shraking stalkers instead of just plain 2 stalker limits?