Yeah, the above is why I voted to limit stalkers. I hope that a couple of captains from the teams that voted to not limit will rethink this and call for another vote.
Quote:
Limiting stalkers but not limiting the amount of buffers per team is equally lame.|
Originally Posted by Psoma
Yeah, the above is why I voted to limit stalkers. I hope that a couple of captains from the teams that voted to not limit will rethink this and call for another vote.
|
Let's run a team of 3 MM thermals in bodyguard. How fun would that be?
Quote:
I'm not sure what limiting buffers has to do with anything. There is no point in this league to playing for a tie as there is no point reward for it. I'm pretty sure you just replay the match. Could 3 emps run around and survive for 10 minutes? Sure the same way 3 MM's could huddle in BG mode and hope someone is dumb enough to stand still long enough to die. Again, there is very little point to it because ties don't get you points. |
Originally Posted by Alpha_Zulu
Limiting stalkers but not limiting the amount of buffers per team is equally lame.
Let's run a team of 3 MM thermals in bodyguard. How fun would that be? |
If you are talking about running a hybrid toon like a corrupter that can do damage and play support, you can't exactly do both at the same time. If you keep the offensive pressure up it forces the support toons to shift into that role. It also encourages teams to get better coordination with their offense rather than chase around an emp for 10 minutes spamming damage.
I'd personally much rather fight 3 MM's that are played well than 3 stalkers who are played well. Against the MM's there is actually a chance at a kill. If the MM's are sitting in BG mode the entire match they aren't much of a threat to anyone with half a brain, but its also possible for the opposing team to actually attempt to get kills and find their own opportunities. For the stalkers if they are playing defensive and we don't have a VEAT, its a game of 10 minute chicken that is likely to end in a 0 - 0 score.
So yes, fighting three thermal MM's sounds infinitely more fun than running around for 10 minutes against 3 stalkers or always shoehorning a VEAT into a blind 3 v 3 lineup.
Quote:
Wins are worth 3 points|
Originally Posted by MrLiberty
I'm not sure what limiting buffers has to do with anything. There is no point in this league to playing for a tie as there is no point reward for it.
|
Losses are worth 2 points
Ties are worth 1 point.
It's in the rules. Which is hilarious. I WANT MY 6 POINTS FOR THE MATCHES PLAYED!
Quote:
This.|
Originally Posted by perilX
Wins are worth 3 points
Losses are worth 2 points Ties are worth 1 point. It's in the rules. Which is hilarious. I WANT MY 6 POINTS FOR THE MATCHES PLAYED! |
If the match is 0-0 you may as well just start emoting to get the extra point, since two >>> one. All you're doing in tying is potentially stealing points away from a team that might need them down the road to clinch first or second, which is fine but somewhat chintzy.
Limiting buffers:
Oz, if you feel strongly about it go ahead and propose a vote to limit buffers (debuffers?) in general. With the way the ladder is set up though, it's mostly just an intensification of damage spam once the target's healer/buffer's powers are recharging. As matches grow in size (5 v 5) you might see teams running an extra buffer, probably a Corr I'd imagine..
The point is guys, this ladder is likely to last into November or so.
If Kat's formula is followed, 8 teams x 2 weeks = 16 weeks.
Starting September 4, 16 weeks take us to...(checks Windows Calendar) December 18th.
First of all, let's be serious...how many teams are actually going to be around for the whole ladder? Especially considering the holiday season at the end of December, new games/interests later in the year and so on.
This is precisely why we (not just me and my team, not just Kat and a few other interested parties, EVERYONE) need to decide what we want out of this league so it retains some amount of fun and interest for all participants involved.
So...I ask all captains to look honestly at the current team set-ups and if they feel they are fine, fine. If one of you feels something is wonky, put it to a captain's vote.
Remember the dedicated PvPrs will still show up but we need to retain the newer, less hardcore ones too..not to say there are a lot of those in this ladder anyway, as most teams are at least fairly dedicated but...
TLDR:
The league schedule is weeks = 2xnumber of teams = 16.
That ends the sked in late December.
Player attrition and flagging interest is a measurable constant.
If you have any issues with powers/ATs, put it to a vote now, to keep the ladder somewhat fresh.
Realize that of the 8 teams listed now, perhaps four or five might remain toward the end...just by virtue of stuff/interest etc.
Don't hesitate to suggest something to Kat for a vote, worst that happens is she thinks it isn't relevant/important enough.
Cheers.
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:
That's what I get for not reading the rules and listening to someone casually mentioning ties are replayed. |
Originally Posted by perilX
Wins are worth 3 points
Losses are worth 2 points Ties are worth 1 point. It's in the rules. Which is hilarious. I WANT MY 6 POINTS FOR THE MATCHES PLAYED! |
I blame Psoma mostly.
Any Captains that would like to change their stalker votes are more than welcome to send me a p.m. and do so.
Beyond that the vote is the vote and hopefully everyone can have fun regardless. I personally don't think all stalker lineups are going to be a big deal. Based on the rosters there is only 1 team that I am aware of that even has 3 people decent on stalker on it. I am pretty sure they only switched to them in the final round out of frustration of the double buffer lineup they were facing.
As far as when it is 4v4 or 5v5 which is where all stalkers becomes really scary. Remember that is an option and no team is obligated to play it. If your team agrees to do 5v5 and that lineup is submitted with all stalkers or anything else extra gai you by default can refuse to play it and resubmit lineups of 3v3. Which is what I would advise any smart Captain to do. Realize though that once you start the match then you are held to that lineup and amount of players officially.
In order to legitimize CoH PvP as a serious sport, I propose a vote requiring all league nights to begin by gathering in Vent for the singing of the national anthem by Critical Kat.
Nevermind. League is fun. Don't want to overdiscuss rules.
Quote:
Pixel, please post more so your count can hit 100 before New Year's.|
Originally Posted by Pixel
Nevermind. League is fun. Don't want to overdiscuss rules.
|
Also, first after Pixel.
GLHF Saturday all.
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:
backing vocals by Scribe.
|
Originally Posted by Pixel
In order to legitimize CoH PvP as a serious sport, I propose a vote requiring all league nights to begin by gathering in Vent for the singing of the national anthem by Critical Kat.
|
OLD SCHOOL PvP
Rad/Psi,Psi/Em,Fire/Em,Cld/Sonic,FF/Sonic,Grav/Ta,Storm/Psi,Sp/WP,Fire/Psi,Sonic/Pain
RIP:Southern Comfort PvP,PE PvP,INTEGRITY PvP,After School Special PvP Test SG's,TPvPL Season1+2 Runner ups
Quote:
Doesn't the ability to change the match size after finding out the lineup sort of defeat the point of having a double-blind lineup submission? I mean, I could push for a 5v5, find out the other team was bringing something that would shut my current lineup down, and then say "screw it" and go back to a 3v3.
|
Originally Posted by CriticalKat
If your team agrees to do 5v5 and that lineup is submitted with all stalkers or anything else extra gai you by default can refuse to play it and resubmit lineups of 3v3. Which is what I would advise any smart Captain to do. Realize though that once you start the match then you are held to that lineup and amount of players officially.
|
@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."
Quote:
where they would then change their line up as well... then your stuck with what ever you pick for that.
|
Originally Posted by macskull
Doesn't the ability to change the match size after finding out the lineup sort of defeat the point of having a double-blind lineup submission? I mean, I could push for a 5v5, find out the other team was bringing something that would shut my current lineup down, and then say "screw it" and go back to a 3v3.
|
The rules are set up for default. Teams are required to follow the default rules. I am not going to require them to follow rules that Captains are negotiating between themselves. For example enlarging or lessening team sizes or rescheduling matches. Teams could agree to 5v5 and if I am going to enforce they have to fight 5v5 then they could fake some dc's and claim they don't have 5. By league rules they are only required to have 3 for default. So if I can't enforce the rules or penalize them across the board then what is the point of trying to at all?
Allowing Captains to negotiate extra stuff is there for the teams that are looking or needing those negotiations. They are however not what the League was set up for which is 3v3 and matches on Saturday nights.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by macskull
Doesn't the ability to change the match size after finding out the lineup sort of defeat the point of having a double-blind lineup submission? I mean, I could push for a 5v5, find out the other team was bringing something that would shut my current lineup down, and then say "screw it" and go back to a 3v3.
|
Quote:
Seriously? Can't Play blasters??? Lol|
Originally Posted by MrLiberty
Sharking is for bad players who can't play blasters.
|
****, I forgot how hard blaster were to play in the first place.
Cool Story Bro.
I vote for Outcazk that we limit stalkers cause it would be simply a Castro Street match and we know what that means. Plus it be so boring. Havign a team of buffer or damage dealer is very interesting matches.
You cannot vote for your team, only your Captain can, which he did. If he would like to adjust his vote he is more than welcome to send me a p.m. to do so.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ELF_STALKER
I vote for Outcazk that we limit stalkers cause it would be simply a Castro Street match and we know what that means. Plus it be so boring. Havign a team of buffer or damage dealer is very interesting matches.
|
I personally thought he mistyped and meant to say "can't play stalkers". I am just a blond though so who knows.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WarScribe
Seriously? Can't Play blasters??? Lol
****, I forgot how hard blaster were to play in the first place. Cool Story Bro. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ELF_STALKER
I vote for Outcazk that we limit stalkers cause it would be simply a Castro Street match and we know what that means. Plus it be so boring. Havign a team of buffer or damage dealer is very interesting matches.
|
I did vote in favor of the limit on stalkers, and I voted to keep cage.
DEAR CHAMPION, DEAR CHAMPION, II Protectors of Neverland
"8 years Guys....What a Ride"
224 LvL 50's
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by XxBudweiser8xX
and I voted to keep cage.
|
lol why???
OLD SCHOOL PvP
Rad/Psi,Psi/Em,Fire/Em,Cld/Sonic,FF/Sonic,Grav/Ta,Storm/Psi,Sp/WP,Fire/Psi,Sonic/Pain
RIP:Southern Comfort PvP,PE PvP,INTEGRITY PvP,After School Special PvP Test SG's,TPvPL Season1+2 Runner ups
Quote:
Actually I'd say you couldn't play either blaster or stalker if you simply run around and shark.|
Originally Posted by CriticalKat
I personally thought he mistyped and meant to say "can't play stalkers". I am just a blond though so who knows.
|
What I meant was you stick a weak/farmable player on a stalker to shark so they can still put out meaningful damage in a spike. Playing a stalker well can be more difficult especially when you are AS'ing in a standard countdown with very little set up, but for the most part with the mechanics of Telekinesis, unresisted mez with domination and mez durations that are simply so long even with mez resistance it creates an easy opportunity for an AS, for the most part stalking is easier anymore because teams can create situations where you have a target standing dead still for 3+ seconds.
Quote:
Ask Neuronias Team why |
Originally Posted by Psyrene
lol why???
|
DEAR CHAMPION, DEAR CHAMPION, II Protectors of Neverland
"8 years Guys....What a Ride"
224 LvL 50's
Quote:
Had the cage not been banned, you may have had a different opinion when someone chose cage map and brought 3 thug/storms.
|
Originally Posted by XxBudweiser8xX
Ask Neuronias Team why
|
Quote:
2 storms and a bubbler in cage would also be a dick move.
|
Originally Posted by DaveMebs
Had the cage not been banned, you may have had a different opinion when someone chose cage map and brought 3 thug/storms.
|
Definitely agree with Psyrene here, if you want the league to take a turn for the worse keep the all stalker line ups.
Reasons all stalker lineups are stupid :
If they become common you won't ever see anyone risk a 4 v 4 or 5 v 5 at the risk of shark spikes.
Sharking is for bad players who can't play blasters.
Running around for 10 minutes trying to time a double AS with no set up and no visible targets is silly.
Blind line ups... two teams bring 3 stalkers each.
Get 1 kill, hide for 10 minutes is stupid.
If the stalker team is careful/defensive trying for just 1 kill and end up failing, you're going to see a lot of 0 - 0 scores and teams getting frustrated and having to run around for another 10 minutes waiting for someone to make a mistake.
Its a 3 v 3 live league, having to always fill one of those spots with a VEAT in the blind lineup just so you don't fall into any of the above situations further limits lineup variation.
I'd really urge the captains who voted in favor of the stalker lineups to reconsider their decision. Not just because I don't want to pay 10 bucks to prove how stupid 3 stalker lineups can be, but because math in this game is hard.
Vs. a Squishy with Frozen armor. You pop 4 reds + BU Shark for 602.5 damage on the initial critical. (Not including procs or DoT's) Coordinate it between 3 stalkers sharking from the same distance (for projectile speed) at the same time and you have more than the HP cap of most AT's. If your spike doesn't work? Immediately drop into hibernate/phase, attempt again after everyone can do so safely.
Yes your timing has to be good, yes its possible to go clutch and heal through it but you do it from almost complete safety if you play stupidly defensive waiting for the time when not enough heals come in or not enough greens are popped.
*Edit* With a Squishy Res Shield its something like 1500 points of damage, so pretty much after that 1 proc will do the rest.