Escalation is good step but done wrong.

[Mitne 724]

I think escalation is actually great thing you implemented which stop problem with one-sided matches you forced to sit on.

I only got two problems:

1. This one is fairly obvious and I think universally noticed - mission weren't modifed for escalation... that problem is especially visible in finales which don't properly scale up and usually side more with defending sides, especially if we talk about point capture finale or VIP ones.

2. Here's problem is implementation of escalation itself - I don't think escalation should have approval of both team leaders - often it leads to pathological situations in matches where escalation is needed but enemy team leader will veto it because they win said match. In my opinion there's better non-autocratic alternative where escalation request is voted by one entire team requesting escalation and then if accepted by it, escalation happens. I know this proposition is controversal but problem is if we allow for escalation to be in current form then current situation with toxic playerbase will nullify it's impact to zero.

[swindIe 120]

Forced to play 10v10 every mission.

What a blast!

[CookiePuss 5379]

2 hours ago, Mitne said:

toxic playerbase will nullify it's impact to zero.

Some of us simply don’t like that many players. I’m personally not escalating beyond 4v4 winning or losing. 

[VanilleKeks 740]

Scaling missions is not so easy. Something like TDM is a no brainer but the second it gets to holding or capturing objectives it's very difficult. The biggest issue isn't the objectives, it's that the spawn system isn't made for such large missions.

 

Combined with the fact that players naturally group around whatever objective there is and it becomes a total mess where you can't move a meter without getting shot. The only way to solve this would be totally new mission styles where the teams get split up in real time. For example, in team missions there's now four bases and half the team competes for two of them each. 

 

Maps and spawns aren't designed for anything more than four people. Another thought; as you scale missions to be bigger and longer to accommodate players, anyone that isn't already in a mission now needs to wait longer since large player amounts are locked in a 30min+ mission.

[DumSAS 5]

Escalation in current balance state is a gamble in it's purest. You basically roll the dice to see if your 2v2 mid tier silver match gives you experienced APB veteran who will absolutely dominate enemy team or poor bronze rank 20 souls who yet to figure their lefts from rights in this game. Balance tweaks are primal imo

[LilyRain 674]

15 hours ago, Mitne said:

I think escalation is actually great thing you implemented which stop problem with one-sided matches you forced to sit on.

I only got two problems:

1. This one is fairly obvious and I think universally noticed - mission weren't modifed for escalation... that problem is especially visible in finales which don't properly scale up and usually side more with defending sides, especially if we talk about point capture finale or VIP ones.

2. Here's problem is implementation of escalation itself - I don't think escalation should have approval of both team leaders - often it leads to pathological situations in matches where escalation is needed but enemy team leader will veto it because they win said match. In my opinion there's better non-autocratic alternative where escalation request is voted by one entire team requesting escalation and then if accepted by it, escalation happens. I know this proposition is controversal but problem is if we allow for escalation to be in current form then current situation with toxic playerbase will nullify it's impact to zero.

If I could agree beyond 100%, I would.

 

Pure facts.

[Qualeta 15]

escalation is good idea but no when you need to make the objective against 10 defenders, you can kill 5 and then die and its feeling like is restart the match because everybody already alive.
and most times the matchmaking putting 7 silvers & 3 golds vs 7 golds & 3 silvers and is just make it UNPOSSIBLE to push

[Mitne 724]

7 hours ago, Qualeta said:

escalation is good idea but no when you need to make the objective against 10 defenders, you can kill 5 and then die and its feeling like is restart the match because everybody already alive.
and most times the matchmaking putting 7 silvers & 3 golds vs 7 golds & 3 silvers and is just make it UNPOSSIBLE to push

 

8 hours ago, DumSAS said:

Escalation in current balance state is a gamble in it's purest. You basically roll the dice to see if your 2v2 mid tier silver match gives you experienced APB veteran who will absolutely dominate enemy team or poor bronze rank 20 souls who yet to figure their lefts from rights in this game. Balance tweaks are primal imo

 

Yeah, I think also the problem is matchmaking still being what it is. It's roulette of "who gets handicap, who gets good player" but there's no easy fix for that with current population, locked additionally to single district. I wonder when they gonna implement phasing cause this seems to be good solution to that.

Edited August 29 by Mitne