Ashika 12 Posted September 11, 2018 I raised this topic several years ago, and also I clearly understand that the chance that it will be changed is low, but anyway ... What is the meaning of final stage? I played a lot of the missions when defending side just waited for final, not going to the points (yep, we all know what will be the final), also it sounds not logical at all regarding to the mission flow and logic ... no really - try defend some points, or then try to catch/prevent delivery of loot it's logical. But final shoot-out after this, which is really maters - how's related??? Maybe all those final stages are to be split to separate missions - kind of go to point (with no defense just who will come first) and then shoot-out, or break-in (for both teams) and then keep item, or multi-point break-in and then bring to team base ... ... and rework the standard missions to remove the non-logical final stage. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vsb 6170 Posted September 11, 2018 i don’t understand if you remove the final stage, then whatever stage the mission ends on will become the final stage and it won’t matter - missions might as well just be one stage long and whoever wins wins the final stage is intended as a balancing factor, since technically (on paper) neither team has the advantage of attacking/defending Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ashika 12 Posted September 11, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, BXNNXD said: i don’t understand if you remove the final stage, then whatever stage the mission ends on will become the final stage and it won’t matter - missions might as well just be one stage long and whoever wins wins the final stage is intended as a balancing factor, since technically (on paper) neither team has the advantage of attacking/defending Wrong Final stage means that defending team lost all previous points and attacking has advantage and won all previous attacks, and now they also need to win the final competition. WHY? Removing final stage is removing this competition, and moving mission to pure attack-defense. Defending team has a lot of changes to stop attackers but if they failed ALL previous stages they must loose! They should not to go to last stage, win only it and win the mission, what's the logic? In this case defenders don't have the real stimulus to make the effort and defend the points, can just wait the final stage and that's all. And to save the drive of final stages - the new "competition" mission type are to be added, with 2 stages : gather all to starting point(s) and then competition phase (vip, keep the item, protect the graffiti, etc ...) Edited September 11, 2018 by Ashika Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlatMan 706 Posted September 12, 2018 I see it as a chance for both teams to earn better rewards at the end of the match. It's not balanced from a win/lose perspective, but mission outcome has little affect on threat, and G1 did adjust the win/lose rewards so they're not as harsh to the losing team. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ashika 12 Posted September 13, 2018 (edited) 20 hours ago, MrsHappyPenguin said: I see it as a chance for both teams to earn better rewards at the end of the match. It's not balanced from a win/lose perspective, but mission outcome has little affect on threat, and G1 did adjust the win/lose rewards so they're not as harsh to the losing team. But lost team always has worse money and standing points. Just look on it from attacking side point of view (and take to consideration that it's always harder to attack then defend): they won all points except final stage and then have 2 times less reward. Attacking side must win ALL stages (including final) when defending side only ONE (any step or final) ... looks not fair and not balanced. Edited September 13, 2018 by Ashika typos Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vsb 6170 Posted September 13, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ashika said: Attacking side must win ALL stages (including final) when defending side only ONE (any step or final) ... looks not fair and not balanced. that’s no different from normal tho for example let’s say team a is attacking and team be is defending stage 1 - team a successfully breaks into obj stage 2 - team a successfully burns a vehicle obj stage 3 - team a successfully raids an objective stage 4 (final) - team b successfully defends their vip and wins the mission vs stage 1 - team a successfully breaks into obj stage 2 - team a successfully burns a vehicle obj stage 3 - team b successfully defends a raid obj and wins the mission theres no difference between the two versions except one mission is shorter due to less stages, the attack/defend mission structure is inherently inbalanced and removing final stages won’t do anything to affect that Edited September 13, 2018 by BXNNXD typo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ashika 12 Posted September 13, 2018 The difference is that activity in last stage is totally different from previous stages. All stages are attack-defense when final is competition. So on my point of view the right is: stage 1 - team a successfully breaks into obj stage 2 - team a successfully burns a vehicle obj stage 3 - team a successfully raids an objective stage 4 (final) - team a successfully delivers loot and win. as right attack defense. Since what we see now: stage 1: arson stage 2: arson stage 3: arson stage 4: shoot-out ... and I see a lot of situations when players even don't protect cars/buildings but just wait for final. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
