OutLaw_Nynx wrote: »“No”
OutLaw_Nynx wrote: »“No”
Seconded as it would mean no more group queue. So absolutely 'ell no.
bantamguar wrote: »Yes, please.
What baffles me is the people who disagree and say "there wouldn't be enough people in non-DM queue" yet complain when they get players that have 0 interest in the game mode.
bantamguar wrote: »Yes, please.
What baffles me is the people who disagree and say "there wouldn't be enough people in non-DM queue" yet complain when they get players that have 0 interest in the game mode.
aurelius_fx wrote: »No, i like doing objectives. Gives healers and tanks way more purpose, complimenting each of their roles with the damage dealers.
Bigger need of strategy and basic coordination too, which is what a team game should be about. Specific queues split the player base further, requiring very little adaptability. On an example that would be at the opposite end of the spectrum, imagine an extremely tanky player with an entire chaosball dedicated set only queueing for chaosball, for instance. Having the chance to be randomly queued to be in a DM match keeps that selfish tank in check, in his otherwise insta-win build.
To me, just seems like people are upset that they need to get off cloak to capture the point. Why so entitled to win every match, to perform every role flawlessly? If you don't like playing BG then... well.. don't play it?
aurelius_fx wrote: »No, i like doing objectives. Gives healers and tanks way more purpose, complimenting each of their roles with the damage dealers.
No, i don't enjoy a team that's completely uncoordinated, that neither happens as often as you make it sound (even with randoms). Why is it so hard to do the objectives? Why queue if you're gonna purposefully ignore the rules of the game? If everyone did their job that wouldn't happen. Still all sounds pretty spoiled talk to me.So you want to tell me that you enjoy playing objectives while the half of your team is doing something else? Or you queue with a premade group to do objectives and you get easy wins while the half of the players form the other group just DM
"Boring" is a very subjective term. Are you unable to stand still for 10 seconds to capture a point? That's still less time spent horse racing in Cyro, that's for sure. Is killing other players the only way you can have fun? Sneaking into enemies relic or defending a 3 man push into ours is still very fun to me. There will always be a meta for everything. I stand with my point.Tanks, yes, they gain purpose. VERY BORING PURPOSE.
Seriously, when you could choose relic/ball back in the days, I remember how broken it was to bring harbinger tank there. Sometimes I just took the relic in the face of 4man team and brought it back solo.
THIS IS OBJECTIVES META. It is fun for like.. 3 hours. And I play BGs for more that a year for sure.
aurelius_fx wrote: »No, i like doing objectives. Gives healers and tanks way more purpose, complimenting each of their roles with the damage dealers.
Bigger need of strategy and basic coordination too, which is what a team game should be about. Specific queues split the player base further, requiring very little adaptability. On an example that would be at the opposite end of the spectrum, imagine an extremely tanky player with an entire chaosball dedicated set only queueing for chaosball, for instance. Having the chance to be randomly queued to be in a DM match keeps that selfish tank in check, in his otherwise insta-win build.
To me, just seems like people are upset that they need to get off cloak to capture the point. Why so entitled to win every match, to perform every role flawlessly? If you don't like playing BG then... well.. don't play it?
aurelius_fx wrote: »No, i don't enjoy a team that's completely uncoordinated, that neither happens as often as you make it sound (even with randoms). Why is it so hard to do the objectives? Why queue if you're gonna purposefully ignore the rules of the game? If everyone did their job that wouldn't happen. Still all sounds pretty spoiled talk to me.