SPAM is ruining this game, artys, skys, naders, fraggers,proxies just had a game where i died 38 times i counted 29 of those were from explosives. Randomly lobbing things takes absolutley no skill at all and is just trashy. I don’t know how it is in 5 mans for comp but in 7v7 and 8v8 it is just horrid.
Explosive spam is killing this game
PixelTwitch
(PixelTwitch)
#4
I have all but given up that this game will ever be a tactical game. In 5 mans its wipe then do the objective as simple as that. If its a c4 objective get as many explosives going as possible to prevent a defuse and win. Personally I never got into DB for this kind of play but it does not look like its going to be changing any time soon (if ever) so I am afraid if you don’t like it then maybe this game is not for you also.
adeto
(Rémy Cabresin)
#6
Depends on what amounts of spam you are used to. RtCW and ET players can probably all agree that it’s not even that bad because especially RtCW players are used to atleast double the amount of spam DB has.
Protekt1
(Protekt1)
#7
I’ve always maintained that DB needs effective counters to explosive based strategies. They’ve only added more characters with explosives, which isn’t necessarily bad, but without adding much counter play.
Augments are now another potential way to alter the effectiveness of strategies without necessarily altering the game a lot. But, the toss live grenades perk seems useless.
Rex
(Rex)
#8
Right. The same applies for QW as well. I have nothing against spam, because in all these games it was controlled spam.
tangoliber
(tangoliber)
#10
Why is spreading out the defense not a counter to explosive-based strategies? (Instead of crowding the objective with bodies/ turrets / mines, why not spread everything out if the other team has a lot of explosive-based mercs? Why not push out more to the perimeter and try to keep them out of range?
In Tribes, you must complement your heavy flag defense with light defense on the perimeter, otherwise you will just get mortared all day. Why can’t the same concept of heavy defense and light defense and shifting the focus between the two to adapt to the attacking team work in Dirty Bomb as well? It’s probably even easier to do in Dirty Bomb, as the perimeter is often split between 3 to 4 chokepoints.
LiNkzr
(LiNkzr)
#11
This game is just ****ed up, wait for spawns / cooldowns to start again, spam nades, hope you gib someone with them, rush in to next pos, rinse and repeat until you have won.
when defending hope you don’t get rushed / gib by nades when your out of position giving ammo / health / trying to counter nade and then pray that they don’t get plant.
sometimes you see people playing other than 2 fraggers 2 medics or +1 sky / engi / whatever and they usually lose. Interesting game at the moment.
#ReBuffVassili2015
PixelTwitch
(PixelTwitch)
#12
[QUOTE=tangoliber;526515]Why is spreading out the defense not a counter to explosive-based strategies? (Instead of crowding the objective with bodies/ turrets / mines, why not spread everything out if the other team has a lot of explosive-based mercs? Why not push out more to the perimeter and try to keep them out of range?
In Tribes, you must complement your heavy flag defense with light defense on the perimeter, otherwise you will just get mortared all day. Why can’t the same concept of heavy defense and light defense and shifting the focus between the two to adapt to the attacking team work in Dirty Bomb as well? It’s probably even easier to do in Dirty Bomb, as the perimeter is often split between 3 to 4 chokepoints.[/QUOTE]
Because the problem is not on defence, its on attack. You simply cannot fight 1vs5 so you need to run in together. This often requires pushing though a choke together, this is when the nades are at their most effective.
When it comes to defusing as defence… Sure you can spread out but unless your running 5 engineers its not going to make a difference. The attacks only need to use explosives on that one guy. Also pushing to the perimeter is a dud tactic on the majority of maps/objectives due to spawn times. ie, even if you do a great push forward for defence on terminal, if the attackers wipe you just after the spawn timer resets, they have enough time to plant + take forward spawn before you get back into the game. The same is on Dome first objective, White Chapel EV, Bridge final objective and Trainyard final as just a few of the examples.
milkymac
(milkymac)
#13
Off-topic. Has anyone heard of any new games coming out that are the same style as crossfire and counterstrike? Those types of games are my favorite for FPS, crossfire being my favorite game for a good 6 years before it died to hacker wave, comp scene is still going decently.
Protekt1
(Protekt1)
#14
[QUOTE=tangoliber;526515]Why is spreading out the defense not a counter to explosive-based strategies? (Instead of crowding the objective with bodies/ turrets / mines, why not spread everything out if the other team has a lot of explosive-based mercs? Why not push out more to the perimeter and try to keep them out of range?
In Tribes, you must complement your heavy flag defense with light defense on the perimeter, otherwise you will just get mortared all day. Why can’t the same concept of heavy defense and light defense and shifting the focus between the two to adapt to the attacking team work in Dirty Bomb as well? It’s probably even easier to do in Dirty Bomb, as the perimeter is often split between 3 to 4 chokepoints.[/QUOTE]
These are totally different games and they have completely different map designs.
Plus I am talking about counters that involve abilities.
tangoliber
(tangoliber)
#15
[QUOTE=Protekt1;526554]These are totally different games and they have completely different map designs.
Plus I am talking about counters that involve abilities.[/QUOTE]
If the concept works in both, then it doesn’t matter if they are different games. Why wouldn’t it work in Dirty Bomb, when the map design is even better suited to it? (Much harder to clear the objective point with explosives in DB than it is in Tribes, because defensive players can get to you faster and kill you faster.)
I don’t know of a good ability to counter explosives. Usually, explosives counter deployables, and slayers counter the explosive classes. If it absolutely must be an ability, then maybe you can deploy force fields or something.
tangoliber
(tangoliber)
#16
[QUOTE=PixelTwitch;526537]Because the problem is not on defence, its on attack. You simply cannot fight 1vs5 so you need to run in together. This often requires pushing though a choke together, this is when the nades are at their most effective.
When it comes to defusing as defence… Sure you can spread out but unless your running 5 engineers its not going to make a difference. The attacks only need to use explosives on that one guy. Also pushing to the perimeter is a dud tactic on the majority of maps/objectives due to spawn times. ie, even if you do a great push forward for defence on terminal, if the attackers wipe you just after the spawn timer resets, they have enough time to plant + take forward spawn before you get back into the game. The same is on Dome first objective, White Chapel EV, Bridge final objective and Trainyard final as just a few of the examples.[/QUOTE]
I’m responding to “5 mans its wipe then do the objective as simple as that.”, so the attacking team losing a chokepoint nade battle is a different subject, I think.
I’m not understanding what you are saying about running 5 engineers, or seeing the relevance. Maybe we should just pick one situation to discuss…such as the first objective on Terminal.
The best solution to any defense is to wipe it out. Why is it worse to be wiped out in the mid field than to be wiped out by the objective?
sunshinefats
(sunshinefats)
#17
I think he’s more on about the timing than the position.
In regard to the 5 eng, I think he just means if you’re going to be spread thin and only have 1 eng, then if that eng gets killed you’re less likely to be able to get to the objective and diffuse, whereas if you had 5 and 1 got killed you still have 4 more that could diffuse if needed, meaning it would be easier to do.
Of course, I’m just making assumptions, I could be wrong.
On the touchy subject of nades, I think there was less complaint in earlier games because overall the maps were generally larger and had more options for movement and positioning, which is to say it was harder to get a 4 man kill with 1 nade. Because of the small, linear maps here and the restrictions on travel paths, it’s far easier to get 3-4 man kills with a single nade. Add to that non-random spawns and spawn times, and you also always have a good idea where and when the enemy will be coming from at all times. Just today I got 2-3 quad kills with a single nade(over the course of a few games) based upon that. So yeah, I can see what ppl are on about, but I don’t think it’s the nades as much as the maps themselves. Personally, I’m far more frustrated by decent snipers than I am explosives…get 2 decent snipers on an opposing team with the right positions and they can pretty much hold your whole team off by themselves.
tangoliber
(tangoliber)
#18
[QUOTE=sunshinefats;526571]
In regard to the 5 eng, I think he just means if you’re going to be spread thin and only have 1 eng, then if that eng gets killed you’re less likely to be able to get to the objective and diffuse, whereas if you had 5 and 1 got killed you still have 4 more that could diffuse if needed, meaning it would be easier to do.[/quote]
I wondered that, but I’m not able to picture it.
Whether you are grouped up around the objective, or spread out: In either situation it is harder to defuse if your one engineer gets sniped, naded, or shot. (Much worse if everyone gets wiped out by a couple of artillery strikes around the objective. )
If someone snuck through and made a plant, then the defense might already be collapsing around the objective…so the travel distance to the C4 isn’t very long. (You can also leave certain routes open, and leave a safety engineer back. When the engineer identifies incoming, the other defenders collapse on those routes from behind.)
If you were already defending the perimeter, then you might have better control over the areas that the Explosive Offense and Snipers would need to nade to snipe the defuser. (If your team is predominantly on the objective, then the Naders can more easily get in position.) And I think that is a really important aspect to this game…It’s always better if the defense wants to defend multiple points at once…and you should always give the offense a way to turn the table against them if they are stacked on the objective.
Rex
(Rex)
#19
The old bad habit of some people in the forum here, blaming the symptoms instead of the problem again.
Source: Maps
Symptom: Spam
You will encounter less spam on the newer maps like Dome for instance where the action is more spread.
Protekt1
(Protekt1)
#20
[QUOTE=Rex;526585]The old bad habit of some people in the forum here, blaming the symptoms instead of the problem again.
Source: Maps
Symptom: Spam
You will encounter less spam on the newer maps like Dome for instance where the action is more spread.[/QUOTE]
Sometimes you need medicine for both the source of the symptoms and the symptoms themselves. It isn’t like old maps are becoming any better just because new ones exist.