Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer

Thoughts on Alderaan/Voidstar Capture Mechanic

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > PvP
Thoughts on Alderaan/Voidstar Capture Mechanic

SlightlySychotic's Avatar

05.26.2013 , 11:06 PM | #1
So like many others I have noticed that Voidstar has become subject to gridlock -- situations in which neither team can make it past the first door -- since the changes implemented in 2.0. I also agree with the concern that resetting stun breakers will make the side points on the Alderaan map incredibly difficult to convert once they have been initially captured (although I am of the opinion that this change will help clear out that gridlock on Voidstar considerably). I would like to propose a mechanic that I believe might help on both these maps.

Simply put, I would change the capture mechanic so that it no longer breaks on damage but rather undergoes a pushback effect similar to what players experience when taking damage while casting. Moves that normally interrupt channeled abilities -- stuns, knockbacks, leaps, and (of course) interrupt abilities -- would be the only means to stop a point from being captured. This would force defenders to be more proactive while stopping a capture, getting close to the capture point and risk putting themselves in the line of fire.

Obviously this idea would have to be tested first. I do see potential problems with players spamming capture points -- although I believe there would be several viable work-arounds (restricting the number of players who can initiate a cap at once for example) -- but even then I believe this to be preferential to the current state of affairs. I must also emphasize that it would not be necessary to apply this mechanic to Novare Coast; the current progressive capture system works almost perfectly IMHO.

[Edited because it is late, I am tired, and I mistook the post button for the preview one.]
Darth Sychotic: (Sith Juggernaut) "Whatever does not kill you has failed and must be made to pay egregiously for its error."
Kaz Keeno: (Scoundrel) "One day I hope we can just move on and put this whole 'trying-to-kill-me' nonsense behind us."

ManiacDavis's Avatar

05.27.2013 , 03:31 AM | #2
I don't think a pushback would be ideal. With the lag and twitchyness of servers one player would appear to cap while server side he got hit 0.1 second. I would rather see the Novare Objective mechanic in Civil War (2 nodes needed to progress).
Man-iac - The Only Commando Left Standing

SlightlySychotic's Avatar

05.27.2013 , 08:37 AM | #3
True. To be fair, my idea came for Voidstar first and I only thought about applying it to Alderaan after seeing all the concern that stun breakers would make the side posts inconvertible. I too would like to see a progressive mechanic applied to Alderaan . . . although part of me is reluctant to apply the same mechanic to multiple maps (especially when there are only five).
Darth Sychotic: (Sith Juggernaut) "Whatever does not kill you has failed and must be made to pay egregiously for its error."
Kaz Keeno: (Scoundrel) "One day I hope we can just move on and put this whole 'trying-to-kill-me' nonsense behind us."

Ajuntalee's Avatar

05.27.2013 , 09:15 AM | #4
It is a nice idea, but i see spamming as a problem with the mechanic you describe, so the nodes would randomly chnage over and over again.

Area Passive cap tranfer based on number of player around node would fail because of the defending side having fast respawn and being able to maintinanmore poeple alive around the node.

Novare cap transfer style would work better than now, but then we would just have 2 novare maps one being spawn biased ( novare) the other being pretty symetric spawnwise alderande.

The problem on alderande is the side speeders mechanic and the size of the map,

honestly the only fiix i can see for voidstarr is per phase perma death, maybee coupled with having only 1 gate to cap for phase one,

beat the other team in death match and cap, or ninja the cap before finishing them off,

then advance to next zone, get reinforced, enemy team respawns full with a 10% stats buff,

same mechanic for second zone but this time with 2 gates the way it is now, still perma death,

if doors 2 are gone through attackers get reinforced, defending team respawns full too in zone 3 with a 20% buff to all stats

same as now go through doors 3 and clik the " win "computer.

either that or much longer resopawn times.

3 big fat team deathtmatches with defenders getting buffed each time they lose a phase to give attackers more challenge on each phase. or maybee 5 to increase the Bg's length.

For alderande a simple fix would be to have defender spawn less close to objectives ( less bias) and a big stretch to the map. all maps are very small , it is okay but it would be good if one was a little more spacy.
it is difficult to do something as big as "arathi" with teams of 8, but a bg where holding your ground at 3 vs 3 matters as much as bus tactics would be good

on all maps at the moment

tug of war bus vs core
ninja capping,
or 2 vs 1 gank cap

are the only valid tactics

a bigger map with strong ( but less strong than now) defense respawn bias ( like alderande could become) would give the player base some change

where movement, objective defense involvement and small group pvp efficiency would have a bigger importance than in other maps

hypergate is a small armswrestling bloody map, Novare is small nervous and bloody, voidstarr is tiny stalemated and defensive map.

Alderande is a small stalemated defensive map. make it bigger and defender's number and movement become two ressource you can't waste anymore.

SlightlySychotic's Avatar

06.06.2013 , 04:58 PM | #5
I'd like to resurrect this thread now that we now that stun-breakers will not be reset upon death any time soon. Again, the primary focus of this suggestion would be the Voidstar but I still believe Alderaan could benefit.

So far, the only real solid objection I have heard is that it risks causing frequent overturns. As I said before, this could be easily offset by only allowing one or two cappers at a time (preferably one). Additionally, I don't believe frequent overturns to be an actual problem; rather, they would keep matches closer and therefore more exciting.
Darth Sychotic: (Sith Juggernaut) "Whatever does not kill you has failed and must be made to pay egregiously for its error."
Kaz Keeno: (Scoundrel) "One day I hope we can just move on and put this whole 'trying-to-kill-me' nonsense behind us."

foxmob's Avatar

06.06.2013 , 05:20 PM | #6
the only problem with voidstar, imo, is that ppl can respec for offense and defense. I would rather teams make a choice: would you rather have higher offensive capabilities and sacrifice durability on defense? or vice versa? note: I don't object to those who do respec. you should, since you are able to. I would find the matches more strategic and think there would be more movement, however, without the mid round respec.

yes, there is rng on the door. this is not a problem for any half decent rated team, and the only stalemates I encounter in regs are caused by an unusually large number of heals/tanks (i.e., ppl don't die).

likewise, in aldaaran, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the WZ in regard to causing a stalemate. the overabundance of healing has made the WZ drag on forever in regs since 2.0. I also detest the reliance on rollers to cap the natural node first. if you don't have predation + roller, you probably just lost your rated match. imo, the problem there isn't the WZ so much as the decided advantage that a particular class brings to the match coupled with the competence of rated healers (which is high).

something I do find a problem with in CW design is that the game can be over but you have to sit around on your thumbs or suffer the indignity of getting 3-capped just for the thing to end. notes on the upcoming patch seemed to address that issue insofar as a few players quitting will prevent the entire match from dragging on.

funkiestj's Avatar

06.06.2013 , 06:59 PM | #7
I prefer not to change the cap/interrupt dynamic. Instead I would implement any number of changes to make defending harder as time goes on
  1. longer respawn doors for defenders
  2. shorter door plant times as time goes on
  3. defenders stack a damage debuff
By doing just one of the above (or any combination) you could make the norm be that the attacker gets past the first door. Depending on how you tune it, the top 2 teams might usually get past the first door, 2nd door or 3rd door. In any case, we are back to competing on time, not kills.

With any of the above, I envision the defender handicap to reset each time a door blows.

Since other warzones don't have attacker/defender phases #1 and #3 don't apply but you could do #2 for NC/CW nodes, with the capture time resetting to the current capture time each time the node changes hands and then decreases.

Mr. Hat says "BW support is the best"!
I am a bad player, so what?

Raansu's Avatar

06.06.2013 , 08:06 PM | #8
Like others have said, pushback would just lead to multiple people spamming the cap and a full resolved player would be immune from being stopped from capping since knockbacks would be the only way to stop them. At the same time though I like the idea, but of course as the OP said it would need to be tested on the PTS. I am curious how that would change the strategy of voidstar. EDIT: I think what would make things interesting with the cap mechanic is have it be a bar that fills up. If the cap is interrupted the bar slowly drops until someone starts to cap again. This adds a bit more pressure to the defense by keeping attackers off the door while also making it possible to cap against a defense heavy team.

Civil War on the other hand I really would prefer if they changed its rule set to novare coast. I hate the point of no return concept. There have been dozens of times where we finally manage a capture after a long stalemate but it didn't matter because at that point we needed the impossible 3 cap. At least in NC, even at 4% you have the ability to still make a comback (rare but its awesome when it does happen). I'm indifferent about the capture mechanic though. Oh, and the side speeders...**** the side speeders. That **** needs to go away.

Laforet's Avatar

06.06.2013 , 10:57 PM | #9
My thoughts on VS is that i think its the other way around.

The LAST door is the easiest to cap while the 1st door is prolly the hardest (altho i think the second is harder but you always can have the slow effect that breaks a team so 2nd door is usually free).

They should make the 1st door an easy cap and the 2nd a medium difficulty cap and the 3rd hard as ****. This way maybe we dont have so much stalemates.

Also respecing is all good and fine. But respeccing at "half-time" in voidstar is beyond retarded.

Civil War is a hard one. Maybe they should make the side speeder landing further from the node, far or the rocks on the sides, dunno. Another option should be to account deaths for shields lost a la hypergates. This way teams that overcome mid battle by killing a lot of people will win the match even if they dont cap. No more 10-0 where the team who got slaughtered won because their side turret fired 1 tick faster.
Believer - Seer - Fatman - RETIRED

foxmob's Avatar

06.06.2013 , 11:32 PM | #10
Quote: Originally Posted by Laforet View Post
The LAST door is the easiest to cap while the 1st door is prolly the hardest (altho i think the second is harder but you always can have the slow effect that breaks a team so 2nd door is usually free).
I think the 2nd door is harder simply because I don't have to rely on randoms as much to eyeball both doors. luls.