Why close the scenario thread...

[Tesq]

Bye what ? im not goin anywhere you still bound to read my comments for another 5 years. Haven't you still learnt after 5 years and 5k post?

Happy 5 year anniversary other 5 of "these" years!(and post )

[Ototo]

1) Thankfully, you're not in charge of the game, because such a dismissive, blase approach would kill off smallscale 10x quicker than is currently the case!
2) It isn't a lie: offensive gear and weapons have literally gone over to PvE from scenarios, with offensive sets for tanks and heals having been attainable via scenarios beforehand, and the new weapons looking like carbon copies of the rr61, with an added 5% damage to boot. I am curious as to what your reply to this will be.
3) Who said anything about getting stomped by 1% stats? You're strawmanning harrrrd today, bro! We have been talking about incentivising all areas of the game: saying 'but scenario is already incentivised' is disingenuous because the gear and weapons it offers is either redundant or outgunned by alternatives from other parts of the game. What is also disingenuous is to deliberately downplay the effect such items will have on the game.

1) My attitude to you comes from your attitude to me. Don't try to make it sounds otherwise.

2) Read the "Deal with it" part.

3) I don't want scenario incentives. People that play to grind sit AFK in Forts, and so did while the scenario weapons were the BiS. I don't want any grind tied to scenarios. I want to play scenarios cause I want to with players that like to. Again read the "Deal with it" but also the "I play a game to have fun".

[shaggyboomboom]

1) Thankfully, you're not in charge of the game, because such a dismissive, blase approach would kill off smallscale 10x quicker than is currently the case!
2) It isn't a lie: offensive gear and weapons have literally gone over to PvE from scenarios, with offensive sets for tanks and heals having been attainable via scenarios beforehand, and the new weapons looking like carbon copies of the rr61, with an added 5% damage to boot. I am curious as to what your reply to this will be.
3) Who said anything about getting stomped by 1% stats? You're strawmanning harrrrd today, bro! We have been talking about incentivising all areas of the game: saying 'but scenario is already incentivised' is disingenuous because the gear and weapons it offers is either redundant or outgunned by alternatives from other parts of the game. What is also disingenuous is to deliberately downplay the effect such items will have on the game.

1) My attitude to you comes from your attitude to me. Don't try to make it sounds otherwise.

2) Read the "Deal with it" part.

3) I don't want scenario incentives. People that play to grind sit AFK in Forts, and so did while the scenario weapons were the BiS. I don't want any grind tied to scenarios. I want to play scenarios cause I want to with players that like to. Again read the "Deal with it" but also the "I play a game to have fun".

tbh your attitude was sore from the start

[Ototo]

1) Thankfully, you're not in charge of the game, because such a dismissive, blase approach would kill off smallscale 10x quicker than is currently the case!
2) It isn't a lie: offensive gear and weapons have literally gone over to PvE from scenarios, with offensive sets for tanks and heals having been attainable via scenarios beforehand, and the new weapons looking like carbon copies of the rr61, with an added 5% damage to boot. I am curious as to what your reply to this will be.
3) Who said anything about getting stomped by 1% stats? You're strawmanning harrrrd today, bro! We have been talking about incentivising all areas of the game: saying 'but scenario is already incentivised' is disingenuous because the gear and weapons it offers is either redundant or outgunned by alternatives from other parts of the game. What is also disingenuous is to deliberately downplay the effect such items will have on the game.

1) My attitude to you comes from your attitude to me. Don't try to make it sounds otherwise.

2) Read the "Deal with it" part.

3) I don't want scenario incentives. People that play to grind sit AFK in Forts, and so did while the scenario weapons were the BiS. I don't want any grind tied to scenarios. I want to play scenarios cause I want to with players that like to. Again read the "Deal with it" but also the "I play a game to have fun".

tbh your attitude was sore from the start

That's cause he was flaming a thread I created, then proceed to start to send me insults via PM.

[shaggyboomboom]

1) My attitude to you comes from your attitude to me. Don't try to make it sounds otherwise.

2) Read the "Deal with it" part.

3) I don't want scenario incentives. People that play to grind sit AFK in Forts, and so did while the scenario weapons were the BiS. I don't want any grind tied to scenarios. I want to play scenarios cause I want to with players that like to. Again read the "Deal with it" but also the "I play a game to have fun".

tbh your attitude was sore from the start

That's cause he was flaming a thread I created, then proceed to start to send me insults via PM.

but you really shouldnt be playing the victim of evil elitists 6 mans as you say

[Ototo]

but you really shouldnt be playing the victim of evil elitists 6 mans as you say

If you say so....

[Luth]

my question is
why do you lure players who don't want 'competition and challenge' into that area ?
or
why do you want un-qualified players sign in 'competition and challenge' game ?

IMO, it'll only reduce 'competition and challenge' part.
like pouring water into salt water.
it'll get less and less salty. less competitive.
what's the logic of 'more player = more competition and challenge' ?
to me it sounds like 'more un-qualified player = more farm'

That makes no sense.
The average player is a living being, capable of learning, evolving and adapting to a different environment.
Players in a scenario are active participants. The players are not the liquids, they are the ones who use the liquids and maybe pour them together if the see fit; this or every other tool that can be operated by them.
You just degraded players to abiotic objects.
Same goes for "luring players into that area"; that happens maybe one time for a group of newbies and then they decide to stay away or get better.

[Alteia]

I dont know if its been said, there are 13 pages to this thread and I really don't wanna read though it all - props to those that do.

Remember on Live they had it for a while where SCs were a vital part of zone flips and campaigns?

VPs were calculated based on:
-Scenario victories for the related pairing (ie. Battle for Praag would contribute to Chaos/Emp pairing campaign),
-Battle Field Objectives,
-PVP kills & deaths,
-PVE (PQs completed),
-Previous Tier campaign status,

Spoiler:

Flip Chaos/Emp T1 to contribute to VP for Chaos/Emp T2 campaign,
Flip Chaos/Emp T2 to contribute to VP for Chaos/Emp T3 campaign,
Flip Chaos/Emp T3 to contribute to VP for Chaos/Emp T4 campaign.

I wanted to suggest: maybe we can take a page out of their book and look to integrate SCs as part of the campaign to potentially break up the blobs a bit, encourage smaller group play, and allow those 6man groups to have some sort of contribution towards realm campaign progression.

We love WAR and I really hate to see how dead its gotten lately. Its really sad to see that server was upped to 1500 capacity but we can barely even maintain 300 in NA prime.


Edit: VP = Victory Points, I failed to define it, sorry! Also should have said that there was a threshold of (whatever #) of VPs to be able to flip a zone and it couldn't be flipped with simply keep takes and BFOs alone.

[anarchypark]

That makes no sense.
The average player is a living being, capable of learning, evolving and adapting to a different environment.
Players in a scenario are active participants. The players are not the liquids, they are the ones who use the liquids and maybe pour them together if the see fit; this or every other tool that can be operated by them.
You just degraded players to abiotic objects.
Same goes for "luring players into that area"; that happens maybe one time for a group of newbies and then they decide to stay away or get better.

i see those ppl everyday.
afk in fort, afk in sc, let's lose to get fort, let's do nothing to farm them etc.
you'll get those ppl inside no-objective kill trade SC farming.
to farm whatever reward in there.
not much different from current SC,
more easy to farm kills or afk after 1 wipe.
hope u get challenge and competition in there, i really do.
so i don't see nobrains in objective strategy game.

[Toonman]

Roll back the sc queue changes and it would improve sc play by a lot alone. Then we can think about incentives to promote making groups for sc.

This guy gets it.

#makeSCgreatagain