.

[jorgemarco]

New scs are pure trash. Full 15 minutes for nothing and if the poll is 50-50 that means that scs are garbage. You cant tolerate having 50% of "NO" votes.

[perche]

in any sc is hard to get 500 point in the time, like in forge, phoenix gate or troll country, 10-13 minutes for less of 5 medallion, people still killing cause dont understand the mecanic of the new sc.

That's because they're still playing Scs for one of the two main reasons people have always played AoR/RoR Scs.

i agree with you, i like the old system more.

[RyanMakara]

Update needs some work(imo mainly the map-pool sorted), and nearly all the ones I've done with my group have just turned into farming the opposition. Don't think there are many people who go into a SC and thinks "i'd love to run the objective for the whole SC or next 5-10mins..."

If you 100% dedicate yourself to the objectives, the scenario should end in your favour sooner, in my estimation. If your group dedicates wholly to the objectives and it still takes 10-15 minutes to complete a SC, there is an inherent flaw in point distribution.

[Azarael]

I should have known you'd try this pressure tactic.

If your response to any problem on this development server is to, within 5 days of the introduction of a change, attempt a pressure tactic (public poll) to get the change overturned while fully aware that the system is not complete and while fully aware that the flaws are in the process of being rectified, then you are not going to survive this server when it comes to RvR or balance changes.

That is my warning to you, right now.

I don't dispute your sentiments. In the last build, the objective-based scenarios have been flawed. Poor rewards, because most of the previous rewards came from killing. Incentive to spawncamp, because renown and xp were banked for conversion at the end of the game. Issues with players holding an objective within their own base radius and stalling out the scenario.

What is annoying the hell out of me is the following:

I know that.
You know I know that.
You know I'm in the process of fixing that.
You STILL make the thread as a pressure tactic.

That is infuriating.

I am not standing here making these changes on my own. The reason you see chiefly me out here defending / commenting upon changes is twofold: I'm the primary mover and I have already sacrificed much of the goodwill that community members have towards me for the sake of being the enforcer or "bad guy" of the RoR staff, dealing with matters that are likely to annoy people. That's a sacrifice someone on the team has to make and I figure it falls more naturally to me than to most. It is not because I have unchecked control over everything.

Hence, there are people other than you that I listen to, and they do not coddle. If they think something is a lost cause or isn't going to work, they tell me. This is why I do not need you to come along making a damn poll within less than a week of the introduction of a change trying to pressure a revert. It doesn't work like that.

[RyanMakara]

New scs are pure trash. Full 15 minutes for nothing and if the poll is 50-50 that means that scs are garbage. You cant tolerate having 50% of "NO" votes.

Define 'nothing'. If you lose with 0-99 points but get 40 kills, you still got renown and XP from killing. If you win with 500 points and no kills, you get 6 emblems and a base renown/XP reward.

People will always say no in the face of change, even if it'll lead to something better for the majority in the long run. Conservatism in old-school metas is pretty evident on this server. The meta is not always the intent our developers actually have, though, thus past updates and metas are subject to change, especially in this volatile alpha environment. We practically CAN tolerate nay-saying if and when we determine that our own intentions and visions outweigh that of the initial player protest.

[wargrimnir]

I personally haven't had the greatest experiences in the new scenarios yet, but it's far too early to shut them down.

People. Learn. Adjust. Things change and it's scary. Give it a chance, some time, maybe instruct the apparent noobs on your team that doesn't understand the changes.

Everyone who reads the forums and votes on polls like this bears some responsibility on making sure the knowledge of these changes are spread to those you play with. QQ'ing that it's ****, no one understands it, that's your fault as much as ours. We do our best to disseminate information on the boards. You guys drag it into the game.

If these were pure deathmatches, they wouldn't have objectives. They do have objectives, so we're pushing in the direction that they should be objective based. Work in progress. More to come. Etc, etc.

Provide FEEDBACK under the context we are moving forward with said objective base. Not cringey entitled whine that it's not the same old TDM format.

[Dresden]

.

[Dresden]

I should have known you'd try this pressure tactic.

If your response to any problem on this development server is to, within 5 days of the introduction of a change, attempt a pressure tactic (public poll) to get the change overturned while fully aware that the system is not complete and while fully aware that the flaws are in the process of being rectified, then you are not going to survive this server when it comes to RvR or balance changes.

That is my warning to you, right now.

I don't dispute your sentiments. In the last build, the objective-based scenarios have been flawed. Poor rewards, because most of the previous rewards came from killing. Incentive to spawncamp, because renown and xp were banked for conversion at the end of the game. Issues with players holding an objective within their own base radius and stalling out the scenario.

What is annoying the hell out of me is the following:

I know that.
You know I know that.
You know I'm in the process of fixing that.
You STILL make the thread as a pressure tactic.

That is infuriating.

I am not standing here making these changes on my own. The reason you see chiefly me out here defending / commenting upon changes is twofold: I'm the primary mover and I have already sacrificed much of the goodwill that community members have towards me for the sake of being the enforcer or "bad guy" of the RoR staff, dealing with matters that are likely to annoy people. That's a sacrifice someone on the team has to make and I figure it falls more naturally to me than to most. It is not because I have unchecked control over everything.

Hence, there are people other than you that I listen to, and they do not coddle. If they think something is a lost cause or isn't going to work, they tell me. This is why I do not need you to come along making a damn poll within less than a week of the introduction of a change trying to pressure a revert. It doesn't work like that.

I decided to stop complaining and just ask other peoples opinions instead, i'm not trying to cause trouble, i included this in my OP to make that clear "I have lost the will to comment on and debate about... the stated (by RoR staff) planned changes to Scenarios that are coming.", this is totally nuetral, i don't have a position on this issue anymore.

However Scenarios are configured isn't something i wish to involve myself in anymore, i don't want a 'Revert' or anything else, i wasn't even under the impression that pressuring is possible given that this is a private no-£ server.

I don't dispute your sentiments. In the last build, the objective-based scenarios have been flawed. Poor rewards, because most of the previous rewards came from killing. Incentive to spawncamp, because renown and xp were banked for conversion at the end of the game. Issues with players holding an objective within their own base radius and stalling out the scenario.

What is annoying the hell out of me is the following:

I know that.
You know I know that.
You know I'm in the process of fixing that.
You STILL make the thread as a pressure tactic.

That is infuriating.

Eh? Wuhza? my sentiment WAS and ALWAYS WAS that killing for points and killing for rewards is VITAL to Scenarios, THAT was my ONLY concern, i'm confused as to wether we are on the same page about my now defunct position.

I'm sorry if i've caused any consternation or offence, i will now remove myself permanently from this conversation.

[Morbidmind]

Agreeing with the scenario change being a bit iffy at the moment. So far there have been a lot of 13-15 minute rounds spent just killing each other, for a small handful of emblems at best. Its just tedious.

[Gerv]

I really enjoy the new group of scenarios being more focused around the objectives. It gives people and more importantly pugs an alternative to win the scenario. I have faith in the staff to adjust the points rewards for holding objectives as required to ensure the scenarios don't drag on. This information gathering period is critical to allow accurate adjustments and I believe this has been lost on a few people.
I trust that once adjusted we will see a scenario rptation that includes both the objective based scenarios we have now and the kill focused scenarios. Remember, you can always pick which scenarios you que for. I think also a thread which breaks down the new scenario rules is important. Espically with capture and carry parts. I will make one when i get home.