Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Proposed Solution for Draw Kiting and Indefinate Camping

2twoto2twoto Registered Users Posts: 68
I know this topic has been done quite a few times with, at best, inconclusive results, but I do want to propose this solution to the draw-kiting and indefinite camping (including corner-camping) problems anyways because I think it has some potential (though it might require refining/adjustment). The idea is relatively simple and uses mechanics currently present in the game:

CA adds a capture zone to the center of every Multiplayer map (or, if the center is unsuitable, the next closest open area). However, unlike in campaign, this capture point will have no in-game effect (i.e. no buff for holding it, no count down till victory, etc). If the time hits 0 before one army is defeated, whoever has the point captured (or is closest to capturing it, if contested) wins. Draws only occur if the point is neutral (i.e. neither army has sent any units into the point at any point in time in the entire game).

Reasons for advocation:
1) Better Objective: Draw kiting arises becomes sometimes the battle seems unwinnable, so instead one the player will try to ensure their opponent cannot win rather fight anyways. So long as the objective remains as “wipe out the opposing army,” this will always be a temptation and possibility; if your opponent cannot wipe you out, you cannot lose. Indefinite camping is similar: those engaging in this practice refuse to leave the advantageous position lest it result in a loss, and if they don't give you the win by advancing you don't loose anything. This solution changes the objective: the objective is battlefield control, and so the winner is whomever claims it. Thus, neither form of cheese is viable: refusing to fight/advance results in defeat, as the draw kiting/indefinitely camping player is effectively ceding the battlefield.

2) Fully Implementable: As discussed, this would use the capture-point system already used for towers, gates, and town squares. Implementing such here should be relatively easy and simple.

3) Hard to Cheese:There are not many, if any, cheesy strategies that can result in an unfair win using this system: the area will be in the center of the battlefield, so boxes cannot start on it and won’t be able to move there quickly (i.e. there will be plenty of time for both sides to get to the point). Likewise, the point is worthless until the end of the game: trying to set up there ASAP merely gives the opponent control of the rest of the battlefield and opens the camper up for a surround and/or allows the opponent to empty all their ranged onto them, so it wouldn’t be viable to simply camp there and try to win by holding out for 20 minutes (assuming balanced army on the part of the opponent). Likewise, camping off the point lets your opponent wait out of range of the artillery/ranged assets until near end of the timer then move onto the point, either forcing the camper to move beforehand (thus forcing him out of camping) or else let his opponent set up on the point, which will likely result in the camper not being able to take the point before the game ends. The Capture point system is furthermore quite resilient to last-second captures, being relatively slow cap without a large amount of models on it, having capping speed slowed greatly by the presence of enemy units, and calculating speed of capture not on unit models in the zone: infantry units will capture the point much faster than Cav/SEM’s will, and will count higher for determining who is winning the point. Considering draw-kiting relies primarily on cavalry, flyers, and/or SEM’s (i.e. low model-count units), this helps prevent cheesing a win by doing something like avoiding combat while picking off a few units here and there then bum-rushing the victory point at the last minute to cap it: the draw-kiter will take longer too long to camp or will loose in melee, resulting in the bum-rush likely ending in failure. Also, one can block access to the point with good infantry positioning, making such rushes hard to pull off by kite armies. Likewise, there is a little notification in-game about the capture point when the battle is close to ending, so players shouldn’t be caught unawares. Basically, it will be a final win condition that probably won’t come into play most matches, but when it does shouldn't be cheesable.

4) Shouldn’t Affect Gameplay: Due to the point having no bonuses and the lack of ability to cheese the point, gameplay shouldn’t be adversely affected: no current strategy will be made invalid and the difficulty in cheesing the system will prevent cheesy strategies from arising. All this would do is remove draw kiting and indefinite camping as viable strategies (normal kiting and boxes should still be as viable as they are now).

Let me know what you think: I believe this solution solves most problems with indefinite camping and draw kiting while introducing few, if any, in return, but I might be wrong about something here, so feedback and refinement would be appreciated.
«13

Comments

  • blindjonnblindjonn Registered Users Posts: 120
    While a King-of-the-Hill objective would disproportionately favour certain army compositions, any solution that encourages fighting instead of running is preferable to what we have now.

    I'd be more interested in a system that forced both players to have attack orders on automatically at the end of a round, which would automate current tournament rules. One way of doing this would be to impose a massive morale penalty on a player who is kiting/running away after the time limit.
  • The_real_FAUSTThe_real_FAUST Registered Users Posts: 427
    This has merit.

    It would change army comps slightly, but there's no reason why it shouldn't do so overly give its still Deathmatch until the last 2 mins or so.

    Not a fan of automated attack orders. It'll just suicide your glade riders into some Spearmen or have them only firing to the front hitting Shields. There are better routes than this.
  • blindjonnblindjonn Registered Users Posts: 120

    Not a fan of automated attack orders. It'll just suicide your glade riders into some Spearmen or have them only firing to the front hitting Shields. There are better routes than this.

    My idea was more to have a 'voluntary' attack order, which can be changed from unit to unit. The player would be penalised with a morale penalty if it is dropped. This would hurt kiters and cycle chargers and help players with multiple remaining units. In the event of a very small amount of units on either side, you just get a straight up heroic brawl. I suppose this could be cheesed by holding a unit in reserve, but it would make your "active" army much weaker. Perhaps there are better ways of imposing tournament rules.

    KotH/Zone Capture is another great solution to draw kiting, though. Elite infantry are currently underwhelming, KotH would make those units relevant again. It would also boost Dwarves, the ultimate line holders, who are currently too weak.

    The problem with both of these solutions are the Undead factions. They would be a nightmare to push off a point and they would need a separate system for any 'morale penalty'.

  • Jman5Jman5 Registered Users Posts: 269
    edited February 14
    It shocks me that this hasn't happened yet. You put the point in an exposed central location. If they can hold that without being killed, they deserve the win.

    Honestly, I would go further. Put a few capture points around the map and offer small army bonuses for holding them. There should be more tangible rewards for having map control.
  • sonofabhorashsonofabhorash Registered Users Posts: 161
    I like it
    First of all its better than nothin
    2nd pretty simple to implement
    3rd its not so common that players are gettin draw kited(well i dont play dorfs and by them i can imagine being drawkoted the most)
    So y i would give it a try

    There might be even simplier(not better) rule
    Whoever got better army ratio in the end, WINS the game
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,942
    Yup, this is the simpler and thus easier to implement win condition that as you say would be harmless for the game.

    I think first of all its good to keep in mind that this doesn't just solve draw kiting, it also solves arguments between players about "who engages first" and where, and prevents corner camping as a viable strategy. It also will replace almost all of the clunky tournament rules around attacking, so even if they just made this as an OPTION in multiplayer battles it would be nice for that.


    Critics believe that people would devise armies specifically designed to hold for 20+ minutes, for example an all tree army against certain factions, and this would become the new cheese. They argue that the reason this isn't already prevalent is that a guaranteed draw with such an army isn't as rewarding as a guaranteed win would be. They argue that draw kiting is essentially a "good" mechanic to the extent that it lets you punish such an army with a draw.


    With respect to those criticisms, I was not aware that the current capture point mechanics are as ideal as you described, but I think you address all the criticisms or that they could easily do so if the mechanics don't already. If # of models takes precedence and the capture point is reasonably large (as it is in castle sieges), then infantry armies will have a natural advantage in slowly claiming it even if it is contested. Given that infantry armies are by their nature incapable of lasting 20 minutes in cheesy ways the way a SEM blob might, i think there is no danger of invulnerable armies having an advantage. The most extreme might be hordes of undead infantry plus summons? An ironbreaker box (though that would easily be outnumbered by enemy units)? I don't think it's unreasonable at all to expect to have to kill the enemy army in such cases to earn a win rather than refusing to engage them.

    In the most extreme case, if you made game length an extra five minutes (25) or in multiplayer custom battles simply selected a longer game (e.g. 40 minutes) it would be even more impossible to try to take an unkillable army, which in turn would remove any incentive from trying to exploit the cap rules to win (so such armies wouldn't be taken nor would games go that long).
  • ystyst Registered Users Posts: 6,626
    Thats just stupid, turning the game into some foolish cap-hammer. Ya gg dwf and voast, good luck with frikking zombies. While vanguard wild riders owning the map with auto win. Full dryads, scouts, stalker, orion.

    What it shocks me is that ppl r still frikking clueless after what 4 yrs now? capture point is NEVER EVER frikking gonna work. Ya brets suiciding the entire cav because theyve to cap a forest, gg.

    Point system is ALREADY in game, wth no one ever wants to discuss this perfect anti draw mechanic and come up with some cap hammer stuffs.

    12,400 points on each, whats so frikking hard to award the guy with 2,000 points higher than the opponent a win, plenty of parameters to be adjusted, can be 500, 1000 who cares. Its already in game and its sure as hell how frikking tabletop works, no some magical funny flag popping up somewhere
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,942
    edited February 14
    yst said:

    Thats just stupid, turning the game into some foolish cap-hammer. Ya gg dwf and voast, good luck with frikking zombies. While vanguard wild riders owning the map with auto win. Full dryads, scouts, stalker, orion.

    What it shocks me is that ppl r still frikking clueless after what 4 yrs now? capture point is NEVER EVER frikking gonna work. Ya brets suiciding the entire cav because theyve to cap a forest, gg.

    Point system is ALREADY in game, wth no one ever wants to discuss this perfect anti draw mechanic and come up with some cap hammer stuffs.

    12,400 points on each, whats so frikking hard to award the guy with 2,000 points higher than the opponent a win, plenty of parameters to be adjusted, can be 500, 1000 who cares. Its already in game and its sure as hell how frikking tabletop works, no some magical funny flag popping up somewhere

    well but points unless cleverly designed encourages you to do some early damage and then kite the rest of the game.

    as for caps, the way 222 describes it i don't see the danger. so the wood elves hang around til the end not engaging and you sit your whole army on the capture area they're not going to outnumber you suddenly at the end. he described a capture point that tilts slowly towards whoever has more models on it.

    Bretts charging a forest is not a legit complaint. Very few maps will have the capture point in a forest and the few that do that's just life - no reason you should never have to fight a battle in a forest. But the other 97% of the time bretts just have to charge the enemy army, exactly like it is right now.
  • ystyst Registered Users Posts: 6,626
    edited February 14
    Nah thats just impossible, parameters can easily be expanded, theres no frikking way any1 can kite > than say 3000 points. If any1 can do a perfect 12.4k vs a 9.4k army, wtf they even need to kite, its an obviously stomp over already.

    Kites game r extremely disproportionate, ure talking about say an entire 7000 points army of dwf chasing like a noctilus at 2500 or something where the bar hasnt kick in for full crumble.

    Those funny kites, full air, horse archer etc, few 1000s points upper hard is just impossible. Its impossible in the sense if someone already did that thats just roflstomp already it would NOT BE IN THE FAVOR of the kiter when hes actually owning the match to self draw kite himself lol.

    Even the greatest attempt to “kite” a win out of the match via whatever means, would be severely limited by time itself, u simply cant have such a great points “ahead” of your opponent and NOT ALREADY BE WINNING that match itself.

    As i said, parameters r easily adjusted by CA. Its a far better solution than artifically and frikking murdering CA staff in implementing and depleting resources just to put a point for every single map. Thats frikking 100 hrs+ of work. 9/10 maps r NOT SYMMETRICAL tp be stressed as such



    Capture point r NOT REALISTIC, CA cbf even adding siege lol!!! What makes u think they r gonna do a cap point on regular maps
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,942
    edited February 14
    Yeah so I agree the points version may be more ready to implement by CA and that if you make the spread reasonably large to spur victory it shouldn't encourage draw kiting. not a bad solution, although it doesn't address corner camping per se. That said, I think honestly corner camping is more of a preference thing (most people hate it) and less of a terrible game design issue. I'll accept some cheese but would love to have a game with any kind of clearer win condition to dictate the action.

    On the flip side though, if you make the spread needed to win reasonably large then it also doesn't solve as many cases of draw kiting. Still, probably most draw kiting occurs when people know they've lost.

    As for capture points being hard to implement, sure that's probably the worst knock on it that they would have to go manually and edit a bunch of maps to have them. Seems not that hard though, and if nothing else they darn well better do it for WH3.
  • 2twoto2twoto Registered Users Posts: 68
    yst said:

    Thats just stupid, turning the game into some foolish cap-hammer. Ya gg dwf and voast, good luck with frikking zombies. While vanguard wild riders owning the map with auto win. Full dryads, scouts, stalker, orion.

    What it shocks me is that ppl r still frikking clueless after what 4 yrs now? capture point is NEVER EVER frikking gonna work. Ya brets suiciding the entire cav because theyve to cap a forest, gg.
    [...]

    Nah thats just impossible, parameters can easily be expanded, theres no frikking way any1 can kite > than say 3000 points. If any1 can do a perfect 12.4k vs a 9.4k army, wtf they even need to kite, its an obviously stomp over already.

    Kites game r extremely disproportionate, ure talking about say an entire 7000 points army of dwf chasing like a noctilus at 2500 or something where the bar hasnt kick in for full crumble.

    Those funny kites, full air, horse archer etc, few 1000s points upper hard is just impossible. Its impossible in the sense if someone already did that thats just roflstomp already it would NOT BE IN THE FAVOR of the kiter when hes actually owning the match to self draw kite himself lol.

    Even the greatest attempt to “kite” a win out of the match via whatever means, would be severely limited by time itself, u simply cant have such a great points “ahead” of your opponent and NOT ALREADY BE WINNING that match itself.

    As i said, parameters r easily adjusted by CA. Its a far better solution than artifically and frikking murdering CA staff in implementing and depleting resources just to put a point for every single map. Thats frikking 100 hrs+ of work. 9/10 maps r NOT SYMMETRICAL tp be stressed as such

    I think you miss-assess the proposition: this is a solution that only comes into play at the literal end of the battle, requiring the battle itself to go on for 20 minutes (a very rare occurrence if both players are playing normally). As such, it would only realistically come into play if one side is actively draw-kiting or indefinitely camping, in which case it threatens them with a loss if they don't stop said conduct before the game's end. Basically, there shouldn't be a point in time where one person is forced to suicide everything to take a point unless that person was purposefully avoiding combat the whole game or camping away from the point. Likewise, if someone did do the Orion vanguard you suggested, the opponent could just shell them from afar with artillery (taking their time to empty all of it if the other player literally refuses to move from the point) then advance and attack the now devastated army, or else (if they don't have artillery/ranged) could deal with the wild riders and then get a full surround on the box.

    Your alternative solution is also flawed: while a point system would admittedly help in some cases of draw-kiting (emphasis on some, not all: I had a game where I got draw kited by Teclis, a noble on a chariot, a tironoc chariot, and 2 tattered units of sisters out of ammo vs my 2 very healthy tree kin, a branchwraith, 2 or 3 75% health eternal guard, and wardancers at 25%. If he had fought I would've won but he technically had more points on the field then I did) it does nothing to solve indefinite camping, specifically when it comes to corner camping, and would even encourage it: the corner camper can win by poking with ranged/artillery then sit in the corner and bunker for the rest of the match (in some maps, depending on deployment, it's fully possible to hit the opposing army with artillery already in the corner). If the opponent tries to fight the camper, then he is at a massive disadvantage due to basically being funneled into a gauntlet by the map, but if he refuses he either looses (if his army took enough damage before he pulled out of range) or gets a draw, resulting in the system failing to solve the problem. Comparatively, the center cap system will force the corner-camping player to move eventually while not forcing the other player to take unnecessary losses: he can wait out of range of his opponent till the corner-camper moves or until the timer is about to end (at which point he will be able to cap the point faster due to not being the one camping at the literal farthest point from the center of the map, and the opponent will not be able to drive him off the point fast enough due to his army being so far away).

    Again, the system isn't perfect, my knowledge of cap points isn't perfect (all my claims are based on campaign observations, so IDK the specifics of the cap point system) and it would admittedly take some discretion on CA's part (the middle of the map is the ideal place, but if the middle is a forest or too close to a good camping spot then it should be moved farther from those areas of strategic advantage), but I doubt it would take a relatively large amount of time compared to other quality of life features.
  • ystyst Registered Users Posts: 6,626
    2twoto said:

    it does nothing to solve indefinite camping, specifically when it comes to corner camping, and would even encourage it: the corner camper can win by poking with ranged/artillery then sit in the corner and bunker for the rest of the match (in some maps, depending on deployment, it's fully possible to hit the opposing army with artillery already in the corner). If the opponent tries to fight the camper, then he is at a massive disadvantage due to basically being funneled into a gauntlet by the map, but if he refuses he either looses (if his army took enough damage before he pulled out of range) or gets a draw, resulting in the system failing to solve the problem.

    If ure getting owned by art from the start, ure got rofl stomped with or without point system. So ure saying the guy got pounded by art, so he decides NOT to frikking attack?!?!?!? ure talking about actively DRAW KITING already

    Ya lets hide and go cap the flag, in which again gets pounded by art holding the flag, which he can simply breeze thru when he arrives as ure basically stubbornly holding the flag getting rekt by art.

    Flag cap does nothing but force ppl mindlessly going for the flag. Can easily hide a $100 peasant, end of the game when everything is so far away simply ninja the flag and win, like who cares about $2000 army owning a $7000 due to flag cap.

    Like literally turns the game into pure range-fest. U really just need art to be in range with the flag and ppl have to be braindead-forced to go there, get bombarded the crap out of them or lose the game, all they need is a simple light cav to reset the flag. Like really basic flag mechanic abuse, been there for decades, de-tag, reset, u name it. Almost done capping the flag? hit them with 1 arrow. Send in a single chaff, cycle charge. Pop a zombie here, get a manticore, use air unit, or is air unit totally handicap and cannot cap flag, turning them into useless unit end game.

    Dont like it? have to move out of the circle, chase them all across the map. Bored of chasing? goes back tot he circle, get rekt by missile.

    Multi cap points r even worse, turning the game into nothing but flag trading, flag rotation, position change. If flag is a thing, army composition will never be the same again. The old boring light cav cap will return. Unit purpose would be different, itll be super range oriented, since ppl r forced to get shot, factions like nosca r pretty much sitting ducks
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • Jman5Jman5 Registered Users Posts: 269
    Whether or not CA bothers to do anything, a cap point in an open field is the easiest and most effective solution to both draw-kiting and campers. I've seen it work before in other games that had similar problems where neither side wants to give up a defensible position, or one side just runs/hides either to pull a draw or because they're a sore loser.

    I have no clue why CA seems happy to leave things like they are, but it's a proven solution.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 22,831
    Practically all other RTS games have capture zones or bases that factor into the win conditions. It can't be that TW somehow's so special that it can't be made to work here, I'm not going to buy that.

    Also, saying that people "would build armies tailored to holding ground"? Really? As if people aren't building armies made for kiting right now just because the game is encouraging it.

  • 2twoto2twoto Registered Users Posts: 68
    @yst I feel like you are misinterpreting what was said: the example you cite from me was specifically discussing corner camping, a cheesy strategy in which someone sets up all their forces in the corner of the map and refuses to leave from there, forcing their opponent to attack from essentially one direction while denying the flanks and rear due to the map boarder. It's not draw kiting to refuse to play into that and instead wait outside their range until the opponent stops abusing the corner. This solution proposes an alternative win condition so you don't have to loose or draw to cheese like that.

    Likewise, I didn't say the opponent got "owned by art from the start," but pointed out that a corner camper may, at the beginning of the game, deal enough damage with artillery initially to put the point balance in his favor. After all, that artillery start in range to hit vanguard units, and on some maps artillery in a corner can hit the closest parts of the opposing deployment zone (thus able to hit troops there). If victory is merely determined by whomever has the most points at the game's end, then that immediately forces a loss on the non-corner camping player: if they attack the corner camping position, they loose, but if they don't they either loose anyways due to having less points then their opponent or, if there is a high point-requirement to be granted a win, the game will be a draw. In any of these circumstances, the corner-camping player either wins or draws, encouraging its use. Thus, the point system doesn't work to deny indefinite camping.

    You also seem to underestimate map size: while artillery can hit vanguard-ed units from the corner (and sometimes is able to hit the closest edges of the opposing deployment zone from there), there is no multiplayer map where you can effectively zone off your opponent from the center insofar as to ensure you can reach the center before them AND camp the corner/line: the camper will either be forced to move up (in which case they will no longer be corner camping), be forced to abandon their artillery in the back while moving up the rest of the army (reducing any value it might generate and leave it vulnerable to attack, while also guaranteeing that the forward force is outnumbered), or they will loose the game. Moreover, unless the corner camper starts moving up early, he will not be able to take the point: you can set up infantry/units along the edge of the point to block access from the center, with the only units able to push through quickly (SEM's and charriots) not having enough weight to claim it if there opponent already has the majority of his army there.
    yst said:


    Like really basic flag mechanic abuse, been there for decades, de-tag, reset, u name it. Almost done capping the flag? hit them with 1 arrow. Send in a single chaff, cycle charge. Pop a zombie here, get a manticore, use air unit, or is air unit totally handicap and cannot cap flag, turning them into useless unit end game.

    Dont like it? have to move out of the circle, chase them all across the map. Bored of chasing? goes back tot he circle, get rekt by missile.

    I suppose this is my bad: I forgot that there's a fair number of people here who don't play the campaign much, so I should've been clearer about what I know of the capture point mechanic. I'll lay it out here:

    The time to capture seems to be able to be specifically set: town centers take longer to capture than gates which, in turn, are slower to capture than towers. Thus, while a tower can be captured in 5 seconds by a single unit of infantry, the town center will take closer to a minute (slightly unsure on the exact time) to capture by the same. Capture points can start out as neutral and can either be set to always return to neutral if there are no units in the zone (as it is with towers) or not (remains with the player who captured it last, as is the case with gates). An already captured point cannot be de-capped back to neutral by contesting the point: the animation will show the flag being de-capped and re-capped, but it will not switch who controls the zone until it has been fully re-capped (as is the case with the town center). This can also be set to skip the decapping and instead have control directly switch over to the opponent if he has more models contesting (as is the case with towers). Shattered units do not count for contesting a point, though routing units sometimes do (it's rather inconsistent when/if this happens). Air units cannot contribute to capturing a point (save for a few bugs here and there with some of the units) unless they are on the ground in melee. If contested, the point is pulled to one player or the other based on the number of models in the square: it is thus really hard to "deadlock" the capture of the point.

    The details of how the point should work based on this can be discussed/examined further, but now that they are explained I'll address why your worries are irrelevant: hitting the enemy with 1 arrow will not stop the capture. Ever. A single chaff unit or zombie summon will only slow the capturing, not stop it (unless there are very few opponent models on the point, in which case you should be contesting anyways). Air units must be engaged to cap it, so they are still useful but not able to cheese the point. Cycle charging will have a minimal effect on capturing: every time the unit leaves to charge again, their influence on the point disappears. If you can't catch their missiles anyways, then chasing them won't help. If you can, then you would be doing that instead of getting rekt by them. Likewise, de-capping not be a thing while the point is contested, so it cannot be reset/de-tagged like that (and can be further set to never go back to neutral if desired, though IDK if that would be the best way to do it).

    And finally, remember that this does not affect any games where both players are engaging in sportsmanlike conduct and actively fighting each other: those games almost always end long before the timer is about to run out (in fact, I don't think I've seen a tournament or non-cheesing game where the timer ran out before one army or the other was routed). Considering that accounts for 90% of games, this mechanic is only relevant in about 10% of match ups where one player decides to indefinitely camp/draw kite, and in those cases these mechanics will punish such players by giving their opponent an alternative win condition that undermines the point of corner camping/draw kiting.
  • WitchbladeWitchblade Registered Users Posts: 485
    I don't play campaign, so I don't know how thought out this is, but how do you define who holds a point? Is it based on the total gold or balance of power value in the capture point? Do fliers count?
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 22,831

    I don't play campaign, so I don't know how thought out this is, but how do you define who holds a point? Is it based on the total gold or balance of power value in the capture point? Do fliers count?

    Every troop outside fliers can de-capture points. Only infantry can actually capture it and it's weighted. If you have more units in the zone than your enemy, you start taking it over.

  • 2twoto2twoto Registered Users Posts: 68

    I don't play campaign, so I don't know how thought out this is, but how do you define who holds a point? Is it based on the total gold or balance of power value in the capture point? Do fliers count?

    Every troop outside fliers can de-capture points. Only infantry can actually capture it and it's weighted. If you have more units in the zone than your enemy, you start taking it over.
    I'm pretty sure every troop outside of fliers in the air can capture the point, not just infantry (I've had all-cav bretonia armies capture gates and town centers before). Infantry just capture the point the fastest due to high model counts, whereas SEM, heroes, and the like take a much longer time to cap due to being 1 model.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 22,831
    2twoto said:

    I don't play campaign, so I don't know how thought out this is, but how do you define who holds a point? Is it based on the total gold or balance of power value in the capture point? Do fliers count?

    Every troop outside fliers can de-capture points. Only infantry can actually capture it and it's weighted. If you have more units in the zone than your enemy, you start taking it over.
    I'm pretty sure every troop outside of fliers in the air can capture the point, not just infantry (I've had all-cav bretonia armies capture gates and town centers before). Infantry just capture the point the fastest due to high model counts, whereas SEM, heroes, and the like take a much longer time to cap due to being 1 model.
    I know for sure that cavalry at least can't capture points, only decap them.

  • 2twoto2twoto Registered Users Posts: 68

    2twoto said:

    I don't play campaign, so I don't know how thought out this is, but how do you define who holds a point? Is it based on the total gold or balance of power value in the capture point? Do fliers count?

    Every troop outside fliers can de-capture points. Only infantry can actually capture it and it's weighted. If you have more units in the zone than your enemy, you start taking it over.
    I'm pretty sure every troop outside of fliers in the air can capture the point, not just infantry (I've had all-cav bretonia armies capture gates and town centers before). Infantry just capture the point the fastest due to high model counts, whereas SEM, heroes, and the like take a much longer time to cap due to being 1 model.
    I know for sure that cavalry at least can't capture points, only decap them.
    Cavalry can, in fact, capture points. Evidence:

    Louin is on a horse, so the Bretonian army is all cavalry.

    Further proof, in case you think it is Leon or the Green knight doing the capping
    Only grail guardians there, yet the Bretonian flag is being raised and the gate is nearly captured.

    A few seconds later: Gate capped by cavalry and only cavalry.
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 8,287
    Only way capture point could work is if they were randomly spawned and changed location during the game to discurage camping and build 100% defensive armies that revolve around CP camping. In order to avoid mobile armies having an advantage, the cupture rate should be based on units speed, with slower units having a significantly higher capture speed.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 22,831

    Only way capture point could work is if they were randomly spawned and changed location during the game to discurage camping and build 100% defensive armies that revolve around CP camping. In order to avoid mobile armies having an advantage, the cupture rate should be based on units speed, with slower units having a significantly higher capture speed.

    That would completely defeat the purpose of capture zones and once again favor highly mobile factions over more stationary ones, so that's a no.

  • Disposable HeroDisposable Hero Registered Users Posts: 4,020

    Only way capture point could work is if they were randomly spawned and changed location during the game to discurage camping and build 100% defensive armies that revolve around CP camping. In order to avoid mobile armies having an advantage, the cupture rate should be based on units speed, with slower units having a significantly higher capture speed.

    That would completely defeat the purpose of capture zones and once again favor highly mobile factions over more stationary ones, so that's a no.
    This is not against mobile armies or stationary armies, its against corner camping and draw kiting.
  • The_real_FAUSTThe_real_FAUST Registered Users Posts: 427
    The whole point I think was that it was normal Deathmatch and THEN if it's a draw scenario we get a capture point so if you beat someone as you normally would then it doesn't come into play.

    If you're at 20 mins and no winner then capture point, but you can still Deathmatch tour opponent even if capture point is present.

    No?
  • AsamuAsamu Registered Users Posts: 640
    edited February 15
    yst said:

    Thats just stupid, turning the game into some foolish cap-hammer. Ya gg dwf and voast, good luck with frikking zombies. While vanguard wild riders owning the map with auto win. Full dryads, scouts, stalker, orion.

    What it shocks me is that ppl r still frikking clueless after what 4 yrs now? capture point is NEVER EVER frikking gonna work. Ya brets suiciding the entire cav because theyve to cap a forest, gg.

    Point system is ALREADY in game, wth no one ever wants to discuss this perfect anti draw mechanic and come up with some cap hammer stuffs.

    12,400 points on each, whats so frikking hard to award the guy with 2,000 points higher than the opponent a win, plenty of parameters to be adjusted, can be 500, 1000 who cares. Its already in game and its sure as hell how frikking tabletop works, no some magical funny flag popping up somewhere

    You realize you have 20 minutes to claim that point near the middle of the map, right? Moving forward isn't an automatic loss for Dwarfs or vamp coast.
    You can see the map before picking your army. If it's a map with a massive forest in the middle, playing a cav-heavy army probably isn't a good idea regardless, even in the current state of the game where it's just death matches.

    This only affects games that hit the timer, and games only hit the timer if both players, or one player with a faster army, are/is drawing out the game intentionally.

    Full vanguard armies generally don't lend themselves to long games. I don't see how they'd be a problem with this suggestion.

    Frankly, I'd like a capture point that can actually end the game a bit early (at ~5:00 remaining), to force players to commit more to contesting the center of the map in the later stages of the game.

    Currently, with this suggestion where it only matters at the very end of the battle, draws are still possible, since you can contest the point just enough to keep it neutral at the end of the battle. It'd be difficult to do, but it is possible.
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,942

    Only way capture point could work is if they were randomly spawned and changed location during the game to discurage camping and build 100% defensive armies that revolve around CP camping. In order to avoid mobile armies having an advantage, the cupture rate should be based on units speed, with slower units having a significantly higher capture speed.

    You really have to game out these sort of statements with logic. In rare maps the cap will be on a somewhat more defensible position like a hill or forest, not a big deal both players can once in a blue moon take terrain into account.

    That aside, there is no incentive to have a defensive army. The only incentive would be to have armies that a) are unkillable for 20 mins of defensive fighting; and also b) somehow retain more models than their opponent so their control is retained against opponents army.

    A and B work in opposition so it won’t be an issue. Literally all this type of cp does is ensure the two armies fight to the death.
  • 2twoto2twoto Registered Users Posts: 68
    @The_real_FAUST Your assessment of my proposal is correct.

    Only way capture point could work is if they were randomly spawned and changed location during the game to discurage camping and build 100% defensive armies that revolve around CP camping. In order to avoid mobile armies having an advantage, the cupture rate should be based on units speed, with slower units having a significantly higher capture speed.

    I don’t understand where your sentiment arises from: how does the proposed solution lend itself to CP camping armies? The CP will always be in or near the dead center of the map, meaning getting there for most bunkers will be slow (as bunkers rely on infantry, the slowest of the unit types), and sitting on the CP the whole game will result in ceding all battlefield control and initiative, leaving the opponent able to dictate the engagement and do as he pleases.

    Moreover, what army do you imagine can withstand a well-balanced enemy army for 20 minutes? All Ironbreakers/defensive infantry? Empty your ammo on them then grind through them with the rest of the army (maybe also toss in an AoE spell here and there). Some disgusting VC heal and summon blob? Sounds perfect for a vortex spell and they cede any chance of compromising your ranged assets, which could then eliminate things like the leadership and Mortis Engine with impunity before you engage. Tree blob? Ideally the CP shouldn’t be in a forest, but even on the off-chance it is they would still be allowing the opponent to empty all of their ranged assets out onto the blob while keeping their melee asset back (and again, AoE spells will punish this severely). Some other blob with a few disrupters to threaten your ranged assets? Ignore the blob sitting on the point twiddling their thumbs, kill the disrupters, then empty your ammo and grind through whatever remains. Long story short, there is literally no multiplayer-legal army that can move to and solely blob/bunker on the point for 20 full minutes without losing to army losses first.

    Also, as others have stated, your proposed alternative is flawed: the advantage would always be with the more mobile army, as they could get to any point fast enough to cap it long before their opponent arrives. This might even encourage draw kiting, as you could just wait till the game is nearing the end then wait for the point to pop up in who knows where, rush to the point faster than your opponent can (the draw-kiting army will be faster overall), cap it, then delay the opponent from getting to the point for a minute or so to win the game.

    See my second response to yst, paragraph 4 for a description of how CP work in campaign: it seems to base capture rate on models, which is still advantageous for infantry as they have the highest model counts. Admittedly, we could do with a more thorough explanation of how the capture point system works (please @CA_Duck if possible), but what is observable is enough to make the proposed solution viable.
  • DandalusXVIIDandalusXVII Registered Users Posts: 4,249
    Draw kitting and infinite camping is part of the game. Get over it.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 22,831

    Draw kitting and infinite camping is part of the game. Get over it.

    No.

  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 8,287

    Only way capture point could work is if they were randomly spawned and changed location during the game to discurage camping and build 100% defensive armies that revolve around CP camping. In order to avoid mobile armies having an advantage, the cupture rate should be based on units speed, with slower units having a significantly higher capture speed.

    That would completely defeat the purpose of capture zones and once again favor highly mobile factions over more stationary ones, so that's a no.
    Not at all

    Its to avoid armies being designed around camping objectives
Sign In or Register to comment.