PDA

View Full Version : Anyone else thinks that the new crossbow map is bs?



DemandredSUN
08-23-2017, 02:20 PM
I mean seriously, wasnt this a melee focused game? Horrible map imo, no fun at all.

Gakboi_HS
08-23-2017, 02:35 PM
I find it fun. Its a bit unique to the map and promotes a different play style other than go kill every one with your sword. i love the map.

Cajin203
08-23-2017, 02:42 PM
Not a fan of it, I've had countless games where a teammate will troll me by killing me with the turret...

kbvlcvfkhgc
08-23-2017, 04:00 PM
I applaud the fact that Ubi are trying new things but personally i don't like the map, maybe in time it'll grow on me?

T_Sesh
08-23-2017, 04:49 PM
I have a love/hate relationship with it. On one hand, it's really cool to be saved from 2 and 3v1s on A by teammates shooting from C, but its also monumentally frustrating when you get insta-murdered by one right as I'm about to make the killing blow against someone else.

Graci0us
08-23-2017, 05:36 PM
Not a fan either. The map is beautiful, though. I feel the balistas limit the playing field way to much. I just stay out of sight from them, but that leaves only a few paths i can take. Can't utilize whole map.

WalrusApproved
08-23-2017, 05:55 PM
One hit kill on my shugoki BS HIS ARMOR SHOULD EAT THAT BOLT! Only kidding lmao. Anyways it's fun sneaking up behind people on the ballista not paying attention ,since they get no map and can't see behind, and just murder them...priceless.

Vasher.
08-23-2017, 06:41 PM
I find the map great...the only issue is people camp the Ballistas. All Ubi needs to do is limit the amount of ammo one turret has or make the recharge time a lot longer (like I mean a lot longer).

Cajin203
08-23-2017, 06:51 PM
Maybe remove the turrets? Or make it so if player A is on a turret and player B comes up behind to attack, then it's an instant kill. Just a thought.

Sir_rage_quit
08-23-2017, 07:20 PM
i find it fun not because of the crossbow but because it big and gank squad have less power!

Helnekromancer
08-23-2017, 07:20 PM
I find the map very annoying, your teammates are trolls, going to B get's you shot. People just sit on the balistas and do nothing. Every game atleast 2 people are sitting on ballistas meaning the ther 2 have to rotate and be pro active but at the same time the enemy is doing the same thing and if you try to capture the other point you are met with 3 people and a bear trap. This map needs more players on it atleast a 5v5. Was really looking forward to playing the Viking Village Dominion map but seeing how that's not a Dominion map I'm stuck with playing Sentinel 80% of the time and having to roll out of the way of shots from my teammates. Ug all they had to do was have soldiers invading the village from the giant gate storming the peer and Viking troops running out of the Viking Hall down the hill or come out of houses in rage but nope.

Overall, I don't hate Sentinel just what the players do on that map that makes me dodge everytime I see it, since everyone wants to sit on their asses and it's usually up to me and someone else to make a play and if it doesn't goes well that's pretty much game.

Manlorey
08-23-2017, 08:19 PM
Personally, I do like the new map, it brings new tactics and more variety into the game. I do think, however, that friendly fire should be deactivated, so you can't kill your own teammates with it (would be not so realistic, yes, but if you don't get killed by a 2 m long axe or spear swing from your teammate then you can patch it up, at least make the ballistas hit your teammate for less hp).

UbiNoty
08-23-2017, 11:59 PM
Thank you for the feedback guys. We've brought up your concerns with the new ballista on Sentinel to the team and we'll try to make some tweaks to make it still fun, but not a nuisance.

RoosterIlluzion
08-24-2017, 02:56 AM
I find the map great...the only issue is people camp the Ballistas. All Ubi needs to do is limit the amount of ammo one turret has or make the recharge time a lot longer (like I mean a lot longer).

I'd suggest the turrets only appear after you've captured the point, and limit the ammo to 2 shots per team member.

SwellChemosabe
08-24-2017, 05:37 AM
I also love this map but I find it frustrating that my **** head teammates can murder me, keeping me from getting my kill, over and over again for the duration of the match just because they either miss or are intentionally trolling. I feel like maybe the cool down could be similar to that of the gates on the bridge map. Once you pull that lever, those gates are staying closed for longer than the time you have to wait there but still effectively block off a certain path and can instantly kill an opponent. Maybe we could put no damage to teammates on the turret as well to keep the griefing to a minimum? Or enforce a penalty for team killing. I don't care what it is but please implement something, because as much as I love this map (and I really do) I hate having to jump out of the way when I see my teammates jump on a turret because I can't trust my team not to shoot my ***.

Tyrjo
08-24-2017, 08:48 AM
I'm not a fan of the ballistas. To me they are an example of bad gameplay design. This is a melee fighting game, not a shooter. ff they really really have to be there, they should reload slower and not one shot people at full health.

Draghmar
08-24-2017, 09:03 AM
The funny thing about one-shot kill is that all the AoE skills like catapult do exactly the same thing and almost no one complains. :P

But the truth is it's too easy to use them. Especially one in the tower where you can't be even sneak up because of the sound and visual when someone enters the capture point area.

Captain-Courage
08-24-2017, 09:25 AM
I'm not a fan of the ballistas. To me they are an example of bad gameplay design. This is a melee fighting game, not a shooter. ff they really really have to be there, they should reload slower and not one shot people at full health.

Same.
The map design is rather good, the ballistas are not, they totally break the flow of the game just for the sake of adding a gimmick.
A sign that the map hasn't been tested enough, turning it into an unfun chore, so now I alt+F4 everytime I land on it.
Ballistas should stay in story mode.

Manlorey
08-24-2017, 09:35 AM
Same.
The map design is rather good, the ballistas are not, they totally break the flow of the game just for the sake of adding a gimmick.
A sign that the map hasn't been tested enough, turning it into an unfun chore, so now I alt+F4 everytime I land on it.
Ballistas should stay in story mode.
Well, its your opinion. Personally, I think the ballistas add to the flow, you must be even more mindful of your surroundings, it is clearly a war going on when you can die when you are not careful, and actually play nice tactic games with your team, giving reason to defend a point. All that adds to the combat athmosphere, imho.

Thing is, people complain when the devs add nothing new to the game, and some people still complain when the devs do so. You just can't get it right for everyone as a developer, it seems.

Captain-Courage
08-24-2017, 09:44 AM
Well, its your opinion. Personally, I think the ballistas add to the flow, you must be even more mindful of your surroundings, it is clearly a war going on when you can die when you are not careful, and actually play nice tactic games with your team, giving reason to defend a point. All that adds to the combat athmosphere, imho.

Thing is, people complain when the devs add nothing new to the game, and some people still complain when the devs do so. You just can't get it right for everyone as a developer, it seems.

Except there is not that much tactic.
One of each teams to the ballistas, one to defend him, and then the 2 left from each team that wait for the shooting contest to end.
There is no flow, it's totally static, sclerosis gameplay.

Chivalry had siege weapons too, but they were better implemented.
And nobody asked the devs to put ballistas.

Draghmar
08-24-2017, 10:00 AM
And nobody asked the devs to put ballistas.
At least they admitted that they weren't sure if it will be good addition and they waiting for feedback for the future maps.

Captain-Courage
08-24-2017, 10:06 AM
At least they admitted that they weren't sure if it will be good addition and they waiting for feedback for the future maps.

Then it's a good stance from their part.
Let's just hope they don't take too much time to analyse the data.
The map is not toal trash, but some elements reallly need to be reworked.

Manlorey
08-24-2017, 11:15 AM
Except there is not that much tactic.
One of each teams to the ballistas, one to defend him, and then the 2 left from each team that wait for the shooting contest to end.
There is no flow, it's totally static, sclerosis gameplay.
Except that it is possible to capture and defend a point by yourself, constantly switching between the ballista and battle the enemies as they come one by one, almost like the honorable duels held on the medieval battlefield between knights or samurai. It is also incredibly fun to see the gameplay unfold into a different scenario. It can be played multiple ways, and the flow is what you make of it.



Chivalry had siege weapons too, but they were better implemented.
And nobody asked the devs to put ballistas.
Can't say anything about that game as I have never played it.
Regarding the ballistas, well, it's just one map. Every other map doesn't have them. So in my opinion, it is fair - if you don't like the ballistas, you have plenty of other maps to choose from. People who do like them as a nice gameplay feature have just this one map.

CoyoteXStarrk
08-24-2017, 11:21 AM
I wouldn't be so damn irritated if it wasn't for the fact that idiots keep voting for the map.


Every other match this past week has been the stupid Ballista map.

Butonfly
08-24-2017, 11:22 AM
Except that it is possible to capture and defend a point by yourself, constantly switching between the ballista and battle the enemies as they come one by one, almost like the honorable duels held on the medieval battlefield between knights or samurai. It is also incredibly fun to see the gameplay unfold into a different scenario. It can be played multiple ways, and the flow is what you make of it.


Can't say anything about that game as I have never played it.
Regarding the ballistas, well, it's just one map. Every other map doesn't have them. So in my opinion, it is fair - if you don't like the ballistas, you have plenty of other maps to choose from. People who do like them as a nice gameplay feature have just this one map.

This can be a problem though as players will quit after loading into the map, leaving bots or game instability in their wake. The bots are stupid and run into ballista fire to boot, leading to even more lopsided games.

The change is good because it does change the flow of things. However the ballista are bad because they polarize the battle so that players don't engage one another.

Captain-Courage
08-24-2017, 11:31 AM
Except that it is possible to capture and defend a point by yourself, constantly switching between the ballista and battle the enemies as they come one by one, almost like the honorable duels held on the medieval battlefield between knights or samurai. It is also incredibly fun to see the gameplay unfold into a different scenario. It can be played multiple ways, and the flow is what you make of it.


Can't say anything about that game as I have never played it.
Regarding the ballistas, well, it's just one map. Every other map doesn't have them. So in my opinion, it is fair - if you don't like the ballistas, you have plenty of other maps to choose from. People who do like them as a nice gameplay feature have just this one map.

Thing is, siege weapons are not a bad idea, but they work better in games that involve more players, and dominion is only 4v4 , which is too few, and in a static map, meaning the frontline never really moves.

In chivalry, games can go up to 32 vs 32 (even if 8 vs 8 or 16 vs 16 are more comon), and the objectives maps are evolving during the game.
Meaning, if you are in the attacking team, your first objective will be to breach throught the portal of a citadel, for example by escorting a cart full of explosives, a ram to break the doors, or a siege tower to go over the walls. If you manage then you enter a second phase where you must storm through the village, reach the castle and break through it's door, and then you reach a 3rd phase where you must complete the final objective (for example burning a library, freeing prisonners or killing the enemy King), all of that while the defending team tries to prevent you to do so.

In such a set up, siege weapons work well (be they offensive or defensive) because the battlefiel is actually evolving as the game goes and they can't cover every point of interest, even if they can actually oneshot numerous players at once. Once you broke through the citadel portal, the catapult you used is no longer needed as the frontline has moved.

I sincerily think they can really make a great use of siege weapons in multiplayer in For Honor, but it should be in a mode that involve much players than 4v4
A siege mode with a real evolving frontline like Chivalry (not just a "B point") would be perfect for that.

Manlorey
08-24-2017, 11:44 AM
This can be a problem though as players will quit after loading into the map, leaving bots or game instability in their wake. The bots are stupid and run into ballista fire to boot, leading to even more lopsided games.

The change is good because it does change the flow of things. However the ballista are bad because they polarize the battle so that players don't engage one another.
Well, people quitting and making a team extremely one sided is a problem already. Also, in most cases bots are stupid and you can eliminate them just as quick as on the Sentinel, as an example on Overwatch they can be easily kicked or thrown down, especially with certain movesets. But ledging is part of the game, for better or worse depends from your viewpoint, personally I think they add the need to be watchful of your surroundings on the battlefield of your choosing.



Thing is, siege weapons are not a bad idea, but they work better in games that involve more players, and dominion is only 4v4 , which is to few, and in a static map, meaning the frontline never really moves.

In chivalry, games can go up to 32 vs 32 (even if 8 vs 8 or 16 vs 16 are more comon), and the objectives maps are evolving during the game.
In such a set up, siege weapons work well (be they offensive or defensive) because the battlefiel is actually evolving as the game goes and they can't cover every point of interest, even if they can actually oneshot numerous players at once. Once you broke through the citadel portal, the catapult you used is no longer needed as the frontline has moved.

I sincerily think they can really make a great use of siege weapons in multiplayer in For Honor, but it should be in a mode that involve much players than 4v4
A siege mode with a real evolving frontline like Chivalry (not just a "B point") would be perfect for that.
Must totally agree with you on that, there can be better ways to implement the siege or the defense weapons into the flow of combat, and room for improvement is pretty much there (still, first step has been done). Modes with more players and siege objectives are certainly welcome.

SlashingElbow
08-24-2017, 01:10 PM
i love it. only annoying thing is that there is some toxic teammates that will try to shoot u but im taking that into consideration and wont go on the balista if i see another teammate on the other side. I usually just stand with my Beastlander behind the wall and defend the point

Tyrjo
08-24-2017, 03:06 PM
The funny thing about one-shot kill is that all the AoE skills like catapult do exactly the same thing and almost no one complains. :P

But the truth is it's too easy to use them. Especially one in the tower where you can't be even sneak up because of the sound and visual when someone enters the capture point area.

I hate the Catapult as well. Also one of those things that shouldn't be in the game. Instead of a cool team fight you get nuked and one shotted. A totally boring end to a match that instead could have been awesome.

Vakris_One
08-24-2017, 04:30 PM
I like it. The map is awesome and the ballista's add something new to play with and think about. Situational awareness is now something you have to actually think about all the time on the Sentinel map rather than just near ledges. It feels a bit closer to what being in a medieval war would be like and that's a good element to strive for.

I hope they build upon this attempt and incorporate actual castle/fortress sieges with a more dynamic battlefield whose fronts change locations as the battle progresses towards either the attackers side or the defenders side. Put some burning oil in there for the defenders to use and put those cool ladder shooters from the campaign story for the attackers. I would also love to see the 'escort the huge battering ram' objective from the Knight's campaign being put into the multiplayer mode as perhaps the first stage of a castle/fortress seige mode.

Maybe make it into a 6v6 or 8v8 mode if possible once dedicated servers get put in.

Casper5632
08-24-2017, 07:41 PM
It makes classes that are effective at killing soldiers worthless. You could get gunned down in a few seconds if you see an enemy on a siege weapon and dont know its line of sight. All you need to do is hold A and you win since you can use the siege weapons to hold B and the enemy team would need to come at you all 4 at once to take it back.

Also that god awful long intro to the map makes me want to kill myself.

UBI announces they are going to be taking out environmental threats, and instead of taking out pit falls they add in siege weapons.

UbiNoty
08-25-2017, 12:10 AM
The funny thing about one-shot kill is that all the AoE skills like catapult do exactly the same thing and almost no one complains. :P

But the truth is it's too easy to use them. Especially one in the tower where you can't be even sneak up because of the sound and visual when someone enters the capture point area.

Thanks for this! This kind of feedback is really helpful to us because it gives us something substantial to see if the Ballistas are giving an unfair advantage without any kind of trade-off.