🛈 Announcement
Greetings! The Division forums are now archived and accessible in read-only mode, please go to the new platform to discuss the game
  1. #11
    Originally Posted by Sachek_SA Go to original post
    Yup, Rogue 2.0 did nothing to sort out gankers.

    If anything, it's worse now than it ever was...
    Now they seem to be trying to prove a point. It's like they're saying 'even with rogue 2.0, we can still **** up your game!'

    I've never understood the DZ in the story. You betray the division to go rogue and they still let you extract using their helicopters? Then they clean the gear you've extracted and they let you collect it at their safe houses? It makes no sense. Once you've gone rogue, you should stay rogue
     6 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  2. #12

    new fun

    So now I get ganked and lost a bunch of stuff, go back in to see the two man team that ganked me shooting each other to up their points. really?
    Share this post

  3. #13

    It's about the loot

    It's not about the fun of ganking someone, it's the value of what your're carrying and getting their stats up higher
    Share this post

  4. #14
    Originally Posted by electricbil2009 Go to original post
    Now they seem to be trying to prove a point. It's like they're saying 'even with rogue 2.0, we can still **** up your game!'

    I've never understood the DZ in the story. You betray the division to go rogue and they still let you extract using their helicopters? Then they clean the gear you've extracted and they let you collect it at their safe houses? It makes no sense. Once you've gone rogue, you should stay rogue
    The helicopter itself doesn't make sense story wise either. You call a helicopter extraction to have your gear delivered 2 blocks away, to a black market spot. Why is the JTF delivering goods to a black market spot? And why do you have to wait for the helicopter to depart after you loaded your stuff? The only purpose of the helicopter mechanic is to create conflict among players.

    It also makes no sense that you can't leave the DZ with the gear you are carrying in your contamination container. What does the black market seller care if you leave with the loot? And there's no one else there to stop you. And it is in a contamination container... amd it's not like you are going to spread the disease, since it is already present in the LZ.

    Same with the contamination events (what makes the spike in contamination?), the supply drops (why the supply drops, why are they being guarded instead of taken, and for whom are they guarding the stuff?), ISAC telling you where the NPCs are but not where other players are, where do the other 23 agents come from, why NPCs (other than cleaners) can go in an out of contaminated areas without masks...

    I can keep on going, but suffice to say, from a story line point of view, The Division has one of the more incoherent story lines of major game releases.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  5. #15
    Cadillac-Jack's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Deepest darkest Chernarus
    Posts
    8,059
    Originally Posted by HawkeRaven Go to original post
    It's not about the fun of ganking someone, it's the value of what your're carrying and getting their stats up higher
    For the most part it certainly is not about the loot most just want you to shoot back, no matter the provocation I will not play their P v P game.
    Share this post

  6. #16
    They need to just make a PVE version of DZ already. Survival has it, why not DZ?

    They could still impose penalties of sort in a PVE DZ, like for example "lost connection" to lower Skill cooldowns, limited ammo supplies etc to still keep it fresh from the LZ.

    Problem with DZ is that it's entire premise is basically feeding this behavior. It's rotten from the ground up. If you're going to have a rogue system which basically encourages mugging people, then of course they're going to do cheap crap like camp at the entrances for easy kills.

    Even if they add a turret system like S4m said, then they'll just wait outside the proximity of the turret with long ranged weapons instead. There's literally no winning because it's exactly what the game mode encourages them to do.. .

    DZ is fundamentally flawed in that way. There is no effective way to stop this level of cheap and gimmicky behavior, especially when you actually promote the people doing it by offering them DZ rank, DZ Credits and any loot the person had on them. It makes camping in FPS games look like a minor thing.

    I can't say I've seen many games do open world PVP right, but Division certainly isn't either.... PVP only seems to work well when it's on a fixed system, with limited players and where everybody spawns in different spots all at the same time. The whole coming-going aspect of the DZ is another agitator, it makes camping that much easier.
    Share this post

  7. #17
    Yeah happened with the other time fought with this guy multiple times which increased his manhunt status and in return he was killed by another for Roguehunt reward but these people are toxic as hell, griefers.
    Share this post

  8. #18
    Babou..'s Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    584
    There should be turrets at every DZ exit that shoot at rogues!
    Share this post

  9. #19
    No need for turrets outside, just make the zone outside checkpoints like the elevators. Can't use skills or weapons and can't be targeted.

    Fix
    Share this post

  10. #20
    Sharpandpointy's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    1,341
    Having the turrets outside would make for some really, really awesome battles, actually. Why?

    It would force Rogues to keep at a distance.

    Someone mentioned that yeah, they might stay more distant and use longer-ranged weapons. Then we enter into a cover-based battle, with people sniping and using AR's from cover. Two groups - the agents and the rogues - with the turrets forcing the rogues to keep back and not facetank/chicken-dance.

    If the agents push too far forward, they risk it turning into the normal kind of battle.

    If the rogues push too far forward, they come into range of the turrets.

    Both sides COULD do this - Rogues could push into range if they feel they could overwhelm people faster than the turrets would kill them. Agents could forsake the turrets if they feel they have the advantage.

    But...I'm feeling it would make for some pretty interesting fights, really - lots of sniping, short burst shooting, LMG coming into play, turret-throwing, seekers actually having SOME use again, etc.
    Share this post