Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 03/08/2010
Offline
424 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 18, 2010

Looks like a lot of players don't want New Maps.

 

If MAG dosen't got Dom Neutral, we likely won't be getting new maps for Dom.

Please use plain text.
Message 51 of 85 (291 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 03/01/2010
Offline
18 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 18, 2010

Yes, yes, yes, hell yes.

 

I think ALL maps should go neutral.

 

It's rediculous the amount of help that some maps get with obsticles and crap in the way.

 

Raven's dom USED to be the worst to defend, now it's the easiest.

 

SVER's dom is easy to defend because getting the bunkers down when 2 others can cover the back of each other is almost impossible.

 

Valor? Crap bunker coverage, so the front lines go down quick. It's easy to get into the letters from the side where there's no gate. It's crap.

 

This way everyone can see what the others have to do without vetting over. My hatred for SVER and Raven won't allow me to do so.

Please use plain text.
Message 52 of 85 (291 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Splicer
Registered: 02/07/2010
Offline
74 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 18, 2010

in my mind, the only game mode that SHOULD be faction neutral is acquisition, because they deal with stealing enemy transports. dont fuq up this game please by making this mode faction neutral

 

sabo shouldnt even be neutral. i had a good idea this morning on the aspect of sabo. have sabo like a 2 round game, in which if the defending faction on their own map loses, it goes to round 2, giving them a chance to reclaim it. say sver and raven are battling it out on ravens map. sver whoops some ass and takes it...it should give raven a chance to reclaim their map. if they are successful in reclaiming, then the game is over, if they lose...again...then thats it. if sver loses the first round, then thats it. go back to the deploy screen. and redeploy.

 

you guys have already started to destroy this game by 1.) adding pay to play character slots, 2.) making a game mode that you didnt beta, which in turn you ended up losing money on, and 3.) completely fuqed up the knife making it OP while nerfing all the other weapons.

 

you should put some of that dev money to new weapons OTHER than AR's, LMG's, and sniper rifles. make us a new shotgun, e.g. maybe a dbl barrel shotgun, or a combat shotgun that dont need to be cokked until you reload it, or a new pistol, e.g. a six round magnum pistol, or a new machine pistol. or perhaps maybe a night/day cycle with night vision goggles and flares and laser sights to go with night cycle which would bring more tactical aspects to the game.i still like this game very much, but if you keep going the way your going with it, im gonna be with alot of the other people saying this game is crap.

 

you ask for our opinion yet you dont take it...if your gonna be that way, dont ask for our feedback if your not gonna take it

 

i mean i realize all this deving takes money, so give us some things that we will GLADLY give you money for

 

 

Please use plain text.
Message 53 of 85 (291 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 12/02/2009
Offline
3 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 18, 2010

wow really not play it thats kinda immature dont you think there prob. doing this can ppl keep on talking about the maps being unfair and also be like a different map but it would me the same map with variant.

Please use plain text.
Message 54 of 85 (291 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 12/02/2009
Offline
3 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 18, 2010

very good point they should keep the acquistion and domination NOT fraction feutral but for the smaller tpys like sabotage and suppresion fraction neutral espically suppresion if it becomes fraction neutral it not gonna TOTALLY RUIN it be bad but not totally destroy the game good points

 

HAVENT GONE ON MY PS3 ON A WHILE IT BROKE

Please use plain text.
Message 55 of 85 (291 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 12/02/2009
Offline
3 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 18, 2010

thats a GREAT idea good thinking  : )

Please use plain text.
Message 56 of 85 (291 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 05/16/2008
Offline
426 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 19, 2010

I'd go faction-neutral. I have enjoyed playing the other modes like that much more than being stuck in one particular position for each map. I realize that this kind of kills the whole 'shadow war' and loyalty to a particular faction and such... but Zipper kind of killed that (and, unfortunately, interest of most clans) with the silly idea of changing through all the factions to get the trophies.

---
Steve
Warhawk Clan: -- Killzone 2 Clan: -- http://www.kilroyclan.com/
WWW Site
Blog
Please use plain text.
Message 57 of 85 (291 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Wastelander
Registered: 03/17/2010
Offline
777 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 19, 2010

No no no!!  Domination should not be faction neutral!  Suppression being faction neutral - fair enough.  Tbh im not too keen on sabotage being faction neutral.  I dont think any of the modes (except interdiction) that have contracts awarded should be faction neutral.  My reason for this is that it ruins the shadow war story, the storyline behind MAG itself.  I always suppose that zipper could turn round and say that you are trying to fight back and reclaim the facility or something but thats rubbish. 

 

Im pretty sure that zipper is proposing this to try and be helpful (so kudos Zipper for once again trying to listen to the community) but the only people that this would please would be the nerf and OP kings/queens that moan enough about weapons to get them tweaked, and those that have been moaning about attacking certain maps i.e. S.V.E.R. acquisition - these maps arent difficult when you know what to do! They only want a shot of say defending a map like this for some more xp and to boost their stats - its pathetic!

 

So zipper I admire that you are taking action from listening to the community (on some things) but please do not fold under pressure from these very noob-like whiners that have not yet found out the best way to attack certain maps.

 

 

 

 


Please use plain text.
Message 58 of 85 (291 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 04/15/2010
Offline
1 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 19, 2010
I think Zipper should consider the creation of more new vehicles than making domination faction neutral.
Please use plain text.
Message 59 of 85 (291 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 03/12/2010
Offline
12 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 19, 2010

Instead of going Faction Neutral, allow the Faction to win the map and hold it until defeated. For instance, if Valor is attacking flores basin transfer and win, then in the next game they must defend at the flores basin transfer. This would in essence make the MAPS faction neutral but at the same time game play would be more war like. You could even track how long a faction is able to hold another factions map. From day one of MAG I have wished after fighting a hard battle and winning that we got to keep the objectives and defend them in the next game!

Never Bleedout!!!!!
Please use plain text.
Message 60 of 85 (291 Views)
Reply
0 Likes