Ok, Dominate is really bugging me. The problem is it's got slippery slope stuck in it.
Lets suppose a 3v3 situation. Team A vs Team B, on Cataract. Team A is doing well at the start, gets a few kills. These kills lets them get map control. They don't get any more kills though. Now, fast forward to the score is 9000-5000 (10,000 to win). Someone Team B manages a comeback, takes the middle 3 flags... Except, they're going to lose anyway, because of the 4000 point lead the other team has. I know I've played games where it's "8000-5000", with me on the winning team, and I think "oh, I could go afk right now and still win".
I propose it be changed, so you only gain points if you control more flags then the other team. This means it's not over until it's over. The way it is now, it's usually over once the other team gains a good lead, even if they only have 5000 points.
I just never liked Dominate. It's what you are trying to do in every game mode...get flags and destory your enemy. I'd much rather play fortress or Conquest.
I hate dominate (its boring and since you end up playing vs computers you just buy 9x tele scrolls and cap whole map to get through it as fast as possible) and I HATE fortress - I steamroll opposing teams for so long and normally get 2 bunkers down and then the other team comes out of nowhere. Its happened to me twice. Once with a Sed/Reg team (no damage output in comparison to my beast/ebe) that just stacked siege (which I refuse to do) and went one direction with reg shooting from a distance and wearing another down without being hit by anything. then the game becomes chasing these people down who constantly just tele away and show up somewhere else. And the second - two rooks. As soon as they decided to kill buildings together they would walk out of mist and kill a bunker (even with upgrades and me running there) instantly. TP away if I show up/they are finished killing and then show up somewhere else. Rinse and repeat - chasing people down who suck is lots of fun.
My strat. on fortress is probably lacking somewhere but I don't know how because I feel like like we steam roll (5k/0d) for both players holding whole map for whole game and lose GG.
I wish playing pantheon was conquest only or you could choose gametype SO BADLY.
AI seems to suck at dominate. I played a pantheon game where everyone on my team disconnected 2 minutes in so i was left with AIs who never did anything to cap flags. I spent the whole time scrambling to cap flags while my team mates went for the little armies that spawn. Meanwhile my human opponents went about holding all of the flags and ultimately winning by a steep margin.
Maybe its just the AI's that need some tweaking or controls, especially in MP. They never support me or eachother and they end up getting killed by the human players who know how to out manuver them over and over. I would almost prefer there be no AI take over.
Amen, I think alot of us feel this way. I'm not sure what difficulty takeover AI is set to but its just a joke in everygame type regardless and being forced in pantheon to play vs AI straight from lobby (shows connection to only AI players) should NEVER happen PERIOD.
The dominate ticker should only go when you have more flags than the enemy and the rate should be dependent on how many more. The way it is now, you aren't going to get the base flags so as the OP said, you can get to a point where it's impossible to lose.
Yeah the score needs to move only when a team has flag advantage. I've never had a dominate game swing once the lead goes over 500 or so points..at 1000+ advantage the game is basically over because the losing team just cant catch up.
Exactly. Lower the total score needed to win and only increase a teams score when they have the majority of flags.
well...I was in a 2v2 dominate game the other night, us as Sedna/Oak, them as TB/QoT. It was give and take for the first 1500 points or so, then we started racking up kills and taking over the map.
By the time we got to 7k, we controlled the map, had no deaths, and they had over 10 deaths each. At that point, we just started destroying towers and let them take all the flags they could take so that we could have some fun butchering them for longer. It was sad when it got to 9900 and was slowly ticking up b/c we knew our fun was almost over.
So I guess the point of this story is that once you get to a certain point spread, it is a good indicator that one side really is dominating the game and extending the game only extends the misery of the other team unless they rage-quit.
/Agree
yea dominate is lame, I avoid it, and so does every else, there are practically no custom games with it.
I agree that only the side with more flags should have their score increasing, I think it's like that in DoW2 with the victory points.
However, the score to win should be reduced to somewhere from 3000-5000.
i found it boren and if i get into one i will drop as soon as i see its that type of game. If i wanted a long drawn out game i would play a rts game.
It sucks hard. I play 2x Hard AI (Erebus/Sedna) on Exile and screwed around and let them get 9k to my 5k. Took their sides flag and all those in between and never lost any of them for a 5K comeback.
Personally not a fan at all of Dominate, like somebody else stated above thats what you're doing in every single game. A couple games I have been at a 3000+ defecit because either my allies sucked, or they were AI (which are HORRIBLE at dominate) and I have pushed myself to the enemy base holding most flags, having most kills, but I'm still doomed to lose because I can't possibly solo a Citadel.
If they lowered the points required to win, and made it only grant points when you had more and scaled higher with more successive held flag then that would be fine, I might actually not leave a Dominate match...maybe.
+1 totally agree
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
