{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by EssAndEmm2013:
6/24/2016 4:07:37 AM
44
POLL / PETITION : Increase "Capture Points" in CONTROL to 1000 and "Neutralize Points" to 500 - Points awarded as a team, not as an individual : Details inside
Control is often played as clash.
Along with RIFT, CONTROL is an easily farmed K/D event in Crucible. Regardless if you win (most times you lose playing CLASH in Control/Rift) your K/D is high, and that is the goal of most people.
I suggest that the "Capture" points be increased to 1000, and the "Neutralize" be increased to 500.
The score remains the same, however, "Capture" and "Neutralize" would become TEAM POINTS.
No matter if 1 person or 6 people Capture/Neutralize, the 1000 is a solid figure.
[u][b]WHAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM THIS :[/b][/u]
1.) Non-Objective play would be nearly impossible. "Clash" Style players would have virtually no chance of winning, regardless of skill level. Priority would be massively put on Objective Gameplay.
2.) Solo players would have extreme favor/ability knowing that their sacrifice and hard work is just as formidable as an entire team of "CAPPERS" in Tradition Control. Should you be slaughtered on your victory of capturing a zone, you will know your death earned your party 1000 points.
3.) Team play will be even more gratifying. You might actually have epic battles where whoever finally captures "B" solidifies near guaranteed victory of the match.
[u][b]WHAT WOULD NOT BENEFIT FROM THIS :[/b][/u]
1.) Players who farm K/D by not playing the objective will see an extreme decrease in their ability to farm Stats.
2.) Solo players who run into teams who ALREADY PLAY OBJECTIVE will find themselves even more outmatched than before. (I believe this is worth the trade though.)
- - - - -
Please bump this regardless of your opinion, as the poll is not bias.
Also vote, please. :)
EDIT :
I am enjoying coming back here to see random people thumbing down every single comment I make for no reason.
Thank you to those who are up-voting them to keep them even. And they say "I" am cancer.
I'm just a house wife lol
-
Agreed however a lot of good point are made in the comments. Since capping and controlling the objective is the point of the game maybe they should try having only 2 cap points, say A and C in order to create more of a control area with less running and gunning. Or a random B point that moves throughout the match.
-
It's not "capture the zone," it's CONTROL the zone.
-
Edited by Kipp3t: 6/24/2016 11:11:21 PMThat's way too many points so I voted no but you're on the right track maybe 150 for capture and 50 for neutralizing
-
The point values are just too much into. Maybe 100 for neutralization and 200 for a capture
-
4 RepliesThese posts are getting more traction for some reason, it's a disturbing trend. Capping a zone is the easiest part of control, CONTROLLING the zone is the objective. If they're were less people like you (who think you're some kind of hero for dying 20 times while trying to cap 1 zone) and more people who understood the actual strategy , there would be a lot less bitchin'. And by the way, you can keep saying to yourself that people who don't have 9 captures per game must have been "farming" k/d , if it makes you feel better . Just know that you're delusional about the contribution YOU have actually made to your team.
-
2 RepliesEdited by The Sword Logic: 6/24/2016 12:50:14 PMFirst let me say that I agree with you 100% on the fact that K/D farmers are robbing objective-based game modes of nearly all the fun. Also, as someone who makes a lot of threads here, unless you find a way to somehow tell every person here that they are utterly perfect, you're gonna get cowardly down votes. It's because for 20-30 years their moms have told them they're perfect and so if we suggest anything to the contrary they fight like the petulant children they are by just down voting things with no actual rebuttal. All that said, I still voted no. Here's why: That's the last thing Control needs. It's already a mess of people playing "musical zones." Capturing the other team's spawn zone leads to disaster every time. It swaps the spawns, causing the other team to spawn at my team's now-unguarded zone. Now everyone on my team who understands the game in its most basic sense is getting wrecked from behind because now the other team is spawning in the diametric opposite side than expected. And what was the point of capturing the enemy's spawn zone if it's just going to hand them ours? It's a zero-sum game; we get capture points and so do they. Absolutely any team will win virtually all matches if they can hold their two appropriate zones for the whole match. If you disagree, consider literally [i]every match ever[/i] on Pantheon. But, like I said, I agree that K/D farmers are robbing objective-based game modes of their fun. What Bungie should do is implement the main component of Zone Control: that teams earn points at regular intervals based on holding zones. It's called Control, not Capture.
-
that would be to easy to exploit... teams would just start spawn flipping for easy points... it would go a bit like this 1. take home zone. 2. take B (or other secondary cap point) 3. abandon home zone and take opponents basically instead of taking 2 points and holding them down it would just be ring around the rosey... and I for one absolutely loath control matches where spawn is always flipping all that being said.. I do wish there was some type of punishment for non objective players.
-
Won't work..even in zone control people ignore zones and focus on kills, when kills aren't worth any points.
-
I agree completely. I have played many control games lately where the opposing team never capture a single control point and win the game. Kind of defeats the purpose of control. Great tactic but defeats the intention of control.
-
It already is. When one person caps, the team gets less points. But if the entire team caps, ou get the max number of points. ~[i]stop the salt![/i]
-
1 ReplyEdited by Percivle: 6/24/2016 8:50:18 AMThe name "Control" is super misleading because you don't have to control any of the points to win. It's basically clash with a way to increase points per kill. Zone control should be renamed and made permanent.
-
1 ReplyOr just replace control with zone control
-
4 RepliesYou are cancer!
-
2 RepliesI love playing objective type fps. Points should only be for completing objective. Kills only matter in attack/defend points. Like capture the flag is scored.
-
Honestly no. Tl;dr: that's not how control works. As much as it pains me to say this, that shouldn't be a thing. The purpose of control is to capture two points and then locking them down and preventing the enemy team to take them from you as you farm points from them. That is the ideal strategy to a flawless match. Now of course this isn't a perfect world and things usually don't turn it like that, and I see where you are coming from. There are two reasons why most teams lose a game of control, and both have to do with a general lack of understanding as to how the game type works. The first and most irritating reason is when people are just running around and killing everything and not protecting the zones. Most of the games that I've lost are due in part to a team that is clearly kicking our noggin and everyone in the team thinks they are the next mlg and not putting in the effort to capture the zones. The other reason is with people that are capturing too many zones. A few players are holding down a couple of zones, the game is flowing smoothly and you are starting to get into the groove collecting some kills and some douchebags think it's a good idea to go for the triple cap, flipping all the spawns and ruining all the progress that you have built up throughout the match, you are in for a bad time. Then they just keep on going and creating this goose chase around the map. That is as equally a hindrance to your team as the first problem. So no, prioritizing captures over kills is not a good idea. That is not the purpose of control. If that were the case, it would give incentive to just capture zones and only cause the problems I just listed earlier. It would further enable the problems that already exist. [spoiler]wow...that is a bit excessive for an answer[/spoiler]
-
Good idea in theory, but if you cap two points that's 3,000 free points which I feel is a bit excessive. I for one might go and cap 4 times, or maybe your team is losing and regaining control of Multiple flags 2 times (which isn't unheard of) that's already a minimum 6,000 points right there (if you lose and regain two flags twice) which is a quarter of the game. So sure control is an objective game mode, but the games would go by to fast in my opinion. However those who cap zones should be rewarded, this could be done by giving those who cap (and neutralize) and increase in points per kill. Maybe something small like 5 and 20 (or smaller) which doesn't sounds like a lot but would stack and could result in 1,500 extra points if you cap two points and go on a 30 kill game (just an example). This is a substantial amount of points Just my two cents, hope you found it interesting
-
I voted no. From what you are saying, all you really need is one person going after the zones. For example, right now, if 6 people capture a zone, thats 450 points. With you're way if one person captures the zone, thats 1000 points. You could theoretically play a game of control without having any kills with this method. And, like mentioned before, control is clash + score modifiers
-
Maybe if this was implemented they could either: 1. Make capture points longer to take, add 5-10 seconds 2. Make the area to capture a lot smaller
-
Now people who are only good at capping zones think they're entitled to more points? Games aren't won on captures alone. I love going into a game with a team and giving the other team a handicap: we don't capture any zones and just win off of kills ; )
-
23 RepliesEdited by bilbo t baginzz: 6/24/2016 9:53:23 AMIm not sure you understand how control is played or works. Its a game of clash with kill points modifiers, [b]IT IS NOT AN OBJECTIVE GAME TYPE[/b] well not in the sense of Rift or zone control. Capturing the zones are a secondary objective with the main objective being getting kills. Getting kills is what gets you points. [b]Now in regards to "farming K/D"[/b] This kind of player is me, im the kind of player who doesnt just run in blind trying to capture a control zone without clearing enemies first, im the kind of player who protect the scrubs who do this, im the kind of player who doesnt push spawns which causes them to flip, im the kind of player who understands how Control should be played. Do i go out of my way to "farm K/D" no... no one does, this is just something scrubs say because other people end the games with a higher K/D and higher score then them, This is what scrubs say when they dont understand how to play control and this is what scrubs say when they think control is an objective game type. TL;DR im sorry you dont understand how control was designed or meant to be played, its clash with kill point modifiers and [b]if you dont like it go play zone control.[/b] EDIT: [quote]1.) Players who farm K/D by not playing the objective will see an extreme decrease in their ability to farm Stats.[/quote] This isnt a thing. Its Scrub mentality, confirmed by looking at your stats. I now understand why you want it changed as currently you are a hinderance to your team cause you cant kill for shit so you want to change the gameplay to make yourself seem useful.
-
1 ReplyBut that would encourage people to run around like crazy, flip spawns, etc. Having a high capture score also punishes you for holding multiple zones, because once you have them, you can't cap them again for big points but the enemy still can. You might even benefit more by avoiding the objective like Salvage (where it's usually easier to let the enemy team cap the relic, then disable it for more points). In this case, if an enemy was taking my flag, it would be better for me to not defend it, let him neutralize first, then re-cap it for double the points he got. This is also why I liked zone control. It was pure objective. Points came from holding the zones and not from kills.
-
4 RepliesHow would this change control? Good teams would still cap two points and defend them. Matches would go only a bit faster.
-
1 ReplyStep 1. Let enemies capture all three zones at the start 2. Farm kills with a team of six 3. Before the end capture and neutralize all zones 4. Every member gets 50+ kills in a game 5. Sounds good.
-
1 ReplyI think it needs to be more about defending zones as well
-
2 Replies[quote]Control is often played as clash.[/quote] Because it's clash with modifiers....? You can win a game of control without capping a single point. 1000 points for standing in a circle for a few seconds? lmaoooo Good thing you aren't in charge of the crucible.
-
Go play zone control, nerd.
