{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Cozmo:
7/26/2018 11:20:57 PM
306
Crucible Labs Feedback
If you have feedback on our latest experiment mode in Crucible Labs, please leave it here.
The mode we are testing is Lockdown, and it will be available until the next weekly reset. Senior Designer Andrew Welden explained how it works in this weeks TWAB.
[quote] Lockdown is a new 4v4 round-based Competitive mode that, like Control, is about capturing and holding zones. Unlike Control, your only score comes from playing the objective. Those of you from the Taken King/Rise of Iron era know this mode’s predecessor, the Control variant “Zone Control.” Here’s how it plays out:
Both teams start Lockdown with a “Progress” percentage of 0% displayed under the scoreboard. Once a team holds two zones, progress will begin ticking up for that team at a rate of 1% per second. There is no round timer—the first team to reach 100% will win the round, and the first to win three rounds will win the match.
That’s not all, though—if a team can successfully capture all three zones, they will instantly win the round, regardless of each team’s progress state. A well-coordinated push from your opponents will always be dangerous, which means you need to stay focused on your objective.
However, winning a round that way is not necessarily as simple as it might seem. To earn capture progress or win on the triple cap, you must hold uncontested zones. If a team holds two zones, you can fully halt their progress by contesting one or more zones (you’ll see “PROGRESS HALTED” display under the scoreboard to let you know this is happening). They won’t start earning score again until they clear you and your progress off the point(s). The same applies when going for the triple cap lockdown—the instant win only applies if all three zones are completely clear.
We’ve seen some really exciting matches play out from this ruleset internally, and we hope you have similar experiences out in the wild![/quote]
[quote][b]• What did you think about this mode?
• Was anything confusing?
• Did anything seem missing?
• Was there a map it played better/worse on?
• Were there spawning issues?
• Were the rounds too short/too long?
• Was there a weapon or other sandbox combination that affected the game in a negative way? [/b]
[/quote]
English
#feedback
-
2 RepliesI want to to start by saying I and my clan like the idea behind Gambit. We are mainly a pve focused group but two of us occasionally engage in pvp. Gambit allows us all to play in our comfort zone. The levels of blockers and intervals for them provide a good amount of strategy options. Do we spam several small blockers immediately to try and block their wave 1 banks, or save up and wait for the invasion phase and drop a large blocker or two. but with that praise comes a decent negative. We ran into one strategy being employed by a team we matched against twice in a row that soured the experience for the rest of the night. Once the opposing team had summoned their prime evil they developed a new strategy to handle Invaders. Once invaded the team would immiediately commit suicide by charging nearby enemies and refusing to fight back. By dying to enemies (which does NOT heal their prime evil) and waiting their maxum time to respawn they essentially denied us the ability to recover their prime evil and made invading a next to pointless endeavor. This could be mitigated by opening up the criteria a little and making it so ANY death will heal the prime evil once it's out, but only during the period where an enemy invader is present. This would allow Invaders to apply pressure more adequately but not drastically increase the danger represented by enemy pve units (except for when the invader is present). This would also make dispatching enemy Invaders more of a priority instead of just hiding from them.
