{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/22/2015 7:04:20 PM
3
This is a terrible strategy and I can only hope its one of this forum's legendary terrible attempts at satire.
C is closer to B. B looks directly at the single door leading to A, while three doors to C are hidden around corners. C also directly links to the covered hallway on the second floor that connects to all three zones and the roof.
Zone A cannot be a place where players "rarely" go, and yet still enable you to get a significant number of kills. Most combat happens around B, and the team that holds C has a much easier time holding B so they are scoring more points per kill.
Don't blame your team mates for dying while you camp the idiot's zone. They are playing from an inferior position because you force them to spawn in the idiot's zone while also leaving them to fight 5v6 around B.
English
-
Not understanding the concept of having a point and keeping it defended while scoring. It does not mean you sit on top of the control point the entire match and nothing else. Nobody said you camp on top of the spot the whole time.
-
Because having 2 points is much better than 1 single point. A sucks so badly, you spawn in a stupid pointless room, there's only 1 direct route to B (which takes longer to get to compared to the 3 routes from C). The argument of ' oh well I can snipe them' doesn't really work as the team with C and B has no reason to go anywhere they may get sniped so you'll get almost no kills, also chances are if you can snipe them, they have a better spot from which to return the favour.
