Just for the record, a veteran Ginebra can outrun good old hansome Kuzmann (and others) for HOURS, with sudden death or not. And without raiders to shoot, you probably can't kill her with your arcs! Pretty neat, uh? She can escape a loooooooong time until you ragequit, thus making the raiders win.

Because anything else would be toxic.

Exactly my point that's an undeserved win in my opinion because the Antagonist was good enough to win a 4v1 but now a gin can just run around to stall for a win

I also think Antagonist should ALWAYS have a secondary objective to win and ways to slow down raider objectives like taking alph from objectives like an engineer. I would actually prefer that to the sudden death but ok.

Maybe with the Master Of Puppets update I'll be able to direct engineers to an area with no raiders so they have a better chance of doing it or be able to call special troops. Cant wait for that update tbh but all this talk of people rage quitting the game because of better balancing is stupid.

Master of puppets:
Finally! I will have some control over them, Ive been wanting this for a while. whether Im being cornered and I call the horde or im about to roll up on them like..


Im happy for the rest but im mostly looking forward to the upcoming in-game store, Master of puppets, the great clash and Aurora Spectors.
My only concern is that it says "For Now" you will have control of the horde. does that mean when Aurora Spectors comes we'll lose that power? If so will we be assisted or assuming the position of the monsters?

They're just saying "For now" to make it sound dramatic that Antags have control over the horde.

I'm super excited for it and feel it should be the next thing released after identity but we have to wait.

I haven't played for awhile but once that's released I'll be back. 😁

Thanks dude. Guess I just have to learn how to use it better.

Yeah I got what your saying not trying to start an argument haha. Only thing I wouldnt like is it would mean an even longer wait when playing when it's already long.

Only solution I see is if it's going to be optional they will have to make people want to play with an Antagonist by severely lowering rewards for no Antagonist and severely increase it with one.

Quote from: TheNobleWolf on November 28, 2018, 12:09:01 AM

Quote from: Level9Drow on November 27, 2018, 06:35:37 PM

Quote from: XjabberwockieX on November 27, 2018, 04:13:26 PM

Quote from: Tekato on November 27, 2018, 02:15:03 AM

Quote from: Ac3_f4ce on November 27, 2018, 12:30:47 AM

I ll go to vote surrender but still play. Im not trying to promote the rage quit culture. 

But yea man, I play as an Antag and i know that shit is cheap lol.

I always vote surrender on any antag match but ofc I'm forced to play through this 1 shot pvp mess with no real choice.

This is the kind of stuff that drives me crazy. I already have to tolerate the blueprint system as it is, putting together win streaks and then HOPING to get the right blueprint to present itself and then HOPING the % gods allow me the opportunity to receive and build it. Now we have weak-willed players that refuse to participate/call for surrender at the first sign of an Antagonist. Let's be honest, the Antag may cause you to get a 7.5 on a mission rather than a 9, and fighting them may net you 1k gold instead of 1.5k good (Major difference..) It is only occasional occurrence though, by surrendering your messing up my opportunity to receive a blueprint I have worked torward just because ONE other human player is standing in your way and you don't like it. I understand if your team is on their third set of lives and the map/antagonist is dominating your team and your only on the first section, but surrendering instantly especially with new/low level players in the mix can hurt other players in the squad who give every mission all they have and lose that chance and have to go back to the drawing board because you don't want to try.

I understand what you are saying for the most part, but there are a few things that may help you understand the situation. Many people surrender at the beginning in order to save time and maintain productive progress. There's no point in surrendering 3 survives in because so much time was wasted already and surrendering won't bring back the lost time or save the situation, it's a shit show and a waste of time. Therefore the BEST time to surrender is as early as possible. This was the least amount of time is spent wasted on a potential loss.

But there's another issue here. If you lose a BP i should still be there after. You can keep attempting to get it. Correct me if I'm wrong people.

Lastly, this is the reality of non-optional PvP. I'm not blaming the antagonist for this. I'm also not blaming the Raiders for surrendering or playing halfhearted. But this is the result of PvP games the world over. EVERY game that has PvP has inevitable and unavoidable toxicity. This is one of a few reasons why some of us, not all, are asking for optional PvP.

We'll se what happens though. We got guilds around the corner.

He's talking about blueprints that require multiple wins in a row that your messing up by surrendering. They have to restart it again if the vote when through.

I play Antagonist 95% of the time so I dont know if its majority or all have to agree to the surrender but I can see how that would be annoying.

Well if Antagonists can claim that they're playing the game as intended and only using the functions of the games to players who hate forced PvP, then so to can the Raiders state they are using a function within the game as intended. No room for hypocrisy. Those who live by the sword die by the sword.

However, none of this would be a problem if PvP was optional. As long as it is mandated then people will use the surrender button, as it is not against the rules to use. Does this suck? Yes, it does. But so does an antagonists doing THE SAME THING to a raiders BP run. so I've got no tears here. Make it optional, and we can condemn players who surrender. Until then, it's the only way they can "legally" circumvent the waste of time.

Do you actually find PvE in this game fun? If this game had no Antagonist I would have been done with it a long time ago.

Although the game and levels are great I would find it really boring to play eventually if it was just AI. Like i said i play Antagonist 95% of the time because i find just PvE very stale but the challenge of other players feels rewarding even though I'm playing the same levels over and over again.

It's a 4v1 where the Antagonist is on the same level as you and the AI is really dumbed down. I do agree rewards should be more for playing against an Antagonist though.

Quote from: XjabberwockieX on November 27, 2018, 04:13:26 PM

Quote from: Tekato on November 27, 2018, 02:15:03 AM

Quote from: Ac3_f4ce on November 27, 2018, 12:30:47 AM

I ll go to vote surrender but still play. Im not trying to promote the rage quit culture. 

But yea man, I play as an Antag and i know that shit is cheap lol.

I always vote surrender on any antag match but ofc I'm forced to play through this 1 shot pvp mess with no real choice.

This is the kind of stuff that drives me crazy. I already have to tolerate the blueprint system as it is, putting together win streaks and then HOPING to get the right blueprint to present itself and then HOPING the % gods allow me the opportunity to receive and build it. Now we have weak-willed players that refuse to participate/call for surrender at the first sign of an Antagonist. Let's be honest, the Antag may cause you to get a 7.5 on a mission rather than a 9, and fighting them may net you 1k gold instead of 1.5k good (Major difference..) It is only occasional occurrence though, by surrendering your messing up my opportunity to receive a blueprint I have worked torward just because ONE other human player is standing in your way and you don't like it. I understand if your team is on their third set of lives and the map/antagonist is dominating your team and your only on the first section, but surrendering instantly especially with new/low level players in the mix can hurt other players in the squad who give every mission all they have and lose that chance and have to go back to the drawing board because you don't want to try.

I understand what you are saying for the most part, but there are a few things that may help you understand the situation. Many people surrender at the beginning in order to save time and maintain productive progress. There's no point in surrendering 3 survives in because so much time was wasted already and surrendering won't bring back the lost time or save the situation, it's a shit show and a waste of time. Therefore the BEST time to surrender is as early as possible. This was the least amount of time is spent wasted on a potential loss.

But there's another issue here. If you lose a BP i should still be there after. You can keep attempting to get it. Correct me if I'm wrong people.

Lastly, this is the reality of non-optional PvP. I'm not blaming the antagonist for this. I'm also not blaming the Raiders for surrendering or playing halfhearted. But this is the result of PvP games the world over. EVERY game that has PvP has inevitable and unavoidable toxicity. This is one of a few reasons why some of us, not all, are asking for optional PvP.

We'll se what happens though. We got guilds around the corner.

He's talking about blueprints that require multiple wins in a row that your messing up by surrendering. They have to restart it again if the vote when through.

I play Antagonist 95% of the time so I dont know if its majority or all have to agree to the surrender but I can see how that would be annoying.

Gotcha thanks for the reply

Thought the same thing lol and I play Antagonist