Should Splash Damage change the win and loss conditions of Stopwatch and remove draws?

TalakTalak Posts: 162
edited January 2016 in Stopwatch
If Splash Damage and nexon are the least bit interested in making this game into an esport they have to make the main competitive game mode fun to watch. No one wants to spectate a game where it ends up being a draw. It's a anticlimactic way to end a match.

This is a post from another thread, but it gives a fantastic example as to why the stopwatch rules in Dirty Bomb is a broken one. In any competitive game or sport, the game should continue on or end until a winner is decided.


atomicMackerel wrote: »
Tonight i played a competitive game on underground :
We start on defense and attackers blow the first objective just before the end of the timer and don't manage to blow the second.
We then go on attack and blow the first objective 4 minutes fasters than our opponents. We thought it was a win but it was not. The game goes on and we try to blow the second objective but the game stops at the time our opponents blew the first objective on the other side.
And the result is a draw.
What the @$!# is wrong with this game ?
We destroyed the first objective 4 minutes faster than our opponents and the game lets us as much time to blow the second objective as it took to the opposite team to blow only the first ....

Should Splash Damage change the win and loss conditions of Stopwatch and remove draws? 27 votes

Yes
77%
TalakextraordinaryEmperorSaulWolfdenProfPlumpN7_ValhallaTheVulpesFoxXanSharpish101blonknokiIIBrazenXXGoldBerylRdmSYNERGYWalkeradiZeroFactorOnly_Use_Me_LazerkaMMakaZZi9incredibleShipDysfnalSabertooth 21 votes
No
22%
wolvieSwegsterDragonNesodosSinfulsebastianjejefasT32 6 votes

Comments

  • wolviewolvie Posts: 300
    No
    I rationalize it as this. Let me set a scene. You have to organized teams. Each with their own offensive and denfensve strategies. Now Team A has a stellar Obj 1 strategy and Team B does not have a good defense strategy. Team A takes and sicesfully completes Obj 1 first push. But on 2nd Obj Team A has a bad of fence and Team B has a good defense. Team B full holds the rest of the map. Sides switch. Team B has and okay strategy for Obj 1 and Team A has good defense. Team B completed Obj 1 a substantial amount t of time after Team A. Team B starts to attack Obj 2 and is about to get it as timer runs out. Match is ruled as draw. I feel that is a good way to rule such match. If you were to say Team A won due to a better time, you are saying Obj 1 is more important than Obj 2 when they should be placed at an even level. If Team A were to win you are not rewarding Team B's great play on Obj 2. Even though Team A had a better Obj 1 Team B had a better Obj 2. To say Team A is the better team is down right stupid. The 2 teams are practically equal. That is why I think judging who had the faster Obj 1 is flawed.
  • ProfPlumpProfPlump Posts: 709
    Yes
    I really hate all situations where you realise that you can "only get a draw", like when in Execution the enemy team has reached 6 wins, or when you're playing Stopwatch and your team only managed to deliver one of the deliverables, and then the enemy team manages to deliver one too. I wish the time at which you delivered made a difference again, like it used to.

    And for Execution there should be a tie breaker round rather than just an anticlimactic DRAW sign.
  • TalakTalak Posts: 162
    Yes
    wolvie wrote: »
    I rationalize it as this. Let me set a scene. You have to organized teams. Each with their own offensive and denfensve strategies. Now Team A has a stellar Obj 1 strategy and Team B does not have a good defense strategy. Team A takes and sicesfully completes Obj 1 first push. But on 2nd Obj Team A has a bad of fence and Team B has a good defense. Team B full holds the rest of the map. Sides switch. Team B has and okay strategy for Obj 1 and Team A has good defense. Team B completed Obj 1 a substantial amount t of time after Team A. Team B starts to attack Obj 2 and is about to get it as timer runs out. Match is ruled as draw. I feel that is a good way to rule such match. If you were to say Team A won due to a better time, you are saying Obj 1 is more important than Obj 2 when they should be placed at an even level. If Team A were to win you are not rewarding Team B's great play on Obj 2. Even though Team A had a better Obj 1 Team B had a better Obj 2. To say Team A is the better team is down right stupid. The 2 teams are practically equal. That is why I think judging who had the faster Obj 1 is flawed.

    I can see the point you're trying to make. All objectives in each stage should have equal importance, but the way Splash Damage makes their games are objective based gameplay in sequential order. There are a few instances in Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory where a covert ops could open a door for an engineer on maps like Battery and Fuel Depot and destroy the main objective, but for the most part the attacking team has to complete objectives in a specific order.

    So when a team is incapable of stalling the attacking side from completing the objective, the game should result in a draw because both teams were able to complete the same set of objectives? What's the point of calling it stopwatch if completing objectives faster doesn't mean anything?

    I will counter that with a scene of my own. Let's say Team A and B both manage to repair and escort the e.v. on chapel at the same time. Both teams manage to deliver the first objective of stage three, but are unable to deliver the second objective. Team B manages to beat team A by four and a half minutes, but the match still results in a draw. Should Team B not be rewarded for completing the objective faster?

    The bizarre thing about stopwatch during the escort phase. If Team A for example is able to stop team B from finishing stage two and stalls the e.v. at the halfway point, The moment Team A escorts the e.v. past the point Team B did, the match ends and Team A is given the win. The inconsistency of how Splash Damage has set the win conditions is very bewildering.
  • BerylRdmBerylRdm Posts: 675
    Yes
    where a covert ops could open a door for an engineer on maps like Battery and Fuel Depot and destroy the main objective
    You meant Fuel Dump, I think.
    What's the point of calling it stopwatch if completing objectives faster doesn't mean anything?
    Agree. This is infuriating when my team manages to complete first objective much faster, then fails at the second obj, but so did the enemy team - and we have a draw. If this is supposed to be a stopwatch, they should really make it in a way, that time actually matters.
    Hey, hey look! It's a goddamn signature!
  • TalakTalak Posts: 162
    Yes
    Beryl wrote: »
    where a covert ops could open a door for an engineer on maps like Battery and Fuel Depot and destroy the main objective
    You meant Fuel Dump, I think.
    What's the point of calling it stopwatch if completing objectives faster doesn't mean anything?
    Agree. This is infuriating when my team manages to complete first objective much faster, then fails at the second obj, but so did the enemy team - and we have a draw. If this is supposed to be a stopwatch, they should really make it in a way, that time actually matters.

    You caught me on that one. Must have been tired when I posted this discussion because I've played Fuel Dump so many times that I wouldn't even be able to guess the number I've played on that map.
  • Yes
    You don't feel as accomplished with a draw. You especially feel stink when you have clearly done better than the enemy team up to this moment (therefore the entire game), and you are told that actually, NO! NO YOU WERE EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE OTHER TEAM.
  • Yes
    ProfPlump wrote: »
    And for Execution there should be a tie breaker round rather than just an anticlimactic DRAW sign.
    While I'm for stopwatch minimizing draws, I'm against execution. It is consistent with many other S&D style game modes from other games, and importantly, in that case both teams did do equally well (give or take).
    I think everything needing to be said for stopwatch has been said already, so there's nothing really to add.
  • jejejeje Posts: 5
    No
    Stopwatch is to do an objective if you do the objective (I mean final objective), the opposite team has to beat your time. Remember that in RtCW or Wolf: ET, you've to do the final objective if you want to set a time. Even if you've done the primary or second objective.

    Here in DB you only that to do one more objective to win, so it's easier !
Sign In or Register to comment.