8v8 Captain Mode thoughts?

[Zarthas]

One of the custom servers was running 8v8 Captain.
What's the community's thoughts?
It seemed like the increased player count mitigated the lose-spiral you go into if 2 out of 6 members of your team are not sure how to play. 1 out of 8 units running around to flags on the wrong side of the map didn't mean you automatically lost.
It also made Cavalry, Archers, and Skirmishers infinitely more playable, as you now have only lost 1/8 of the Mace Heavy Infantry you have to play to win the current meta.
Are there any reasons we should stick to a 6v6 Captain mode?
It was mostly new players, so I'm not sure how problematic Kiting/AI Exploiting would be with 4 more players on the field. It does seem like if there's more captains on your team, there will be potentially a smaller percentage of your team just mashing f1 f3 and getting their units kited around successfully by opposing captains.

 

[Roy1012]

I queued up with 5 friends for a commander battle (I refuse to call it captain) game. It was pretty fun, except for the fact it took 22 minutes to find a match, which included one guy hiding all his cav in the back of the map and going out with them one by one, as well as one who just didn’t know any tactics whatsoever. So, seeing as it took that long for a 6v6, the quality of the players being suspect and finding two additional players would be a time-wasting massacre. Could be fun for those who have the patience to wait an hour.

 

[Mabons]

I think it has more to do with the troops numbers being higher also.

 

[ParzivaI]

Maps need to by bigger for it to work

 

[CaptainFracas]

This server will be great with the future new captain mode map ?

 

[Gotha]

I think we were the first to host DR Captain 8v8 with slighlty reduced bot count 20 per players (default 25 per player). Higher bot counts / player counts led to crashes. But maybe there was also another custom server running 8v8.

 

[Delinard]

It's like comparing a 50vs50 battle mode with 6v6 skirmish, one is always going to be better then the other.

 

[Brandis.]

8v8 caused inf rush to be even stronger. The blob works better the bigger it is. Archers and skirms are getting stronger in the next patch, but due to how incredibly weak they are atm, I question if it will be enough without infantry damage/speed nerfs.

8v8 is quite similar to 6v6. I'd be more interested in 10v10 or higher. Of course, scaling would need to be an option. It's also a problem on custom servers that if you have leavers, you don't get extra troops to compensate.

 

[Zarthas]

8v8 caused inf rush to be even stronger. The blob works better the bigger it is. Archers and skirms are getting stronger in the next patch, but due to how incredibly weak they are atm, I question if it will be enough without infantry damage/speed nerfs.

8v8 is quite similar to 6v6. I'd be more interested in 10v10 or higher. Of course, scaling would need to be an option. It's also a problem on custom servers that if you have leavers, you don't get extra troops to compensate.

Ah, the server I played on had reduced troop counts per Captain so the overall troop count was the same as a 6v6 match. This was a bit more fun than traditional 6v6 I think, smaller units meant more positioning and engagement.
I'd like to see a 10v10 for sure.

 

[FearSpear]

It was mostly new players, so I'm not sure how problematic Kiting/AI Exploiting would be with 4 more players on the field.

You would lose to 8 Skirmish players instead of 6 if such a change was implemented.

 

[Zarthas]

You would lose to 8 Skirmish players instead of 6 if such a change was implemented.

Skirmish is for old men. Battle is what sweaties play now.

SAD.

 

[FearSpear]

Skirmish is for old men. Battle is what sweaties play now.

SAD.

Sad!