DOWN WITH LEGACY PLAINS!

DOWN WITH LEGACY PLAINS!

  • River Village

    Votes: 28 45.9%
  • Legacy Plains, EW!

    Votes: 20 32.8%
  • Other: POST WHAT OTHER MAP!

    Votes: 13 21.3%

  • Total voters
    61

Courtney

Squire
Best answers
0
Roberta_Baratheon said:
Courtney said:
22nd_Can said:
Also courtney every time I read a post of yours about plains I just cringe, dunno why it just cringes me.
Probably because you dislike plains maps but I enjoy playing them  :party:.
You don't even play the game why do you always argue in tourney threads.
I'm just following Marnid's footsteps  :iamamoron: :shifty: (and because I get bored at work  :dead:)
 
Best answers
0
Courtney has played before. I remember seeing him before both of you Zaffa and Rob. That being said, I think he and his opinion deserve some respect. He is just discussing what his thoughts are and he's being bashed for it.

Besides, he's right
I don't see the problem with plains maps being cav dominated. We see a lot of closed maps where they are infantry dominated, but no one has problems with them. There is nothing wrong with a map being cav dominated, because it forces players to be better than a 1 dimensional, one trick pony infantry or archer. Besides, having archers and even infantry can work on open maps, but the players need to know what they're doing.Also, the cohesion required is more on open/random plains than a majority of maps. The adaptability is something I feel teams have lost now a days. They know exactly what they're playing and stick to the same strategies, even if they don't work. Sorry if this is not organized well, I am writing this in class on my phone.
 

Thunderbeu

Sergeant Knight at Arms
WB
Best answers
0
The_Troubadour said:
Courtney has played before. I remember seeing him before both of you Zaffa and Rob. That being said, I think he and his opinion deserve some respect. He is just discussing what his thoughts are and he's being bashed for it.

Besides, he's right
I don't see the problem with plains maps being cav dominated. We see a lot of closed maps where they are infantry dominated, but no one has problems with them. There is nothing wrong with a map being cav dominated, because it forces players to be better than a 1 dimensional, one trick pony infantry or archer. Besides, having archers and even infantry can work on open maps, but the players need to know what they're doing.Also, the cohesion required is more on open/random plains is more than a majority of maps. The adaptability is something I feel teams have lost now a days. They know exactly what they're playing and stick to the same strategies, even if they don't work. Sorry if this is not organized well, I am writing this in class on my phone.
Um almost all maps can be cav dominated closed map cav can make up for lack of infantry skill, for example SJW their inf is definetly not bad but their inf know how to survive and let cav get them kills
 

Courtney

Squire
Best answers
0
Aura (Zaffa) said:
At least Marnid ran a tournament. You have done nothing but complain. You are like a Mr. X that never played the game.
Exactly where in this thread did I complain again? All I did was express my opinions of what this topic was asking and express my general opinion of plains in general. Get butt-hurt because I don't agree with you? Is this your first time on the interwebz?

Never played the game? Boy your long-term memory isn't really that great is it? I've been on my Courtney character since the Rebels formed back in July 2011, and I've played under various names even before that.
 
Best answers
0
Thunderbeu said:
The_Troubadour said:
Courtney has played before. I remember seeing him before both of you Zaffa and Rob. That being said, I think he and his opinion deserve some respect. He is just discussing what his thoughts are and he's being bashed for it.

Besides, he's right
I don't see the problem with plains maps being cav dominated. We see a lot of closed maps where they are infantry dominated, but no one has problems with them. There is nothing wrong with a map being cav dominated, because it forces players to be better than a 1 dimensional, one trick pony infantry or archer. Besides, having archers and even infantry can work on open maps, but the players need to know what they're doing.Also, the cohesion required is more on open/random plains is more than a majority of maps. The adaptability is something I feel teams have lost now a days. They know exactly what they're playing and stick to the same strategies, even if they don't work. Sorry if this is not organized well, I am writing this in class on my phone.
Um almost all maps can be cav dominated closed map cav can make up for lack of infantry skill, for example SJW their inf is definetly not bad but their inf know how to survive and let cav get them kills
That is only one team, though. Most teams rely on their infantry strength to win closed maps like Sandi'boush or Verloren. Not saying that archers and cav don't matter, but the same can be said for inf and archers on open maps. Not the most important class, but they still contribute.
 
Best answers
0
Hmm, good points. It has been a while since I've played on legacy plains. Probably deserves another try from me.
In any case, I would be in favor of playing open/legacy/random plains. Cavalry is probably the least tested class in our tournaments
 

Thunderbeu

Sergeant Knight at Arms
WB
Best answers
0
The_Troubadour said:
Hmm, good points. It has been a while since I've played on legacy plains. Probably deserves another try from me.
In any case, I would be in favor of playing open/legacy/random plains. Cavalry is probably the least tested class in our tournaments
It isn't though because open maps still test cav even if it isn't just a plain...
 

Courtney

Squire
Best answers
0
Thunderbeu said:
The_Troubadour said:
Hmm, good points. It has been a while since I've played on legacy plains. Probably deserves another try from me.
In any case, I would be in favor of playing open/legacy/random plains. Cavalry is probably the least tested class in our tournaments
It isn't though because open maps still test cav even if it isn't just a plain...
Cav skill also means being able to protect your ground teammates from enemy cav with barely any cover. In current "open" maps, like Legacy and River Village in the poll, there are plenty of cover, usually in the form of buildings and structures, for archers/melee to hide behind, below, and above, leaving cav to wander about without having to worry about their ground teammates getting killed from behind by enemy cav.

On another note, just because I like Random Plains doesn't mean I like maps that allow all cav as the only viable strategy, i.e. Open Plains. People seem to think Random Plains = Open Plains. No it's not...most of the time. The only time they're similar is if you roll a Random Plains map that has mostly flat terrain and few trees.
 

22nd_Can

Sergeant Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
Courtney said:
Cav skill also means being able to protect your ground teammates from enemy cav with barely any cover.
Legit that's almost never the case unless if you're on open plains and the enemy team is all cav, and even then usually ground troops are bait to get kills. Due to the nature of cav, even if another cav is there to protect a ground troop without spear, there isn't much he can do unless he is literally standing next to the guy the whole time, the enemy cav will just circle around and bump lance closing his shield causing you to be one man down somewhere else in the field. There isn't one other map where cav has to protect ground troops. People keep saying no meta change no meta change, but to my experience this is one of the biggest changes now, there isn't any babysitting for ground troops going on anymore on any map increasing the value of people like Achilles who can survive a long ass time baiting the enemy team causing friendlies to get kills.

Of course cav zone each other out sometimes but that's a very different concept than what you're saying.

 

Calamity

Il Padrino
Count
Best answers
0
Aura (Zaffa) said:
That is why as Can suggested, teams go in knowing the one archer they run will die and that the archer's role is merely to bait tunnel vision cav. Even if the archer dies, so long as the team was able to dismount or secure a kill against multiple members of the other team, the trade was worth it.
West Knights Achilles © 2012
 

Courtney

Squire
Best answers
0
22nd_Can said:
Courtney said:
Cav skill also means being able to protect your ground teammates from enemy cav with barely any cover.
Legit that's almost never the case unless if you're on open plains and the enemy team is all cav, and even then usually ground troops are bait to get kills. Due to the nature of cav, even if another cav is there to protect a ground troop without spear, there isn't much he can do unless he is literally standing next to the guy the whole time, the enemy cav will just circle around and bump lance closing his shield causing you to be one man down somewhere else in the field. There isn't one other map where cav has to protect ground troops. People keep saying no meta change no meta change, but to my experience this is one of the biggest changes now, there isn't any babysitting for ground troops going on anymore on any map increasing the value of people like Achilles who can survive a long ass time baiting the enemy team causing friendlies to get kills.

Of course cav zone each other out sometimes but that's a very different concept than what you're saying.
I guess you just have to witness it to understand what I'm talking about. That type of cav play doesn't really exist anymore because it's a type of play you would usually see only on Random Plains, back when it was a choice. BkS cav was particularly very good at protecting their archers against enemy cav, while their archers shoot away without having to keep looking behind them. Because of how effective their cav were, they wouldn't even need to field a melee to babysit their archers. Old Balions were also pretty good at this. Probably the closest to that kind of play you'd see nowadays is when wK was using Achilles as the sacrificial lamb in their open map matches.
 

Thunderbeu

Sergeant Knight at Arms
WB
Best answers
0
Courtney said:
22nd_Can said:
Courtney said:
Cav skill also means being able to protect your ground teammates from enemy cav with barely any cover.
Legit that's almost never the case unless if you're on open plains and the enemy team is all cav, and even then usually ground troops are bait to get kills. Due to the nature of cav, even if another cav is there to protect a ground troop without spear, there isn't much he can do unless he is literally standing next to the guy the whole time, the enemy cav will just circle around and bump lance closing his shield causing you to be one man down somewhere else in the field. There isn't one other map where cav has to protect ground troops. People keep saying no meta change no meta change, but to my experience this is one of the biggest changes now, there isn't any babysitting for ground troops going on anymore on any map increasing the value of people like Achilles who can survive a long ass time baiting the enemy team causing friendlies to get kills.

Of course cav zone each other out sometimes but that's a very different concept than what you're saying.
I guess you just have to witness it to understand what I'm talking about. That type of cav play doesn't really exist anymore because it's a type of play you would usually see only on Random Plains, back when it was a choice. BkS cav was particularly very good at protecting their archers against enemy cav, while their archers shoot away without having to keep looking behind them. Because of how effective their cav were, they wouldn't even need to field a melee to babysit their archers. Old Balions were also pretty good at this. Probably the closest to that kind of play you'd see nowadays is when wK was using Achilles as the sacrificial lamb in their open map matches.
Sacrificial Lamb is a strat Mar would say is effective...
 

RalliX

Count
M&BWBWF&SVC
Best answers
0
In my time playing Legacy Plains, I can safely say it was always really fun to play as a map. That's my two denars.
 

Lagstro

Baron
Best answers
0
What ever happened to that DoF map we used to play on the old pickup parties? I remember we decided then that it was too big of a map for a 7 v 7, and (Erminas?) was going to downscale it a bit and make one of the hills a little less steep. Anyone remember it?

It had like a little arena/market area on one end and then it went up into like a little rock path into some other zone, and the rest was like, slanted plains.

You should remember it Zaffa. I remember you intentionally tk'd me on it with an xbow and you laughed about it for like 5 minutes.
 

Achilles_TheIV

Archduke
NWWBWF&S
Best answers
0
Aura (Zaffa) said:
since K-Tit
:roll:
Calamity said:
Aura (Zaffa) said:
That is why as Can suggested, teams go in knowing the one archer they run will die and that the archer's role is merely to bait tunnel vision cav. Even if the archer dies, so long as the team was able to dismount or secure a kill against multiple members of the other team, the trade was worth it.
West Knights Achilles © 2012
them be fightin' words back in the day, you best believe it
 

Mad_Dawg

Count
Best answers
0
Aura (Zaffa) said:
Ballion is probably the only team that thought ground games worked on the map which probably contributed to their lack of success on the map.
I'm bad at Plains maps, that is all.