RVSB MAP: ABOUT VICTORY SITES

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • xXWolfXx wrote:

      That would make Red V Blue maps even faster than they already are most of the time lol. Probably wouldn't be that balanced either. Makes the game boring as well since it ends too quickly and I guess from my perspective not as much excitement
      Opposite. The reason they're so fast is because it's decisively determined by inactives and actives most of the time, as well as it being 4x. That map should definitely not be 4x, the 4x deletes a lot of the point of the map. The victory sites add more competition, why would that be less excitement? In my opinion, the main problem is the 4x and the inactives. And this moving requirement from Rank 1 to Rank 2 for the map didn't seem to change a single thing.

    • xXWolfXx wrote:

      It's just that Victory Sites are usually only in Rising Tides and make people enjoy it! R V B is mainly based on the West vs East and if they added Victory Sites it would kinda make it feel like the older Rising Tides map. I agree with the rank thing though. They gotta ramp it up
      I absolutely LOATHE Rising Tides maps because of those stupid magical treasure troves of VP called victory sites. It's a dame shame they put those unbalancing pieces of crap in there, because otherwise, I'm all about the expanded Naval opportunity
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD

    • Dealer of Death wrote:

      xXWolfXx wrote:

      It's just that Victory Sites are usually only in Rising Tides and make people enjoy it! R V B is mainly based on the West vs East and if they added Victory Sites it would kinda make it feel like the older Rising Tides map. I agree with the rank thing though. They gotta ramp it up
      I absolutely LOATHE Rising Tides maps because of those stupid magical treasure troves of VP called victory sites. It's a dame shame they put those unbalancing pieces of crap in there, because otherwise, I'm all about the expanded Naval opportunity
      I mostly agree, I wouldn't say loathe but Rising Tides would be great if they didn't have VP Sites. If your per say a better player and someone focuses on gathering up all the victory sites while your at war with other nations then they'll win. Doesnt matter if you have a stronger army as long as there are VP Sites. I dont say that's happened all the time but it's a possibility

    • I played a game once, where a guy, ranked 11, won the game in 10 days on a rising tides map, by just going after the victory sites, twas quite annoying:)
      "The greatest battles are never won by men but with words"-Me

      "Free flies and no work"-ME

      "Duty is heavier than a mountain death as light as a feather" Lan from the Wheel of Time

    • xXWolfXx wrote:

      Dealer of Death wrote:

      xXWolfXx wrote:

      It's just that Victory Sites are usually only in Rising Tides and make people enjoy it! R V B is mainly based on the West vs East and if they added Victory Sites it would kinda make it feel like the older Rising Tides map. I agree with the rank thing though. They gotta ramp it up
      I absolutely LOATHE Rising Tides maps because of those stupid magical treasure troves of VP called victory sites. It's a dame shame they put those unbalancing pieces of crap in there, because otherwise, I'm all about the expanded Naval opportunity
      I mostly agree, I wouldn't say loathe but Rising Tides would be great if they didn't have VP Sites. If your per say a better player and someone focuses on gathering up all the victory sites while your at war with other nations then they'll win. Doesnt matter if you have a stronger army as long as there are VP Sites. I dont say that's happened all the time but it's a possibility
      the amount of sites required to win now is 8, ever tried managing an attack on 8 countries at the same time, coordinated, and holding off tentatives to get the site back, plus many players defend them heavily. It’s not as easy as you think but certainly possible as I won a game like that
      “I hate 4x” -me

    • Funniest game every played Rising Tides when first came out and 4 of 6 of victory sites were on islands ( island between africa/s america; Bermuda; island in hawaii; island between australia and africa).

      Anyways our 3 man coalition controlled all island Victory sites with strong navy. I was waiting for europe and asia and europe to do something as they must not have noticed (new game/rules) that we only needed 1 more victory site to win and where still duking it out against each other.

      Sailed 2 marines and a sub all the way from S America to last Vic site in Siberia (long as-s swim) but only one to get to without battling through 5 countries., took like 2.5 days. Guy had strike fighters in area and was smart enough to have airfields in every adjacent prov to victory site. Was able to get ball sub up a river and take out 1 or 2 airfields; timed with spy sabotage in other 2 airfields. marched in and won the game before 3/4 of map knew what happened.

      More strategy in Rising tides and map now drastically favors Asia as think 4 sites in Asia; 1 or 2 in africa; 1 n am; 1 s am; 1 or 2 europe.
      "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him "

      aka ...The killer formerly known as BuckeyeChamp