No Plans to Implement Invis Gamertags in Conquest

[jmeatball]

Ok so I know this didn't seem like a problem when there was loads of conquest and I can assure you it wasn't. I think that has to do with the sheer size of the battle and the way they were fought. From what I recall while fighting in Iblis and for SH at one point, it was easy to group up on the person jumping (mainly MRP!!!!) and then go for a charge. Or go to the centre, right, or left of the battlefield to break up a charge. This large scale type battling was easier to fight with since there were more skilled pvp vets than usual.

Now some people may be wondering what I mean about Invis Gamertags in Conquest, and I don't blame them. What I'm referring to is while people are invisible on your side, you should be able to still see their gamertag. Now this doesn't really work for the attacking side if the defenders have Spectral, but it does work better for the defending side. Multiple times in the recent fights I've been in, I have to call someone who is being attacked or pushing too far up back, but I have no way of knowing who that is and just have to say "person who is too far up". I think that being able to see your own towns and allies names while you fight will lead to smoother fighting and smoother bits of pvp. Instead of just randomly calling someone, you could say their name and what you want them to do. Also with repotting and seeing who is at the head of a charge, it would help to see the persons name.

Idk comment on this if you agree, but I think it would just overall help to be able to see your own guys while you conquest.

 

[OperaGhost2004]

+1

 

[Steve5729]

+1

 

[Cryptite]

I feel like we used to have this, but lost it at some point. Worth discussing bringing back.

 

[jmeatball]

I feel like we used to have this, but lost it at some point. Worth discussing bringing back.

Yeah so do I, but I think that was before armour changed colour in fights to make it easier to see your own team, so gamertags were needed to see who was on your team and who wasn't.

 

[Skuhoo]

No, we never had this. It was suggested once before, but really if you want to be able to easily identify who's who on the battlefield then you shouldn't be using invis. What you want is the advantages of being invis without any of the disadvantages, which is silly.

 

[jmeatball]

No, we never had this. It was suggested once before, but really if you want to be able to easily identify who's who on the battlefield then you shouldn't be using invis. What you want is the advantages of being invis without any of the disadvantages, which is silly.

I did not know that it was supposed to be like this, I just thought people assumed it is, I still think it should be like that since it would help both sides (unless defenders had spectral)

 

[Skuhoo]

I did not know that it was supposed to be like this, I just thought people assumed it is, I still think it should be like that since it would help both sides (unless defenders had spectral)

Like I said in the previous thread, it would turn invis potions into just another fire resistance, a potion you need to carry around and drink every 8 minutes because otherwise you're disadvantaged. I don't see a real argument for it here, only that it's confusing. And I would agree that it can be difficult to find a specific teammate among an entire team of invis players, but why is that an issue? Why shouldn't it be hard to find that specific player? If a player wants to be quickly identifiable by their teammates then they shouldn't drink an invisibility potion.

 

[ModernMozart1787]

-1

 

[koi0001]

-1, in Stromgarde one of Silverhands main tactics was splashing us with invis to incite confusion and it worked incredibly well; removing this aspect of game play would only prove to make conquest less strategic

 

[Skuhoo]

-1, in Stromgarde one of Silverhands main tactics was splashing us with invis to incite confusion and it worked incredibly well; removing this aspect of game play would only prove to make conquest less strategic

To be fair, that was before armor colors were added which removes the advantage of invis'ing your opponents.

 

[Logic_ES]

Whats a invis?

 

[koi0001]

To be fair, that was before armor colors were added which removes the advantage of invis'ing your opponents.

very true, I suppose that was already nerfed regardless of how fun it was; why were armour colours added? I was afk when that happened

 

[Cryptite]

It appears I was mistaken. Ultimately, this isn't something we want to introduce. The reasons were basically already covered by Sku as well as that thread he linked.