criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube
Felucia Transmission
No Match for a Good Blaster

Capital Supremacy and Heroes - What would you prefer?

124

Replies

  • Regardless of hero count, if you select a hero and survive phase 1, you shouldn't have to re-select said hero in phase 2.
  • 4 on ground, 2 on ships! M
  • Extraction Maps.
    The new mode I will adapt to
    Zero,2 ,4 or all.
    As long as I can play a trooper only mode with a extraction
    I'm good.
    GA and supremacy?
    Don't mind them.
  • CeymalRen
    1123 posts Member
    Wow. Almost 70% voted 2 heroes or none.

    Did not expect that.

  • frankly, i'd like to say 2 of chache listed on the ground and 1 in the capital ship, but when we see anakin, i prefer no hero as long as it will not have been squirmed nerve, sincerely, remove its retribution, it will be always a very powerful hero without that. Small flat that has nothing to do with the heroes, but I find that 4 CAB is much too advantageous for the droid, maybe you can go to 2 CAB and also reduce the number of vehicles on the side clone in consequance
  • Arockstar2 wrote: »
    I really hope they decide on 4 heroes at a time (or the 3 suggested above would even be nice) despite the popular opinion of this forum. Capital Supremacy is a pretty fast based and chaotic mode, in a good way, and I’m really enjoying it. I’m finding that in this chaos, heroes really aren’t the OP characters (BESIDES ANAKIN) that people are acting like they are. Especially with special classes, you can hold your own very well against a hero. Also, oftentimes I find I’m traveling in a mass group of players while taking on command posts, and enemy heroes are much more vulnerable. Lastly, I haven’t seen anyone mention the problem of people camping the spawn screen for heroes, which happens A LOT and thereby takes players out of the game. (This is what happens with only a max of 2 heroes). As of playing a few minutes ago, I found that a number of people were doing this. I was really tempted to do so as well, considering I was sitting on a plethora of battlepoints and every time I looked for a hero they both were taken...

    On a side note, if this mode was a TRUE 32v32, then the issue of hero numbers wouldn’t even be a problem. :|

    32 v 32 = Major Lag experience with these graphics
  • DJLutherKing
    183 posts Member
    edited March 29
    4v4 I want to see all the heroes on the battlefront! Change Chewie to Padme on Geo
    Put droidekas in the Capitol Ship interiors and add starfighter coruscant in future similar to how this mode is like a game of conquest then a search/destroy
    Game of conquest/starfighter assault or vice versa
  • 4 heroes, I hate having BP to spend and having no heroes available to spend it on.

    I'd worry about your bank account if this is your line of thinking
  • budzai
    148 posts Member
    I voted none, but I think 1 per side (in GA too) would be ideal.
  • Arockstar2 wrote: »
    I really hope they decide on 4 heroes at a time (or the 3 suggested above would even be nice) despite the popular opinion of this forum. Capital Supremacy is a pretty fast based and chaotic mode, in a good way, and I’m really enjoying it. I’m finding that in this chaos, heroes really aren’t the OP characters (BESIDES ANAKIN) that people are acting like they are. Especially with special classes, you can hold your own very well against a hero. Also, oftentimes I find I’m traveling in a mass group of players while taking on command posts, and enemy heroes are much more vulnerable. Lastly, I haven’t seen anyone mention the problem of people camping the spawn screen for heroes, which happens A LOT and thereby takes players out of the game. (This is what happens with only a max of 2 heroes). As of playing a few minutes ago, I found that a number of people were doing this. I was really tempted to do so as well, considering I was sitting on a plethora of battlepoints and every time I looked for a hero they both were taken...

    On a side note, if this mode was a TRUE 32v32, then the issue of hero numbers wouldn’t even be a problem. :|

    32 v 32 = Major Lag experience with these graphics
    Arockstar2 wrote: »
    I really hope they decide on 4 heroes at a time (or the 3 suggested above would even be nice) despite the popular opinion of this forum. Capital Supremacy is a pretty fast based and chaotic mode, in a good way, and I’m really enjoying it. I’m finding that in this chaos, heroes really aren’t the OP characters (BESIDES ANAKIN) that people are acting like they are. Especially with special classes, you can hold your own very well against a hero. Also, oftentimes I find I’m traveling in a mass group of players while taking on command posts, and enemy heroes are much more vulnerable. Lastly, I haven’t seen anyone mention the problem of people camping the spawn screen for heroes, which happens A LOT and thereby takes players out of the game. (This is what happens with only a max of 2 heroes). As of playing a few minutes ago, I found that a number of people were doing this. I was really tempted to do so as well, considering I was sitting on a plethora of battlepoints and every time I looked for a hero they both were taken...

    On a side note, if this mode was a TRUE 32v32, then the issue of hero numbers wouldn’t even be a problem. :|

    32 v 32 = Major Lag experience with these graphics
    Battlefield does it fine with just as detailed graphics plus a destructible map.
  • Arockstar2 wrote: »
    Arockstar2 wrote: »
    I really hope they decide on 4 heroes at a time (or the 3 suggested above would even be nice) despite the popular opinion of this forum. Capital Supremacy is a pretty fast based and chaotic mode, in a good way, and I’m really enjoying it. I’m finding that in this chaos, heroes really aren’t the OP characters (BESIDES ANAKIN) that people are acting like they are. Especially with special classes, you can hold your own very well against a hero. Also, oftentimes I find I’m traveling in a mass group of players while taking on command posts, and enemy heroes are much more vulnerable. Lastly, I haven’t seen anyone mention the problem of people camping the spawn screen for heroes, which happens A LOT and thereby takes players out of the game. (This is what happens with only a max of 2 heroes). As of playing a few minutes ago, I found that a number of people were doing this. I was really tempted to do so as well, considering I was sitting on a plethora of battlepoints and every time I looked for a hero they both were taken...

    On a side note, if this mode was a TRUE 32v32, then the issue of hero numbers wouldn’t even be a problem. :|

    32 v 32 = Major Lag experience with these graphics
    Arockstar2 wrote: »
    I really hope they decide on 4 heroes at a time (or the 3 suggested above would even be nice) despite the popular opinion of this forum. Capital Supremacy is a pretty fast based and chaotic mode, in a good way, and I’m really enjoying it. I’m finding that in this chaos, heroes really aren’t the OP characters (BESIDES ANAKIN) that people are acting like they are. Especially with special classes, you can hold your own very well against a hero. Also, oftentimes I find I’m traveling in a mass group of players while taking on command posts, and enemy heroes are much more vulnerable. Lastly, I haven’t seen anyone mention the problem of people camping the spawn screen for heroes, which happens A LOT and thereby takes players out of the game. (This is what happens with only a max of 2 heroes). As of playing a few minutes ago, I found that a number of people were doing this. I was really tempted to do so as well, considering I was sitting on a plethora of battlepoints and every time I looked for a hero they both were taken...

    On a side note, if this mode was a TRUE 32v32, then the issue of hero numbers wouldn’t even be a problem. :|

    32 v 32 = Major Lag experience with these graphics
    Battlefield does it fine with just as detailed graphics plus a destructible map.

    But with different servers.
  • Spiito
    1911 posts Member
    Heroes are really buggy. I had a grievous fly after me while I was jet packing away. It was insane. Just a tad scary. That skill he used to do it doesn't even work on a stationary target, he'll just zoom around in circles around or above them.

    Would it be alright to just cut heroes out of the new large scale mode completely? Since they're so... Wonky.
    Wknuto!
  • Arockstar2 wrote: »
    Arockstar2 wrote: »
    I really hope they decide on 4 heroes at a time (or the 3 suggested above would even be nice) despite the popular opinion of this forum. Capital Supremacy is a pretty fast based and chaotic mode, in a good way, and I’m really enjoying it. I’m finding that in this chaos, heroes really aren’t the OP characters (BESIDES ANAKIN) that people are acting like they are. Especially with special classes, you can hold your own very well against a hero. Also, oftentimes I find I’m traveling in a mass group of players while taking on command posts, and enemy heroes are much more vulnerable. Lastly, I haven’t seen anyone mention the problem of people camping the spawn screen for heroes, which happens A LOT and thereby takes players out of the game. (This is what happens with only a max of 2 heroes). As of playing a few minutes ago, I found that a number of people were doing this. I was really tempted to do so as well, considering I was sitting on a plethora of battlepoints and every time I looked for a hero they both were taken...

    On a side note, if this mode was a TRUE 32v32, then the issue of hero numbers wouldn’t even be a problem. :|

    32 v 32 = Major Lag experience with these graphics
    Arockstar2 wrote: »
    I really hope they decide on 4 heroes at a time (or the 3 suggested above would even be nice) despite the popular opinion of this forum. Capital Supremacy is a pretty fast based and chaotic mode, in a good way, and I’m really enjoying it. I’m finding that in this chaos, heroes really aren’t the OP characters (BESIDES ANAKIN) that people are acting like they are. Especially with special classes, you can hold your own very well against a hero. Also, oftentimes I find I’m traveling in a mass group of players while taking on command posts, and enemy heroes are much more vulnerable. Lastly, I haven’t seen anyone mention the problem of people camping the spawn screen for heroes, which happens A LOT and thereby takes players out of the game. (This is what happens with only a max of 2 heroes). As of playing a few minutes ago, I found that a number of people were doing this. I was really tempted to do so as well, considering I was sitting on a plethora of battlepoints and every time I looked for a hero they both were taken...

    On a side note, if this mode was a TRUE 32v32, then the issue of hero numbers wouldn’t even be a problem. :|

    32 v 32 = Major Lag experience with these graphics
    Battlefield does it fine with just as detailed graphics plus a destructible map.

    But with different servers.

    Yes I suppose. It’s a shame they didn’t plan Battlefront to be optimized for 32 v 32. Star Wars encompasses MASSIVE Galaxy wide wars and 20 v 20 just doesn’t quite capture the scale of it...

    I will say though that Capital Supremacy is a good step in the right direction.
  • Arockstar2 wrote: »
    Arockstar2 wrote: »
    Arockstar2 wrote: »
    I really hope they decide on 4 heroes at a time (or the 3 suggested above would even be nice) despite the popular opinion of this forum. Capital Supremacy is a pretty fast based and chaotic mode, in a good way, and I’m really enjoying it. I’m finding that in this chaos, heroes really aren’t the OP characters (BESIDES ANAKIN) that people are acting like they are. Especially with special classes, you can hold your own very well against a hero. Also, oftentimes I find I’m traveling in a mass group of players while taking on command posts, and enemy heroes are much more vulnerable. Lastly, I haven’t seen anyone mention the problem of people camping the spawn screen for heroes, which happens A LOT and thereby takes players out of the game. (This is what happens with only a max of 2 heroes). As of playing a few minutes ago, I found that a number of people were doing this. I was really tempted to do so as well, considering I was sitting on a plethora of battlepoints and every time I looked for a hero they both were taken...

    On a side note, if this mode was a TRUE 32v32, then the issue of hero numbers wouldn’t even be a problem. :|

    32 v 32 = Major Lag experience with these graphics
    Arockstar2 wrote: »
    I really hope they decide on 4 heroes at a time (or the 3 suggested above would even be nice) despite the popular opinion of this forum. Capital Supremacy is a pretty fast based and chaotic mode, in a good way, and I’m really enjoying it. I’m finding that in this chaos, heroes really aren’t the OP characters (BESIDES ANAKIN) that people are acting like they are. Especially with special classes, you can hold your own very well against a hero. Also, oftentimes I find I’m traveling in a mass group of players while taking on command posts, and enemy heroes are much more vulnerable. Lastly, I haven’t seen anyone mention the problem of people camping the spawn screen for heroes, which happens A LOT and thereby takes players out of the game. (This is what happens with only a max of 2 heroes). As of playing a few minutes ago, I found that a number of people were doing this. I was really tempted to do so as well, considering I was sitting on a plethora of battlepoints and every time I looked for a hero they both were taken...

    On a side note, if this mode was a TRUE 32v32, then the issue of hero numbers wouldn’t even be a problem. :|

    32 v 32 = Major Lag experience with these graphics
    Battlefield does it fine with just as detailed graphics plus a destructible map.

    But with different servers.

    Yes I suppose. It’s a shame they didn’t plan Battlefront to be optimized for 32 v 32. Star Wars encompasses MASSIVE Galaxy wide wars and 20 v 20 just doesn’t quite capture the scale of it...

    I will say though that Capital Supremacy is a good step in the right direction.

    I agree.
  • Spiito wrote: »
    Heroes are really buggy. I had a grievous fly after me while I was jet packing away. It was insane. Just a tad scary. That skill he used to do it doesn't even work on a stationary target, he'll just zoom around in circles around or above them.

    Would it be alright to just cut heroes out of the new large scale mode completely? Since they're so... Wonky.

    Nothing special for Grievous. He probably used thrust surge and caught you as you were leaving the scene.
  • How about all prequel villains vs anakin only on the lightside?
    I think thats a fair fight.
  • Spiito
    1911 posts Member
    Spiito wrote: »
    Heroes are really buggy. I had a grievous fly after me while I was jet packing away. It was insane. Just a tad scary. That skill he used to do it doesn't even work on a stationary target, he'll just zoom around in circles around or above them.

    Would it be alright to just cut heroes out of the new large scale mode completely? Since they're so... Wonky.

    Nothing special for Grievous. He probably used thrust surge and caught you as you were leaving the scene.

    For a skill that cannot even find an idle target 1ft infront of it, that Skywalking was pretty impressive to see.
    Wknuto!
  • Spiito wrote: »
    Spiito wrote: »
    Heroes are really buggy. I had a grievous fly after me while I was jet packing away. It was insane. Just a tad scary. That skill he used to do it doesn't even work on a stationary target, he'll just zoom around in circles around or above them.

    Would it be alright to just cut heroes out of the new large scale mode completely? Since they're so... Wonky.

    Nothing special for Grievous. He probably used thrust surge and caught you as you were leaving the scene.

    For a skill that cannot even find an idle target 1ft infront of it, that Skywalking was pretty impressive to see.

    Grievous thrust surge seems to like when the target is moving straight away from him rather than sideways close to him. People use it to catch up to faster heroes that try to escape a lot.
  • Spiito
    1911 posts Member
    edited March 29
    Paraply wrote: »
    Spiito wrote: »
    Spiito wrote: »
    Heroes are really buggy. I had a grievous fly after me while I was jet packing away. It was insane. Just a tad scary. That skill he used to do it doesn't even work on a stationary target, he'll just zoom around in circles around or above them.

    Would it be alright to just cut heroes out of the new large scale mode completely? Since they're so... Wonky.

    Nothing special for Grievous. He probably used thrust surge and caught you as you were leaving the scene.

    For a skill that cannot even find an idle target 1ft infront of it, that Skywalking was pretty impressive to see.

    Grievous thrust surge seems to like when the target is moving straight away from him rather than sideways close to him. People use it to catch up to faster heroes that try to escape a lot.

    It was head on, but I 'getcha.
    You're a wellspring of information, thanks.
    Maybe you could explain to me, what the cause is when Grievous locks up (can't run, can't attack, but can jump, and can block?)
    Wknuto!
  • 4 heroes during the Conquest part.
    2 during the capital ship attack.
    hnytpwosbe30.png
  • I'd prefer 1, but I'm fine with zero or two. 4 per side is excessive
    My name is Bob

  • Spiito wrote: »
    Paraply wrote: »
    Spiito wrote: »
    Spiito wrote: »
    Heroes are really buggy. I had a grievous fly after me while I was jet packing away. It was insane. Just a tad scary. That skill he used to do it doesn't even work on a stationary target, he'll just zoom around in circles around or above them.

    Would it be alright to just cut heroes out of the new large scale mode completely? Since they're so... Wonky.

    Nothing special for Grievous. He probably used thrust surge and caught you as you were leaving the scene.

    For a skill that cannot even find an idle target 1ft infront of it, that Skywalking was pretty impressive to see.

    Grievous thrust surge seems to like when the target is moving straight away from him rather than sideways close to him. People use it to catch up to faster heroes that try to escape a lot.

    It was head on, but I 'getcha.
    You're a wellspring of information, thanks.
    Maybe you could explain to me, what the cause is when Grievous locks up (can't run, can't attack, but can jump, and can block?)

    Happens to me occasionally after having used claw rush, can usually be fixed by claw rushing again or using unrelenting advance. If it's the same issue, because his abilities are not exactly bug-free.
  • TjPunx
    1598 posts Member
    Heroes Unleashed
  • brienj
    680 posts Member
    edited March 30
    I haven't tried it with 4 heroes yet. I think 2 is fine, but there are times when one side is able to lock down entire hallways, etc. because the other team's heroes aren't doing anything. With 4 heroes on each side, the odds of heroes tying each other up in battle increase. So that same hallway scenario plays out differently because the heroes get involved with each other, leaving the infantry room to push one way or the other.

    The only hero I've seen kill another hero, is Anakin. All the other ones run from each other. He is the only one that can always easily kill another hero, especially since he has a bunch of ARC troopers following him around.

    I voted for 2, but there should be an option for 2 for DS and 1 for LS, meaning Anakin could be the only one on the LS, since he would be the only one picked anyway, lol

    I also think that there should be a limit on the number of reinforcements, it seems like there are way too many ARC Troopers and Commando Droids running around. And what is up with there being Wookie Warriors?

    Edit: I just thought of something else to add. I also think that once a hero is picked, they can not be picked again if they die, until all the other heroes are used (in the case of 2 heroes being the mode). So if the LS picks Anakin and Obi Wan, but Anakin dies, then the next person can only pick Yoda or Chewbacca. This would make the mode even more enjoyable, and still let people use heroes. Not having Anakin around for a while is always a good thing.
  • L3wY
    57 posts Member
    The current system is fine. 2 heroes is good enough during both part of the game mode. 4 heroes would ruin it.
    "May the Force be with you...always!"
    ''Do, or do not, there is no try!"
  • freshseth83
    382 posts Member
    edited March 30
    The heroes are unbalanced. Yoda just boosts his team and absorbs damage. The only thing that helps the Droids are the new guys. Their vibrosword is deadly and it basically stun locks clones in place. Unless you're extra careful or the team boosts you consistently, no hero is really worth getting on the dark side. The Emperor might change things up, but I feel like Grievous and Chewbacca are the worst two in this mode. The ship part at least.
  • 4v4 I want to see all the heroes on the battlefront! Change Chewie to Padme on Geo
    Put droidekas in the Capitol Ship interiors and add starfighter coruscant in future similar to how this mode is like a game of conquest then a search/destroy
    Game of conquest/starfighter assault or vice versa

    I would love to see this.
    pija5nbcgaah.jpg
    "This is a mission of peace. I put my faith in diplomacy. We can't solve all of our problems by throwing troops at them."
    -Padmé Amidala
  • Rook008
    838 posts Member
    I voted for "No Heroes" but zero Heroes per side would be good too. :)
    Gunfighter Ballads and Trail Songs
  • Dice...You’ve GOT to do something about Anakin. Just finished a match where the top of the board was Anakin with 221 kills. Yeah. You read it correctly. 221. The next highest was 150. This is flat out ridiculous. Chosen One or not, having a single character with the ability to unbalance the entire battlefield is game breaking. This is perhaps WORSE than the Senate when he could shock through walls months ago. Remember the kill switch? Time to flip it on Anakin until you can rework him and make his abilities more balanced and in line with the other heroes in the game.

    And, 4 heroes per side in CS is far too many. 2 per side should be the limit. Allow the battlefield to be a battlefield and not a hero-fest.
  • TjPunx wrote: »
    Everyone should vote for 4 heroes. Make Heroes Unleashed perm for Capital ship, and GA

    Finally something you say I can agree with lol. Conquest is about total chaos on the battlefield. The more vehicles and heroes, the better. It's not meant to be a safe linear situation like GA or Blast. It's not a KDR mode. It's about doing whatever it takes to control the most ground.

    I think that there should be a little less violence and chaos. This is not the civil war here.
    “The force is with me and I am one with the force. I fear nothing because everything is as the Force wills it to be.” -Chirrut Imwe
  • Arockstar2 wrote: »
    I really hope they decide on 4 heroes at a time (or the 3 suggested above would even be nice) despite the popular opinion of this forum. Capital Supremacy is a pretty fast based and chaotic mode, in a good way, and I’m really enjoying it. I’m finding that in this chaos, heroes really aren’t the OP characters (BESIDES ANAKIN) that people are acting like they are. Especially with special classes, you can hold your own very well against a hero. Also, oftentimes I find I’m traveling in a mass group of players while taking on command posts, and enemy heroes are much more vulnerable. Lastly, I haven’t seen anyone mention the problem of people camping the spawn screen for heroes, which happens A LOT and thereby takes players out of the game. (This is what happens with only a max of 2 heroes). As of playing a few minutes ago, I found that a number of people were doing this. I was really tempted to do so as well, considering I was sitting on a plethora of battlepoints and every time I looked for a hero they both were taken...

    On a side note, if this mode was a TRUE 32v32, then the issue of hero numbers wouldn’t even be a problem. :|

    🐴💩.

  • freshseth83
    382 posts Member
    edited March 30
    Tenngoat wrote: »
    Dice...You’ve GOT to do something about Anakin. Just finished a match where the top of the board was Anakin with 221 kills. Yeah. You read it correctly. 221. The next highest was 150. This is flat out ridiculous. Chosen One or not, having a single character with the ability to unbalance the entire battlefield is game breaking. This is perhaps WORSE than the Senate when he could shock through walls months ago. Remember the kill switch? Time to flip it on Anakin until you can rework him and make his abilities more balanced and in line with the other heroes in the game.

    And, 4 heroes per side in CS is far too many. 2 per side should be the limit. Allow the battlefield to be a battlefield and not a hero-fest.

    That's like 22 kills to 15 kills for a ratio. That's nothing. I saw someone use Yoda for over 300 kills. But the mode is adding assists to the total as well. I got over 150 in a match earlier but only played the heroes 2 or 3 times. And I was using the specialist to level it up. Getting these high kills isn't hard if the match goes on and on. It's not just Anakin either. I think Yoda is better for this mode.
  • WodiQuix
    4559 posts Member
    I voted two Heroes per side, but I really, really, really wanted to vote for no Heroes, but I think that a balance of two would satisfy both parties. A lot of good arguments here. I'm getting very sick of the way Heroes dominate the mode and slaughter Troopers. Did they put four Heroes back in CS? Because it feels like it. They're everywhere, hacking and slashing.
  • WodiQuix
    4559 posts Member
    We really need Turning Point. The way Heroes dominate the Battlefront and make Troopers nothing more than useless AI cannon fodder for killstreaks is getting very stale. Very stale, indeed.
  • WodiQuix wrote: »
    We really need Turning Point. The way Heroes dominate the Battlefront and make Troopers nothing more than useless AI cannon fodder for killstreaks is getting very stale. Very stale, indeed.

    I'd prefer Supremacy instead of Turning Point, but yeah, either is needed as a Trooper only experience
  • Tenngoat wrote: »
    Arockstar2 wrote: »
    I really hope they decide on 4 heroes at a time (or the 3 suggested above would even be nice) despite the popular opinion of this forum. Capital Supremacy is a pretty fast based and chaotic mode, in a good way, and I’m really enjoying it. I’m finding that in this chaos, heroes really aren’t the OP characters (BESIDES ANAKIN) that people are acting like they are. Especially with special classes, you can hold your own very well against a hero. Also, oftentimes I find I’m traveling in a mass group of players while taking on command posts, and enemy heroes are much more vulnerable. Lastly, I haven’t seen anyone mention the problem of people camping the spawn screen for heroes, which happens A LOT and thereby takes players out of the game. (This is what happens with only a max of 2 heroes). As of playing a few minutes ago, I found that a number of people were doing this. I was really tempted to do so as well, considering I was sitting on a plethora of battlepoints and every time I looked for a hero they both were taken...

    On a side note, if this mode was a TRUE 32v32, then the issue of hero numbers wouldn’t even be a problem. :|

    🐴💩.

    Thank you for sharing your very well thought out and valid opinion. :D
  • Lee1981
    1985 posts Member
    Tenngoat wrote: »
    Dice...You’ve GOT to do something about Anakin. Just finished a match where the top of the board was Anakin with 221 kills. Yeah. You read it correctly. 221. The next highest was 150. This is flat out ridiculous. Chosen One or not, having a single character with the ability to unbalance the entire battlefield is game breaking. This is perhaps WORSE than the Senate when he could shock through walls months ago. Remember the kill switch? Time to flip it on Anakin until you can rework him and make his abilities more balanced and in line with the other heroes in the game.

    And, 4 heroes per side in CS is far too many. 2 per side should be the limit. Allow the battlefield to be a battlefield and not a hero-fest.
    Palps really wasn’t that bad in the first place, far too many whiners in respect to him

    Anakin on the other hand is massively op, I look forward to the nerf he is due in the next few days
  • Nebula
    19 posts Member
    T0TALfps wrote: »
    We're looking to gather some feedback on the communities preference when it comes to Heroes within Capital Supremacy.

    Let us know by filling in the poll and feel free to share your thoughts on this subject by commenting!

    I'd like to see how this plays out with no Heroes during a limited event. Likewise during Heroes Unleashed switch it to 4 heroes. For the time being probably 2 heroes is the way to go.
  • 50 heroes
  • Nicky2face
    370 posts Member
    edited March 30
    And a better blaster hero for both sides, iden for dark side and captain rex for light
  • 4 heroes for ships and ground. No heroes no fun.
    What could be the big news? The big news for me is that Anakin Skywalker and Obi Wan Kenobi are said to be definitively playable in the future. Unfortunately, the fact that these two are coming to the game is now considered the big news. While these are the foundation stones of the Star Wars universe. Very sad.
  • 2 heroes is perfect and the best option. Hekc, even 1 hero on each side would be a good idea.

    For me, Only troopers will get stale fast and turn into Call of Duty yolo style gameplay. Heroes add skill to the game when trying to fight one in a team. Not to mention the fun and laughter you have when you turn a corner and go "Nope nope nope, ***** you Ani."

    I dont really see the appeal in only troopers, as its not like its not cancer especially on maps like Kashykk when 50% of people just play snipers and cancer it up. Always when im trying to fight an objective, I die and I roll my eyes from some guy sitting across the map with a sniper rifle.

    I think GA is cancer with how many heroes while CS with the low amount of heroes is great. It would only get better if they lower the amount of infilitrators allowed, as having four arc troopers sticking together is absolute cancer. Dont really have an issue with enforcers usually, but yea, lower them too. Lower all reinforcements.

    CS is amazing as it is, and heroes aren't really an issue for me. I have fun fighting them and I dont get to play the moften since people camp them, which unfortunatly, they always do that.

    I hope they improve the trooper gameplay though with more weapons, abilities, star cards and such.
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    I prefer 4 heroes, but with restrictions in place to prevent repeat hero usage. Right now the players who load quicker in between transitions get the heroes first. If you're able to luckily get a hero, and you have enough BP to use them repeatedly, you can reclaim dead heroes after the 5 second respawn delay to chain them back-to-back. I'd prefer if that timer was increase for specific heroes to allow other players the chance to use heroes.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • 2 heroes is perfect and the best option. Hekc, even 1 hero on each side would be a good idea.

    For me, Only troopers will get stale fast and turn into Call of Duty yolo style gameplay. Heroes add skill to the game when trying to fight one in a team.

    Right now the way Capital Supremacy is I find it very stale and frustrating. There is absolutely nothing fun about getting 9/10 of my deaths from heros and its always when I am in a fun 1v1 with an enemy trooper, its a complete killjoy and makes me want to quit playing the game ... the same way I quit with Galactic Assault.

    If they don't remove heroes I'll just stop playing until a mode like Turning point comes out. Hereos are hands down the worst part of this game.

  • Mystical wrote: »
    2 heroes is perfect and the best option. Hekc, even 1 hero on each side would be a good idea.

    For me, Only troopers will get stale fast and turn into Call of Duty yolo style gameplay. Heroes add skill to the game when trying to fight one in a team.

    Right now the way Capital Supremacy is I find it very stale and frustrating. There is absolutely nothing fun about getting 9/10 of my deaths from heros and its always when I am in a fun 1v1 with an enemy trooper, its a complete killjoy and makes me want to quit playing the game ... the same way I quit with Galactic Assault.

    If they don't remove heroes I'll just stop playing until a mode like Turning point comes out. Hereos are hands down the worst part of this game.

    I said this in another thread, so ill post it here and then add more after:

    You're all trying to **** what Star Wars: Battlefront has ALWAYS been about or Star Wars to start with. Star Wars has ALWAYS had a focus on their heroes and their troopers on combined. Yes, I dont like the fact the heroes get all the love and the troopers are left in the dust, but trying to force the game into another Call of Duty reskinned with blasters is silly. Yes, I know that this game IS better than Call of Duty because of what you said, but a trooper only mode would do nothing but attract the wrong peopel who dont really care about Star Wars, and just care about the shooter.
    I dont REALLY get the hatred for the heroes themselves and not the balance of the modes.
    Why does everyone think the heroes are such a cancer when the only cancer is in fact, GA cause of four heroes. CS is not a cancerous mode... well except the fact droids get the better tanks but thats not this topic.
    Heroes are NOT a problem in the game except in GA and HvV. I really just dont understand why you guys are so vocal about being anti hero.
    Keep in mind, ive never ONCE been anti trooper. Ive just pointed out that Star Wars and Star Wars: Battlefront has ALWAYS been about both sides fighting side by side on a warfront, as its shown in the movies, in the TV show((I dont know about Rebels as I dont watch it)), and the older games from the earlier 2000's.
    But alot of the arguements for the full on trooper, was because of heroes and thats just not something I understand. You are right, a hero is stronger than a singular trooper but why should a singular soldier be able to beat anything?
    Thats all im saying. I dont understand.


    Well, if heroes are removed, I want specialists removed. Nothing is more irritating then having a fun fight, then some guy camping in the back shooting me in the head while doing nothign for his team other then ***** off the enemy.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!