Mercurysteam's Hangout
BARRACKS => Suggestions => Topic started by: Level9Drow on April 14, 2018, 03:12:28 AM
-
There are WAY too many antagonists infesting games now. Is there any way we can get a system in here soon that allows players who actually like fighting antagonists to opt in as priority? Give them more rewards, etc... That way those of us who just want to enjoy ourselves and, you know, have fun, can do so in peace.
I don't mind less rewards, but currently offline is absolutely pointless and doesn't reward anything, and it's more fun with 4 players doing a mission.
Let me ask this question: Where can a person who just wants to play a multi-player cooperative hero shooter go to just have fun and progress in levels and items? I kind of thought this would be that game. Even Overwatch rewards for playing against AI, and now they have Archives this month and these PvE missions CANNOT get invaded by PvPer, and this is a purely PvP game we're talking about.
Can you guys think about something to alleviate the misery PvEers are going through now, please? I like this game, but I don't know how much more I can do this. I'm just not having fun anymore. Plain and simple. And the reason is antagonists.
-
Well, i haven't played since yesterday... now i don't know if i want to login.
Tell me, Level9Drow, will you play antagonist on a daily basis now that is more "atractive"?
I know i wont, because i dont like that mode.
-
Well, i haven't played since yesterday... now i don't know if i want to login.
Tell me, Level9Drow, will you play antagonist on a daily basis now that is more "atractive"?
I know i wont, because i dont like that mode.
I never play antagonists, unless the game forces me to have to (as in certain cards, weapons, blueprints that you need antagonists affinity to unlock), and when I do I will AFK without spawning touching the controller every once in a while to make sure i am not kicked for inactivity. This is way less frustrating then actually committing emotionally and mentally to the task of being antagonists. If I'm going to lose I'd rather expect it and not invest any commitment to it so i will noe be let down and tilted. We get XP even when we lose as antag, so I can AFK in games a few times and get affinity. I mean, they force you to play this so I won't dignify the fight with any interest or effort, as I didn't want to do it in the first place. It's also a statement of protest so as not to be a hypocrite, I don't like it when someone ruins my game, and so I'll let these players win so they can have fun completing the mission with an added bonus of me being a glowing Uras Berit symbol on the floor. All i need is 20% xp for affinity.
No, what I'm talking about is playing as Raider and getting an antagonists nearly every fucking game. And thus losing about 60% - 70% of my matches. Not only does playing against an antagonist reduce the quality of enjoyment in playing the game, it also reduces the likelihood of completing the mission, make the match longer and reduces the reward for the time wasted. Seeing an antagonists is a liability to rewards and productivity. It's a complete horrible experience all the way around. Even when we win against an antagonist I'm not happy, I'm nervous and agitated after that win (or survival is more like it). There's no, "Well fought! Good game! What a good fight!" It's just, "That was a shitty experience and i don't want to do that again, even if I DID win. I'm here for the experience as well as the rewards.
-
Everywhere I look I see people complain about Antagonists. Often in this very strong, almost abrasive tone. Sometimes I wonder if I am the only person who likes the Antagonist part of this game. I think it adds a lot of depth and variety to a game that would otherwise be fairly shallow and straightforward to be honest.
Of course it has problems. Of course it needs more work done to its gameplay balance and rewards.
But to anyone that absolutely cannot stand the antagonist system I say, maybe this game isn't for you? Mercury Steam obviously views it as an integral part of the experience. It's not going anywhere.
No offense to anyone who doesn't share mu opinion but there is too much negativity surrounding this game. Especially the PvP part. I think there needs to be a lot more constructive criticism offered for MS to work on and respond. Not just a bunch of vitriolic complaining and frankly, whining.
Let's be positive and help make this game as great as it should be.
-
Everywhere I look I see people complain about Antagonists. Often in this very strong, almost abrasive tone. Sometimes I wonder if I am the only person who likes the Antagonist part of this game. I think it adds a lot of depth and variety to a game that would otherwise be fairly shallow and straightforward to be honest.
Of course it has problems. Of course it needs more work done to its gameplay balance and rewards.
But to anyone that absolutely cannot stand the antagonist system I say, maybe this game isn't for you? Mercury Steam obviously views it as an integral part of the experience. It's not going anywhere.
No offense to anyone who doesn't share mu opinion but there is too much negativity surrounding this game. Especially the PvP part. I think there needs to be a lot more constructive criticism offered for MS to work on and respond. Not just a bunch of vitriolic complaining and frankly, whining.
Let's be positive and help make this game as great as it should be.
Agreed completely. I love the mode, and the only things preventing me from playing it more are: #1 the SUPER LONG wait times to get a game, 20+ minutes at high MMR, #2 I play with a full team most of the time, and #3 the rewards are still awful. I would care less about the rewards if I could get a game within a couple minutes of queuing, but that doesn't happen.
And yes, I agree that most of the comments against pvp are just complaining from the perspective of people who just plain do not wish to deal with pvp in any capacity at all, despite it being a core mechanic that is even part of the entire lore of the game. Uras is not just a side issue.
-
So, PVE people just has to go to another game because this is one is not for them.
You know making a PVE mode would attract more people (less competitive, yes, but the point is to get more players) and make the game more popular, don't you? And maybe those gamers want to try antagonist mode, and then enjoy it because they can choose between the two modes.
We should be telling people to stay, not discourage them telling that "the game is not for you". I don't think MercurySteam wants to send that kind of message.
-
We should be telling people to stay, not discourage them telling that "the game is not for you". I don't think MercurySteam wants to send that kind of message.
+1
-
Many people are imagining (hallucinating?) a separation between "PvE players" and "PvP players" that simply is not meant to exist in this game.
If you play Raiders of the Broken Planet you are expected to participate as both a Raider and Antagonist. This is how the game is designed.
I agree that the problems with this system are very unforunate. However, I believe it is possible to fix these issues and create a more fair and rewarding system that most people will be content with.
I also think that, to an extent, the anti-Antagonist people will need to suck it up. To lobby for the complete removal of the Antagonist is not reasonable, nor realistic.
The playerbase is so small right now that creating seperate queues for Antagonist and Raiders is basically removing the Antagonist all together. It is not a solution at all.
Next time I post I'm going to write a whole list of the problems I see with the PvP right now.
In my opinion the people scaring off new players are the ones spreading this Antagonist doom and gloom all over the internet. Making the game sound like a complete nightmare. There is one thing deadlier to a game than lower player numbers and that's a widespread negative, and defeatist attitude amongst the community - and THAT's what I'm seeing all over the place. I'm not doing any harm in suggesting that people either reavaluate their relationship with the game or stick around and offer some CONSTRUCTIVE feedback and advice to the developers.
I think we should be very careful not to put words in each others mouths. Or twist the meaning of what we are trying to say.
If I came off as being arrogant or unsympathetic to the PvP-haters I'm sorry. It wasn't deliberate. But to be honest, I think you are kind of missing the point of the game.
-
The problem here, with all respect, is that the game offers a PVE game. If antagonist was a core mechanic, why can people play without him? Why the game balances itself around having or not having it? It's not a core mechanic, you can experience the game without him.
I understand why you defend it; PVErs are not here to remove the antagonist, but to bring room for more players. Another kind of players. And competitive players do exist in this game; I don't think a PVE mode would hurt the game. Just make antagonist mode more appealing with more rewards and that's all.
Right now antagonist mode is very unbalanced: antagonists with a lot of levels can destroy raiders because passives; experience in the map, objectives, having the weapon and cards... you put a "terminator" in front a bunch of newbie raiders and they get obliterated, hoping to play without antagonist. In the other hand, 4-man squads can block antagonist and don't give him any kind of opportunity to do nothing. The ping can be a crucial factor too... That's why this mode is very unbalanced right now. Needs a lot of work!
And I'm not trying to twist meaning or words; if the person loves the game with passion is obvious that you will find these class of discussions, because they have experienced that PVE game and that PVP game, and they prefer one over the other. You can tell them to reevaluate their relationship with the game, that's the way! But I have seen a lot of people saying that the game isn't for them (in a bad way) and is really discouraging, especially for new people. No offense, and sorry if something in this message or the other happened to trouble anyone.
Can't we all agreed in this one?
In the end, I think the point of the game is having a good time for everyone.
-
Boni:
(https://media.giphy.com/media/7rj2ZgttvgomY/giphy.gif)
Pelenas: Have you played all of Alien Myths yet? Uras and the antagonist are part of the story itself. This update added the aequilibrium balance to further stress how both sides are important.
Balance is difficult to master in an asymmetrical game. The point is that there is a lack of balance between the two sides. But it can suck when you're fresh and dealing with an experienced antagonist, or when you're antag and there are no enemies on the whole map to help you.
MMR cannot be the only measuring stick of balance. I am tired of playing high MMR games in general because it's just not fun, so I stay low. Thus I get matched in games with lower level or weaker players sometimes, regardless of my experience or level. I have fought other teams that do this same thing and got steamrolled for it, since it was 4 good players against me with no enemies around to help.
-
Many people are imagining (hallucinating?) a separation between "PvE players" and "PvP players" that simply is not meant to exist in this game.
If you play Raiders of the Broken Planet you are expected to participate as both a Raider and Antagonist. This is how the game is designed.
I agree that the problems with this system are very unforunate. However, I believe it is possible to fix these issues and create a more fair and rewarding system that most people will be content with.
I also think that, to an extent, the anti-Antagonist people will need to suck it up. To lobby for the complete removal of the Antagonist is not reasonable, nor realistic.
The playerbase is so small right now that creating seperate queues for Antagonist and Raiders is basically removing the Antagonist all together. It is not a solution at all.
Next time I post I'm going to write a whole list of the problems I see with the PvP right now.
In my opinion the people scaring off new players are the ones spreading this Antagonist doom and gloom all over the internet. Making the game sound like a complete nightmare. There is one thing deadlier to a game than lower player numbers and that's a widespread negative, and defeatist attitude amongst the community - and THAT's what I'm seeing all over the place. I'm not doing any harm in suggesting that people either reavaluate their relationship with the game or stick around and offer some CONSTRUCTIVE feedback and advice to the developers.
I think we should be very careful not to put words in each others mouths. Or twist the meaning of what we are trying to say.
If I came off as being arrogant or unsympathetic to the PvP-haters I'm sorry. It wasn't deliberate. But to be honest, I think you are kind of missing the point of the game.
Right, because "options are bad". All you would need to do is implement a system that allows people to choose to be invaded for extra rewards. This would allow both PvEers and PvPers to co-exist in the same game, just not play together. It would bring AND HOLD ON TO more players (I've already had a few new people completely get turned off at the antagonists system). Maybe, and just maybe, if there was a large contingent of PvEers in the game that were shielded from antagonist play then some would want greater rewards, not all, and some would enter PvP when they're READY, not get their faces shoved in the shit when they're green and inexperienced, which again leads to many people leaving (please refer to YuoTube reviews). Remember this is a videogame not a Darwinistic experiment, it's called Electronic Entertainment, not Electronic Dawinism.
"It's simply not the game for them, they should leave, this is a PvP game for us HARD CORE BADASSES, who preen our epeen." I'm offering a solution to have BOTH kinds of players (and again, keep them) and the PvPers are trying to kick the others off the game. LOL, MSE, if you're reading this you have a group of players that are actually vying to reduce your playerbase, because they want other player who don't want to be their entertainment be forced to be their entertainment. And this goes for both sides. Some of you PvPers and your "hard core" mindset are a liability to future players. I would hope MSE is wider than you are. And aside from this you have the temerity to dictate to others what games they should play and that they should leave, how entitled and self centered. Again, I offer a solution for both, and you slap it down.
And Draco, an appeal to story line isn't an argument for the allowance of abuse. The Litch King was a bad gut in World of Warcraft, but Death Knights weren't given a free ticket to prey on PvEers (UNLESS you chose a PVP realm, options are good). Just because Mario is up against Bowser doesn't mean someone can play Bowser and fuck up your time playing a level. It's a complete disconnect from the core issue. It isn't relevant that Uras Berit is a bad guy who creates dark clones, we get to fight the dark clones on his stage anyways, and he's integral enough in that he possesses the last protector.
And I want to remind people of the philosophical inconsistency the game is delivering as a message. They say, "We are a PvE game and have some of the BEST PvE content, com play." and will thus draw in, you guessed it, PvEers (player verses ENVIRONMENT), and then say "If you love PvP come and play our game, we have a bunch of carebares for you to prey upon til your hearts content." Historically PvEers and PvPers have NEVER EVER mixed well. Games that have done this have gone under horribly. There isn't one around now that has both simultaneously without giving the option to choose between. Warhammer Online, is a prime example. However, games that are strictly just PvP or both but give you the option to choose have actually been successful. World of Warcraft (with the differing realms), Overwatch (you gain XP from AI and custom games, and now Achives/Uprising PvE mode), Bloddborne (the bell), Any of the Halo games, etc... And of course games that are strictly PvP have no issues because only "wolves" want to play those games, there is no misleading for PvEers, they know to stay away from that stress and misery. You have to have options for both if you are advertising both. You cannot force PvPers and PvEers together. They may slowly grow together, but you have to allow them to choose.
-
Just an idea, thrown to the wind : what if queueing as Antagonist allowed you to play as an Antagonist OR as a Raider willing to fight an Antagonist ?
The bonus reward could be XP based on how many "player kill" (Raider killing an Antagonist for the Raider side, Antagonist killing a Raider on the Antagonist side) were performed during the match, or a 4th reward for the Raider side at the reward selection screen and an increased Score (or reward) for the Antagonist side. Cause you know, when playing Antagonist and getting mowed down by 4 people twice your lvl and getting a 0.5 score while you tried your best to do your Antagonist job sucks a bit. Same as loosing a mission cause the Antagonist is twice the level of the highest Raider and having to split by 4 1K gold or Faction point ...
Just my 2 cents to the discussion
-
You guys really forget that having antagonist does scale down the AI and the higher the MMR the more antagonists become an easy mode, or it should be so.
As far as I've seen the antagonist level has nothing to do with how tough the fight is - good teams can easily beat down antagonists of 3 times higher levels and dumb people can lose to antagonists of 3 times lower level. I've lost games where lvl 20 antagonists beat our lvl 50+ squad and it wasn't that much the antagonists skill but the team's lack of skill. I also tend to be dropped in games with absolutely new people even at MMR 60+ and I can swear that these new people are sometimes a lot better than those high level raiders with upgraded weapons yet no idea how to deal even with AI.
-
My veteran team has also lost to crappy terrible antagonists, due to them being so bad, so terrible, that spawn rates and AI are nearly completely unaffected. Just with the addition of an infinitely spawning idiot, which takes extra time to kill and will get someone every now and then from behind while we're busy with something else. Basically, the map kills us, there's just someone else who gets credit for it.
-
You guys really forget that having antagonist does scale down the AI and the higher the MMR the more antagonists become an easy mode, or it should be so.
As far as I've seen the antagonist level has nothing to do with how tough the fight is - good teams can easily beat down antagonists of 3 times higher levels and dumb people can lose to antagonists of 3 times lower level. I've lost games where lvl 20 antagonists beat our lvl 50+ squad and it wasn't that much the antagonists skill but the team's lack of skill. I also tend to be dropped in games with absolutely new people even at MMR 60+ and I can swear that these new people are sometimes a lot better than those high level raiders with upgraded weapons yet no idea how to deal even with AI.
I think you're missing the point. It's PvP. It means another person is in the way of your progression, rewards, and fun. PvEers aren't fond of PvP, they see the other player as a barrier to their enjoyment and goals in the game, nothing more. They become tilted and resentful because another human being has control over their entertainment and not themselves. And the game design unfortunately allows the other player to have that control.
I'd rather deal with AI enemies, PvE. Their more like a puzzle to solve and you are free to think of ways to solve the problem because the "enemies" are static and predictable, some people like stable situations in which to progress in, they like control, even if it's difficult. Another player is not predictable, can learn from you're attacks and BURDEN a PvEer to be bothered to think of new ways to fight the other player in their ENTERTAINMENT. I don't want to be bothered to care about another player, I just want to get on with the mission and have enough to think about dealing with THAT. I don't need another person fucking things up for me. This causes stress, irritation, anxiety, aggravation, and rage. And PvPers like this, it's in their nature to troll others, they get off on it, it's why they PvP. Unfortunately causing misery to another human being is thrilling for some. NOT for me. I'm not a sociopath. I don't enjoy the misery of others.
Those people who enjoy PvP should be allowed to do so with each other. Let the wolves loose on each other, let them tear themselves apart, it's what they want isn't it?
Again, you can't mix PvE and PvP with any great success unless you implement a system which mediates the interactions of the two kinds of players. Unfortunately MSE are effectively drawing in two polar opposite kinds of players to their game. And so here we are in this situation on the forums.
-
...You say we're here to troll. But I enjoy PvP because it is inherently more challenging than bots in a manageable way. For instance, the game progresses difficulty for you, but at a certain point there are just too many bodies that need too much damage done to them by the team to effectively complete your missions (this may be a hypothetical difficulty if you can handle 100% difficult missions) but we can all attest that at some point we'd begin losing because of volume of damage the mooks can dump out.
The PvPer ( like myself) enjoys something that with nothing other than strategy can become more difficult. I enjoy the puzzle of it, just like you, and if you've played antag enough at all, you'll notice that other players are also predictable. The decision is what to make your priority. And then when you see the win screen, you'll know you made okay decisions Hah.
I'm not here to troll people. I'm here to win. Just like you. I'm here to enjoy the challenge.
I get ragey if I -know- that I'm losing because someone SHOULD be able to handle a particular task, and are willfully neglecting/failing at it.
I do not get ragey if I lose and I should have lost. That's just me, though.
-
And PvPers like this, it's in their nature to troll others, they get off on it, it's why they PvP.
Only when I get matched against you, buddy ;)
You can stop repeating the "pvpers are evil assholes who suck and I hate them" philosophy.
-
It's obviously not all of them. It can't be, because the situation is more nuances. You have a design which forces even PvEers to have to play antagonist. so I don't believe all people playing Antagonists are, in fact, people who enjoy causing misery to others. I realize many people are there because they HAVE to be. And, to be honest, I don't believe LordDraco is interested in causing misery or trolling ("unless it's me"), but there are people who ONLY play antag who've stated they don't care if the raiders are noobs, they, in fact, like this. This is a universally understood attitude in gaming in general, PvPers generally are micro-sociopaths. Sure, you get you're "honorable" PvPers who want a fair fight, but this is the exception not the rule.
Also I'd like to state the horrible situation from the other side. We had an antagonist the other day that was level 6. Our group was all 50+. We won, but it was horrible, why is he fighting us? He kept trying but he just didn't do enough damage to us, and we would WASTE him with firepower in moments. It was an unpleasant feeling when we won, and let's face it, we were going to win no matter what. For the reasons stated above I think PvP HAS to be an optional thing, or at least more well mitigated with barriers and filters that prevent this sort of thing.
-
Well, I think you just need to look at it differently. If you get a low level antagonist. They chose to be an antagonist, so, no mercy. It means they got their MMR in your range somehow, so, lower in it for them if helpful
-
Or worse, he was forced to be there because he needs affinity for weapons and cards. He may not even be a PvPer at heart. I think this is probable because we've run with this guy before prior to the patch. I mean, sure, if he loves PvP and wants to be there, yea, "show no mercy" I guess. But it would be so much worse if he was a PvEer who was forced to be there. Which brings into questions why they are forcing us there in the first place. and at huge disadvantages.
-
Currently, that's just how it is. Everyone playing Antagonist wants to be there. They'd rather fight you and get a gun, than not fight you and get a gun. Ta da. Beat them.
-
Currently, that's just how it is. Everyone playing Antagonist wants to be there. They'd rather fight you and get a gun, than not fight you and get a gun. Ta da. Beat them.
That is true. You don't have to spawn as antag at all to get XP or a chance to get a blueprint. I can attest to this. Uras Berit gave me credit for 12 kills the AI got, and I got blueprints because I queued with a weapon with a good amount of Treasure Hunter. 2 or 3 times of this and you get your affinity. And it only takes 30 minutes total because they clear the map quick!. It's an incredibly efficient means of gaining affinity and blueprints.
I can't complain if I'm not there. And I didn't. At least they allow us to do this to gain affinity. And as long as this is a thing I guess there isn't really any problem being "forced", you are right.
-
Pro Tip: Buy a 1.5 xp boost (12k) before you go in and one match gets you antag affinity pre level 100.
After level 100 do the same with 40% boost cards.
-
I am a very lazy person and if a game has both PvP and PvE then I usually avoid PvP completely - just because I'm too lazy to make different loadouts for PvP and PvE. Because of this I've played all Souls games in phantom form, I never tried PvP in FF XIV and basically the general idea is - just one mode.
In RoTB I have no problems with antagonist settings because the game doesn't force me to have different loadouts. All my characters have just one loadout that works perfectly in both PvE and PvP and both modes take same amount of effort. That is why I seriously don't understand the many complaints about antagonists. They make this game more fun and with Hades update it's now so easy to get exp for them even for those who absolutely don't like them. Just 1-2 games and you have your antagonist affinity.
-
I am a very lazy person and if a game has both PvP and PvE then I usually avoid PvP completely - just because I'm too lazy to make different loadouts for PvP and PvE. Because of this I've played all Souls games in phantom form, I never tried PvP in FF XIV and basically the general idea is - just one mode.
In RoTB I have no problems with antagonist settings because the game doesn't force me to have different loadouts. All my characters have just one loadout that works perfectly in both PvE and PvP and both modes take same amount of effort. That is why I seriously don't understand the many complaints about antagonists. They make this game more fun and with Hades update it's now so easy to get exp for them even for those who absolutely don't like them. Just 1-2 games and you have your antagonist affinity.
You are right, 1 to 2 games. You don't even have to spawn, as I've said before. you get XP and Blueprints for watching them at different angles and admiring the level design, textures and set that you would normally never be able to do if you were taking part. Again, it's quicker than fighting the raiders, because if you fight them the game takes longer, and with the reduced AI minions they clean up the level really fast. So if you are looking to change your affinity fast and you don't like PvP this is the most efficient and quickest way to do it.
The group I normally run with was in a mission as well and they got an antag that didn't spawn either. They said they were relieved because it was a boss fight, not sure which one.
But it's silly isn't it? This is what you get when you force PvEers to need Antag Affinity and force them to PvP, unspawned antagonist who just change spawn angles until the fight is over. I'm sure this will be patched out soon, because MSE wants to force it, but then we'll just afk and Aleph feed the Raiders, which, ironically, will make the match EVEN QUICKER.
But do PvPers want this? Do they want a PvEer antag who isn't there? And if not, what would fix this issue of AFK antagonist? Because it's a very lucrative technique so I don't see it stopping. And why would YOU as a PVPer want to FORCE a PvEer to fight you? Because they don't really want to be there. "Just take my Aleph and finish the damn mission already, I got to build a weapon that will only allow me to build it with Antag affinity, chop chop!."
-
Hi. Glad to be here. My name is Shuggoth_Poot and I love being an Antagonist. I apologize to the community. I'm the reason you fail missions and get crummy rewards. I'm sorry. I'd stop if I could, but I can't. I like being an Antagonist too much. It's like, when Uras-Behrit?...Emoji-Berra?...when he taunts the Raiders before the mission launches - I get this rush. It's like running from the police on a mixture of bath salts while listening to Motor Head on a blue-tooth headset made out of faulty wires that shocks your friggin brain every time Lemmy grunts like he gargled broken glass for breakfast
...but I digress.
I've played against Antagonists too - and lost. This opened my eyes to the pain I was causing others, and I realized what I'm doing when I Antagonized others. But I still don't wanna quit. I can't. It's too good. Like when you run outside butt-naked in a thunderstorm with...nevermind. POINT IS...I would like to give some suggestions to help alleviate the pain I'm causing others, because I lack the self-control to quit you, Emoji-Barrel.
Firstly (hahaha firstly) - I think players should be given the option of joining a mission in which the Antagonist can or cannot join. Obviously, missions that have Antagonists should be rewarded significantly more for being completed successfully. That is not to say that those who opt out of playing against an Antagonist should be punished. If you've ever played an extremely long dog-fight of a mission against an Antagonist, only to lose at the very friggin end when victory was so friggin close you could friggin taste its sweaty victory...stuff. Yeah, it's one heck of a devastating defeat. Higher risk (PvP), higher reward. Lower risk (PvE), lower reward. And I don't think it's enough that the reward be higher if you get invaded. Some people, no amount of reward will make them enjoy the experience of an Antagonist. In the end, they're so stressed and irritated, etc. that they would say you can take your BluePrint (that roll b.s. is...well, b.s. but we'll talk about that somewhere else) and shove it up your Aleph Injector.
Secondly - Well, I've lost track of my thoughts. Anyone else wanna chime in?
-
Hah, good first post.
-
Cool man, thanks! :)
I'm glad you're enjoying yourself, honestly, and in the same breath vying for more options. It would attract a whole lot more players, I know it.
-
I put on music and just phase out and try to have fun given I am the last person who should be playing Antagonist. Truthfully, I tend to get upset on either end of the equation but there are simply less factors from my viewpoint when playing as an Antagonist. However, it depends on how my matches trend too. For instance, if I get a bunch of vets that will absolutely destroy me if I don't do my best it's going to be hard to 'tone it down' for a newer group.
The best 'you' can do given that Antagonist has been waiting (sometimes an artificially increased amount of time... *grumbles*) is give it 'your' best so the lot of you are hopefully learning a few new tricks. You mentioned admiring the level but you should also be paying deep attention to how other players achieve their goals. Therefore, it's equally important if not more so when you go back to playing as a Raider to pay attention to what your foes are up to from your unique perspective.