81 replies to this topic

[Koniving]

Why do I feel like the one "No" vote was either Paul Inouye or someone else at PGI?

[Pz_DC]

...Cant imagine who can say "no" to this idea

[Prezimonto]

CorranHorn, on 07 September 2014 - 02:11 PM, said:

I have talked with friends and family that play as well, and we all love the ideas that we came up with, similar to the original poster and some others

I don't know how you could NOT want these types of game modes as they're actually story based. If you're a fan of any previous MW video games then the gameplay presented here is much closer to what we had in those games.

Balancing asymmetric game modes can be challenging, but as noted, flipping the teams so you play the map twice is as fine idea as any.

[MacCaileanMor]

How about:
(1) defend a choke point for a certain amount of time to allow for an extraction. Then withdraw in good order. Defender gets lots of points for each mech that escapes across a certain line. OR
(2) One team has an assault that starts out legged (so it is really slow) and that team has to escort its "commander/prince" from the battlefield. OR
(3) Assault on a facility (make small destructible targets) that you get points for destroying (or keeping alive). The defending team starts with just a lance but gets reinforced after 5 minutes with 3 more lances. The attacking team gets a dramatic increase in points for coming back alive. This would promote a quick strike (e.g. get in kill as much as you can and get out before the reinforcements come). This would simulate a raid. OR
(4) a single lance has to penetrate a large facility (e.g. mining collective) and photograph/scan 20 objects (add a camera/scan module). This would simulate a recon mission. Extra points for coming out alive. Attackers get no points for a kill.
(5) Defending team gets to hide a "flag" somewhere. Attacking team gets points for taking flag (objective A) and for each mech that survives objective. Another raid scenerio.
(6) Defending team defends the mouth to an underground bunker. They are outnumbered (to discourage them from going into assault mode). Object to be destroyed is in a tunnel (the bunker). This way it cannot be destroyed by LRM barrage. Maybe have two very heavy lances defending versus a mixed bag company sized unit.

Edited by MacCaileanMor, 20 October 2014 - 07:32 AM.

[Dianesion]

Amazing topic!

This would definetely make me spend money on this game. I play it for some time but it never made me feel like playing the MW I played as a youngster. That´s because of the lack of PVE and objective based missions.

If at least some of this ideas are added, I think many oldschool MW players would give this game a try.

A shame the point and click shooting scheme won over the joysticks... I would love to play this with a Razer Artemis with Force Feedback...

Dreams.... only dreams....

[Prezimonto]

MacCaileanMor, on 20 October 2014 - 07:29 AM, said:

How about:
(1) defend a choke point for a certain amount of time to allow for an extraction. Then withdraw in good order. Defender gets lots of points for each mech that escapes across a certain line. OR
(2) One team has an assault that starts out legged (so it is really slow) and that team has to escort its "commander/prince" from the battlefield. OR
(3) Assault on a facility (make small destructible targets) that you get points for destroying (or keeping alive). The defending team starts with just a lance but gets reinforced after 5 minutes with 3 more lances. The attacking team gets a dramatic increase in points for coming back alive. This would promote a quick strike (e.g. get in kill as much as you can and get out before the reinforcements come). This would simulate a raid. OR
(4) a single lance has to penetrate a large facility (e.g. mining collective) and photograph/scan 20 objects (add a camera/scan module). This would simulate a recon mission. Extra points for coming out alive. Attackers get no points for a kill.
(5) Defending team gets to hide a "flag" somewhere. Attacking team gets points for taking flag (objective A) and for each mech that survives objective. Another raid scenerio.
(6) Defending team defends the mouth to an underground bunker. They are outnumbered (to discourage them from going into assault mode). Object to be destroyed is in a tunnel (the bunker). This way it cannot be destroyed by LRM barrage. Maybe have two very heavy lances defending versus a mixed bag company sized unit.

I'm game to try any of them!

Dianesion, on 20 October 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

Amazing topic!

This would definetely make me spend money on this game. I play it for some time but it never made me feel like playing the MW I played as a youngster. That´s because of the lack of PVE and objective based missions.

If at least some of this ideas are added, I think many oldschool MW players would give this game a try.

A shame the point and click shooting scheme won over the joysticks... I would love to play this with a Razer Artemis with Force Feedback...

Dreams.... only dreams....

I know right! This game has seriously good mech combat. I just want to be fighting for a purpose in an environment with real and changing goals.

[Telmasa]

I wonder if they keep an archive of good ideas like this...there's some real gems from the past couple of years that I have no idea bout til someone bumps them, lol

[Prezimonto]

I know!

I doubt it though.

[TygerLily]

Thank you Prez for commenting on my original thread for a game mode. I didn't realize you had a thread of compiled ideas. I wanted to add mine here as well (and to bump your thread) :

Spoiler

USING THE NEW DROPSHIP MECHANIC

Premise:
Grid Squares are capturable and require adjacency to capture enemy Squares. Create a contiguous path to your enemy’s Home Grid Square and capture it.

Win Conditions:
Kill All Enemy Mechs
Capture Enemy Home Grid Square

On Time Out:
Least Number of Squares to Enemy Home Grid Wins
If Tied, Most Number Grid Squares Captured Wins
If Tied, Most Number Of Kills Wins

Gameplay:
The game begins with Grid Squares evenly divided between the teams and each team has a Home Grid Sqaure.

You can only capture an enemy grid if it is adjacent to one you own.

An enemy Home Grid Square can only be captured if there is a contiguous connection to your Home Grid Square (below: Enemy present in a Grid you are capturing does NOT stop the capture but DOES slow the rate of capture).

Any Grid Square that touches a Home Grid Square can be captured without adjacency to one you own. This allows teams to go behind enemy lines and begin backward paths toward the front lines in effort to create a contiguous connection.

Mechanics:
If a Lance or more (4+) occupy a Grid Square it begins to capture at the rate of current Conquest capture.

If 1 to 3 Mechs are in a Grid Square it will capture but at half the rate (IE twice as slow).

There is no neutral period of capture; a Grid Square is either Team A’s or Team B’s. As soon as one team lowers the enemy capture bar they immediately begin filling their own capture bar.
If enemy enter your Grid Square while you still occupy it, it does NOT stop capturing but it does cut the capture rate in half (IE capturing continues but will take longer).

If all friendlies exit the Grid Square then the capture stops. If Team A is present when all of Team B have abandoned a Grid Square or enter one of Team A’s owned Squares then they must undo Team B's progress and then proceed to capture the Grid Square (just like a half-capped Resource Node in Conquest).

On the Battlegrid, captured Grid Squares are tinted with your team’s color. Home Grid Squares are tinted bright, bright green and indicated on the HUD compass
.
A Grid Square being captured will flash on the Battlegrid.

Grid Squares that are 10% or more INSIDE the map boundaries are capturable. IE, fully square Grid’s are not necessary...just mostly present Grid Squares, to ensure enough space to contest those Grids without needing perfectly square maps.

How It Promotes Role Warfare
The ability to "back capture" from the enemy's Home Grid Square allows fast Mechs to begin working backwards to capture.

Slower Mechs are intended to push the front line and the mechanic of allowing a Square to keep capturing even in enemy presence gives durability and pilot skill in standing their ground a meaningful part of the game.

Making 4+ the ideal capture size means Lances benefit from sticking together for capture but teams benefit by splitting Lances for quicker territorial gain. This makes the leadership role valuable. This also plays in to the new Rewards System which emphasizes Lance cohesion.

http://mwomercs.com/...-mode-territory

[Prezimonto]

TygerLily, on 17 November 2014 - 09:38 AM, said:

Thank you Prez for commenting on my original thread for a game mode. I didn't realize you had a thread of compiled ideas. I wanted to add mine here as well (and to bump your thread) :

Anytime! There's a couple of thread's that were started around the same time as this one. I believe Acidphase linked to his as well in here, and it's slightly older.

I should try to curate this thread a little better and aggregate the ideas and link in the OP one of these days.

[50 50]

With the recent announcements of the scouting missions and different things like the artillery sites, it feels like objective based missions are coming through.
The attack/defend and counter attack modes were a pretty good addition, though players have once again resorted to killing all the enemy mechs instead of completing the objectives.
That just tells me that there is not enough of a c-bill, XP and point reward associated with the objectives, or some sort of condition that unless the objectives are completed, the mission is a failure even if the enemy team is defeated.
Not sure how that would work out though.

Looking at the existing CW game modes, I would like to see them combined and become more of a fluid ongoing engagement.
To try and elaborate:

In the standard attack/defend mode the attacker's primary objective is to disable the orbital gun. But why?
What happens if the objective isn't completed?
Nothing, because the elimination of the enemy team can be substituted for the win.
I'm not overly fond of the time limits to end a match... or even calling them matches... doesn't seem right for a battle.
What I would prefer is to have the timer act as the limit for achieving the primary objective - disable the orbital gun.
If that is not met, then the mission does not end but it will be considered a failure for the attacking team.
The mission ends when there are no more mechs left on one of the teams.
The reasoning behind this is that the disabling of the gun should be a requirement for the second stage of the invasion which is waiting to launch. Don't do it in time and the second stage cannot commence when it is meant to.... and that has some sort of flow on effect into another separate mission.

In essence, failure to complete an objectives on time needs to have some sort of consequence.
It's similar for the defenders.

I'd elaborate more but it probably needs it's own post.

[Threat Doc]

Exactly, you have to accomplish A, B, and/or C to move on to D, E, and/or F, etc. Begin with Intelligence Gathering, including scouting missions, purchasing intel, extractions of minor personnel and/or friendly combatants. Move onto minor skirmishes planned by the attacking commander, with the defender having placed all of their forces, such as your resource gathering, destruction or capture of assets. If it's more than a raid or series of small moves, then you move onto more important parts, larger skirmishes, etc. Then, if it's a planetary assault, and you've completed enough percentage of missions to do so, you can move onto the actual major missions, assaults, and the like.

It's stupid, to me, that this game was not already built to be that way. What's going to be the point of having a Solaris VII mod for the game, it's going to be the same ********, with different maps, we deal with, now. (shrugs)

One of these days, I'll actually stop posting on this forum; it does about as much good as adding another hole to my head.

[Prezimonto]

I hear you Kay, I sort of quit playing months ago (check in once a month or so). I still haven't seen any game play that looks interesting enough to dive back into. I should check and see if stock mech matches are still a thing, or better are being combined with some of these new modes.

[Threat Doc]

Admittedly, Prezimonto, I'm keeping an eye on things. However, I'm not going to be anywhere near as active as I was. I guess I'm waiting for PGI to clean the **** from their eyes and ears and start listening and seeing, and some modicum of hope remains in my chest that the game will be more, will be what they said it could be, will become what we ancient tabletop players and MechWarrior computer game players would hope for in a computerized version that is both fun and as accurate as possible to what BattleTech is supposed to be. It CAN be done; to not do it is a travesty, and will end badly.

[Koniving]

I'm in the same boat as you two. And in the mean time I'm working out the concepts and details of how I would like to see a Battletech game.

Maybe one day I'll be part of a company that gets the license.
....Maybe one day I use it to make my own game with mechanized combat.

Either way, so far it's looking like a mix between an RTS (dead pilots and live players with Command Console can command limited amounts of conventional forces) / Titanfall ('Mechs, while the mainstay, are not always immediately deployed. Retreat mechanic also.) / Megamek's campaign system, and a dash of Star Citizen-esque simulator. Considering it's a huge project,

I'm likely to start smaller and build up to it in terms of real production.

[Threat Doc]

Well, you and I have not always gotten along, but I have quite a few ideas, myself, about a BattleTech game. If you think you have even a remote future in building a game, I wouldn't mind sharing them with you.

[Prezimonto]

I've wanted to see a game that has a much deeper out of match tie in to the setting.

I'd like to see you run your own small house/company/noble/corp, that keeps a few pilots and/or stable of mechs. If you want to run Liao, that's an independent stable from your Steiner stable. You'd recruit pilots, who would slowly level, get injured, die or retire (and if retired with enough XP, perhaps stick around and help train new recruits), as well as tech, political officers, and whatever else sounds fun... everything adding up to being able to field a Mech into battle.

Battles would be fought in series (as in you've limited resources when you go on campaign, including human resources) and fights should be over important sites. Your mech(s) should degrade over a campaign, and/or you lose all your pilots and have to go home and recruit again. While at home you bring everything back up to 100% and look for another campaign to join (and therefore lock in your mech's loadout for another 4 or 5 matches). It'd be fun to see whole campaigns played out on a map of a planet as well, rather than just systems.

IE... I want to be immersed in the setting while outside the game.

Heck, I'd LOVE different rules sets as well. 3020's would have stables that have older mechs and tech only available, with very little customization (read like stock mech night rules), 3045 might be primarily Houses, with modern mechs and more customization, and 3050's would be clans.

[50 50]

Some more immersion would be nice.
Imagine a briefing room more like this when you go to join a battle.
Room starts filling up with player avatars.
Lance and team commanders could appear out the front.
And the screens have the various bits of data for the mission.
Don't need it to be animated or to wander about, it's replacing the menus with more of a visual asthetic.


However, that's another topic to objective based game play.
There was post showing an ongoing battle from MM:LL which I'll provide the link to:

What I am seeing here is a mode which has the following setup:
There are different mechbays for both teams spread around the map for players to start from.
The player objective is to capture these points and dominate the map.

From an MWO perspective, this sort of territorial domination of a map would be absolutely brilliant but with the following amendments to enrich the mode and keep it within some of the restrictions we have already:

• Firstly: No timer other than it ends once the attack phase 8hr period expires and there are in battle messages when this time is about to expire.
  
• Second: Players can drop in and out of the battle making it a continuous event.
  
• Third: The drop decks remain. When one of your mechs are destroyed, you return to the staging area but return to a queue to rejoin the map when a space becomes available within the team limit. This will cycle players through the battle getting more people involved in a single outcome.
  
• Fourth: The match is won when one team has captured all the mechbays and drop points. Otherwise at the end of the attack phase, the team with the greater number of captured points is the victor.
  
• Fifth: There are other strategic locations on the map that can be captured and held to provide a benefit such as:
  Repair Facility - while this is held, when ever you return to the staging area, if you have a destroyed mech in your drop deck, you can elect to repair it. That mech will then be available again 1 or 2 drops later.
  Artillery Site - while this is held, your team can use the artillery consumables.
  Airfield - while this is held, your team can use the air strike consumables.
  
• Sixth: Players can retreat back to a friendly mechbay or drop point to leave the battle and return to the staging area without losing their mech. The mech can return to your drop deck with a status of 're-arming' and be available for use again in 1 or 2 drops.
  
• Lastly: Once you have lost all the mechs in your drop deck, you can no longer participate in the battle for that attack phase and have to wait until it starts again.

Now, maybe it's just me, but this is what I would love to see as second stage in the community warfare and it becomes available once enough orbital cannons have been destroyed to allow for the larger Union and Overlord dropships to land.

[Greyhart]

I can't help but note that this has been going for 2 years.

that there appears no one who disagrees with it.

I think the simplest method for this type of game play might be to make conquest a capture and hold game.

i.e. the team must hold all 3 points simultaneously for 2 minutes (or something). If no one does it no one gets the big Cbill bonus (say 1 million for each player on the winning team)

That could provide more depth and strategy

[Araevin Teshurr]

We would all go for anything right now that gives the game some meaning to what we are doing.
No more maps.
No more mechs.
No more tweeks.

Work on the game content, pull it out of the hole it is stuck in.

Edited by Araevin Teshurr, 24 July 2015 - 09:58 AM.