84 replies to this topic

[IraqiWalker]

HantuDuppy, on 24 July 2014 - 07:36 PM, said:

I think it's funny that PGI would advertise 'roll warfare' so much, and then wreck it with turrets. The turrets have my vote at the dumbest thing PGI has done with Mechwarrior. It's not possible for a light to base capture. The only reason a light has to join a base capture game is to run and hide if their team is loosing, and the enemy will base capture win instead of hunt them down. I haven't complained about turrents on the forums because there is a fix for me - I just don't play base capture matches.

Again, one Ember, soloed all the turrets on Crimson strait with pretty much most of my mech intact.

[Wolfways]

Pjwned, on 24 July 2014 - 08:30 PM, said:

I'd rather just see them gone, letting people camp their base next to their turrets is stupid as well.



They shouldn't be there in the first place and people should need to spread out to spot lights coming in to cap, as it is now you might as well not bother trying to cap at all and it's stupid as hell.

The turrets are there because players complained about lights capping bases instead of it being a team deathmatch. Of course PGI listened to the whiners as usual and instead of telling them to defend their base just gave them turrets.
When it comes to MWO whining generally beats sense.

Edited by Wolfways, 24 July 2014 - 08:36 PM.

[Pjwned]

Wolfways, on 24 July 2014 - 08:35 PM, said:

The turrets are there because players complained about lights capping bases instead of it being a team deathmatch. Of course PGI listened to the whiners as usual and instead of telling them to defend their base just gave them turrets.
When it comes to MWO whining generally beats sense.

I know why it happened, that doesn't make it less lame and now that Skirmish is a thing people can just play that instead if they don't want to deal with defending their base objective. At least before Skirmish existed there was somewhat of an argument because if people really just want a team deathmatch option then fine, that doesn't mean you have to screw over an entire weight class from using a legitimate tactic for 1 game mode that you can now avoid if you want to.

[Zolaz]

Like Forrest says ... Stupid is as stupid does.

[IraqiWalker]

Pjwned, on 24 July 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

I know why it happened, that doesn't make it less lame and now that Skirmish is a thing people can just play that instead if they don't want to deal with defending their base objective. At least before Skirmish existed there was somewhat of an argument because if people really just want a team deathmatch option then fine, that doesn't mean you have to screw over an entire weight class from using a legitimate tactic for 1 game mode that you can now avoid if you want to.

The logic is flawed. The turrets should stay there. In fact, there should be walls, and other structures as well. The turrets right now are too easy to circumvent and destroy. Base capping is a tactic in Assault, and I agree, however, what should be done right now is boosting the reward for capping, and keeping, if not buffing the turrets. Lights shouldn't be able to cap a base unopposed.

I'm not sure if many players here remember how easy it was to single-handedly turning a match around by taking the long path, and then capping. It was the easiest way to win a match.

I still remember how the tactic worked so well. I just tell the whole team at the start of the match "Setting up a cap feint, skirmish with them and don't commit to a roll until after I draw a few of them off. Then shoot them all in the back. I will cap to 99% and walk away if we have the advantage, if not, I will finish capping for the win."

98% of the time, my team listens really well, in fact, I might get another light mech to help me with the cap. I personally prefer going solo, that way I can guarantee the idiots won't keep capping when we're 8-0 in the lead. I just wait until we're three minutes in. my teammates tell me when to cap, and as soon as I do, the enemy team starts to panic, especially uncoordinated teams, and many will start to run back to base. Even if they may ignore me for the first 20 seconds, they will change their mind when their base is at 50% cap. Once they move like that, my team moves like one big firing line, and just rolls the enemy team in a near perfect stomp.

At least with the turrets right now, there's the illusion of a good deterrent (in Terra Therma, the turrets are positioned in a good way that causes an invading force to suffer some serious damage compared to some other maps, like Frozen City, or River City.)

[Lykaon]

Xipe Totec, on 23 July 2014 - 09:36 PM, said:

Just a vague idea to create an incentive to play lights? They'd become the only units which could threaten with base-cap, which would make a light-advantage meaningful and dangerous.

Not only would this mean they could cap, but they could also gut the turrets with immunity.

Because the entire reason we have turrets is because puggies couldn't wrap there minds around role warfare and demanded turrets to keep lights from base capping.

With turrets puggies no longer need to think about two mission objectives.It's skirmish with some base thingy with turrets like how conquest is skirmish with some sort of resource cap thingy.

Seriously the pug queue should be bring whatever Mech (none of this 3/3/3/3 BS) Skirmish ONLY unlimited respawn fixed XP and C-bill rewards (I don't care if they are huge rewards as long as they are not at all performance related) and,at the end of the match you only ever see your own score and best of all...

NO MATER HOW MUCH YOU SUCK the end of match screen says VICTORY!

Do this and the puggies can play in the kiddie pool and be happy and development can be better spent on the players who play the game correctly.

[Cavendish]

Ultimatum X, on 24 July 2014 - 05:16 AM, said:

This goes beyond the Red team being upset.

This is a shooter, most people are here to shoot other people and blow stuff up.

I don't mind the occasional surprise cap-rush win, but ultimately it means I waited a few minutes of searching for a match that can end before anyone shoots, anyone scores damage, anyone earns decent XP or Cbills.

It's not fun for most of the winning team, it's not fun for the losing team and really it would just be lame if this were a common occurrence.


When this is a sudden mid-game decision because the match is going poorly but a clever light pilot reverses the situations to pull out a win, or cause confusion among the OpFoR, I'm all for it.

However when this happens at the 10 or 12 minute mark where people have only just found their positions, it ends up in a boring waste of time. Woopdie doo, you "won" by sitting in one spot after shooting a few stupid AI bots.



On top of this both you and the OP fail to consider that making capping even easier would be dumb on several levels, not the least of which is that would likely promote even more base humping by teams than we already see.

Because if a match can end in 2 minutes due to lights cap rushing, the smartest strategy becomes to just sit and defend.
This is already lame, and awful on the maps where it's mostly unavoidable. Let's not find new reasons for players to do this.

I see your point.

However, as we both seem to agree upon is that it should be a viable tactic availible to the teams. I did not mean to imply that we should remove the turrets, nor make lights "immune" to them, I do think the turrets should be tuned to hit randomly and not go directly for the legs (which has been pointed out above) which can easily be exploited on some of the maps currently.

The first problem I have with assult at the moment is that it is really a skirmish where the teams meet up in deathball fight and if it goes poorly for one side the might try to run off and cap but will most likely be shot down in flames before making it half way. It should, in my opinion, be more tactical then that, making it worthwhile to spread out the lances (maybe leave one behind to defend, send one to scout, keep the last in reserve for push or defence) instead of the utter boredom that is "meet up in middle and bash it out", we do have the Skirmish mode for that if people find it fitting their playstyle and intrest. Without the "threat" of lights being able to rush your base there is no point in doing anything else but deathball and roll out to meet the enemy.

The second problem is that if you take 4 mechs that can sprint and actually do play the objective, somehow you are doing it wrong according to a large section of the playerbase. This confuse me. If the objective of the game is in fact to cap the enemy base, and you dont like the game ending by the base being capped, one could ask "why do you select a game-mode that you hate?" Yes the "cap in under 2 min, gg" version we had before the turrets was even more boring then deathball, but there must surely be a middleway where tactics can play some sort of role.

Finally I would like to say that the "Assult mode" should of course only have one base that one side defend and the other attack. Considering the small size of our maps besides alpine and caustic it would even be better to split it into two rounds at 7.5 min each where the teams switch roles at round 2. Rewards should also be reworked from "damage/component/kills" to "Surviving turrets/surviving defenders/dead attackers" and be awarded equally for the team to encourage scouting, taking out specific targets and also defending them instead of the messy "screw tactics, fire EVERYTHING!" a lot of players seem to have adapted to.

[Pjwned]

IraqiWalker, on 25 July 2014 - 01:29 AM, said:

The logic is flawed. The turrets should stay there. In fact, there should be walls, and other structures as well. The turrets right now are too easy to circumvent and destroy. Base capping is a tactic in Assault, and I agree, however, what should be done right now is boosting the reward for capping, and keeping, if not buffing the turrets. Lights shouldn't be able to cap a base unopposed.

So it's flawed logic to say that people should actually consider defending their important objective?

Wow.

Quote

I'm not sure if many players here remember how easy it was to single-handedly turning a match around by taking the long path, and then capping. It was the easiest way to win a match.

I remember it pretty clearly actually, unless you went straight for the base with a full lance it mostly just served as a distraction and at worst ended up with a dead light mech that did essentially nothing. It also encouraged some actual brawling because people needed to DEFEND (there's that blasphemous concept again) their base from the enemy and that was often a much closer range engagement instead of the pop-tart camping nonsense all day long that we have now because turrets compensate for bad players making bad decisions and only want to pew pew in a game mode that has an actual objective instead of playing Skirmish.

Quote

I still remember how the tactic worked so well. I just tell the whole team at the start of the match "Setting up a cap feint, skirmish with them and don't commit to a roll until after I draw a few of them off. Then shoot them all in the back. I will cap to 99% and walk away if we have the advantage, if not, I will finish capping for the win."

98% of the time, my team listens really well, in fact, I might get another light mech to help me with the cap. I personally prefer going solo, that way I can guarantee the idiots won't keep capping when we're 8-0 in the lead. I just wait until we're three minutes in. my teammates tell me when to cap, and as soon as I do, the enemy team starts to panic, especially uncoordinated teams, and many will start to run back to base. Even if they may ignore me for the first 20 seconds, they will change their mind when their base is at 50% cap. Once they move like that, my team moves like one big firing line, and just rolls the enemy team in a near perfect stomp.

Great, so what you're saying is your team played well and the enemy team played poorly, wow what an unfair situation, not to mention you oversimplify everything massively there on top of lots of assumptions and ignoring any valid counter plays the enemy team could make.

Quote

At least with the turrets right now, there's the illusion of a good deterrent (in Terra Therma, the turrets are positioned in a good way that causes an invading force to suffer some serious damage compared to some other maps, like Frozen City, or River City.)

The deterrent should be the team defending their own base to some degree, if they ignore it and lose then that's their fault and it shouldn't be up to the game to compensate for poor play when they can just go play Skirmish if they don't like it.

[IraqiWalker]

Pjwned, on 25 July 2014 - 03:27 AM, said:

So it's flawed logic to say that people should actually consider defending their important objective?

Wow.

No, I understand where you're coming from, but I'm one of the people who campaigned for adding turrets and make the bases actual "bases". If you want to incentivize people to play lights don't make them play them because they are a "cheat", but rather because there is something that lights excel at, that makes them unique. Right now, such a thing doesn't really exist. Basically, what I'm saying is add proper role warfare.

Pjwned, on 25 July 2014 - 03:27 AM, said:

I remember it pretty clearly actually, unless you went straight for the base with a full lance it mostly just served as a distraction and at worst ended up with a dead light mech that did essentially nothing. It also encouraged some actual brawling because people needed to DEFEND (there's that blasphemous concept again) their base from the enemy and that was often a much closer range engagement instead of the pop-tart camping nonsense all day long that we have now because turrets compensate for bad players making bad decisions and only want to pew pew in a game mode that has an actual objective instead of playing Skirmish.

With cap accel module I can cap the base solo within a minute or so. On a map like Tourmaline that is as good as done. If I had even one mech with me, there is no feasible scenario where a mech comes back from the front line in time to stop us, and still buy enough time for the rest of the team to come back it up. Mostly because the rest of the team is getting killed from behind by now.

Pjwned, on 25 July 2014 - 03:27 AM, said:

Great, so what you're saying is your team played well and the enemy team played poorly, wow what an unfair situation, not to mention you oversimplify everything massively there on top of lots of assumptions and ignoring any valid counter plays the enemy team could make.

There is literally no counter play to it short of having all the lights know ahead of time that they need to go back and defend the base. Which still works to the plan's advantage since it causes the front line forces to be extremely overwhelmed. If you send back 4 lights, that's 4 lights no longer at the front helping the team. Or you have the ENTIRE team run back together. They would still get shot in the back while trying to stop 1 maybe 2 mechs from capping. Even if a couple mechs sacrifice themselves to slow the enemy team and stop them from killing the rest of the team, the end result is your team loses mechs, and are undermanned now.

Pjwned, on 25 July 2014 - 03:27 AM, said:

The deterrent should be the team defending their own base to some degree, if they ignore it and lose then that's their fault and it shouldn't be up to the game to compensate for poor play when they can just go play Skirmish if they don't like it.

In that case, remove all turrets, and let the light easy wins come. Because one of two scenarios will play out in Assault if we implement this idea:

1- Both teams camp their bases. You thought river city was bad on assault, wait until it's every other map.

2- One team camps, and another charges, the team on the charge is expected to lose more than 70% of the time by the way. Either they attack a heavily fortified position with a smaller force, since they need to keep some defenders. Or they attack with full force, and abandon the base, leaving easy for a perfect light cap victory.

Camp Warrior:Online doesn't sound like fun at all.

What you're proposing won't actually add any value to playing a light, but rather make them a derided pack of "cheaters" and will make people play assault even less.


The way I see it, you're either misunderstanding what I'm saying, or have completely given up on the concept of proper role warfare.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 25 July 2014 - 03:49 AM.

[Pjwned]

IraqiWalker, on 25 July 2014 - 03:46 AM, said:

No, I understand where you're coming from, but I'm one of the people who campaigned for adding turrets and make the bases actual "bases". If you want to incentivize people to play lights don't make them play them because they are a "cheat", but rather because there is something that lights excel at, that makes them unique. Right now, such a thing doesn't really exist. Basically, what I'm saying is add proper role warfare.

It isn't a "cheat" to use your speed to deal with objectives, that's just stupid, and how would your idea of real "bases" even work in the Assault game mode anyways? You can't just say "oh this idea sounds neat so put it in" and then not think about the consequences, of which there would be many; not saying that it couldn't possibly be something for a different game mode though.

Quote

With cap accel module I can cap the base solo within a minute or so. On a map like Tourmaline that is as good as done. If I had even one mech with me, there is no feasible scenario where a mech comes back from the front line in time to stop us, and still buy enough time for the rest of the team to come back it up. Mostly because the rest of the team is getting killed from behind by now.

It definitely takes longer than a minute to solo cap a base on Assault even with the cap acceleration module, and wow maybe some of the light mechs on the enemy team could try doing something about their base being capped or they can just push knowing that your team is down by at least 1 mech on the field. This is also assuming that nobody spots you, nobody checks on their base when there aren't any targets on the map, nobody even thinks about not straying so far away from their base that a cap attempt would guarantee a loss which is hard to achieve unless they're sitting with their thumbs in their asses, nobody tries initiating their own cap, etc.

Quote

There is literally no counter play to it short of having all the lights know ahead of time that they need to go back and defend the base. Which still works to the plan's advantage since it causes the front line forces to be extremely overwhelmed. If you send back 4 lights, that's 4 lights no longer at the front helping the team. Or you have the ENTIRE team run back together. They would still get shot in the back while trying to stop 1 maybe 2 mechs from capping. Even if a couple mechs sacrifice themselves to slow the enemy team and stop them from killing the rest of the team, the end result is your team loses mechs, and are undermanned now.

If you say "there is literally no counter play" that is just plain wrong, sorry, and no it is not just as simple as the entire team running back while getting shot.

Quote

In that case, remove all turrets, and let the light easy wins come.

What you're proposing won't actually add any value to playing a light, but rather make them a derided pack of "cheaters" and will make people play assault even less.

Excellent, make it so that base defense actually matters for the team and the whiners & QQ'ing little babies can go play Skirmish if they don't want to deal with it. If you think it's "cheating" to go for the objective then you're an idiot, just as much as the person who ignores said objective and then complains about it.

I don't see people throwing a fit about winning on points in Conquest, I don't see the need to do so for Assault and especially not when you don't even have to play it if you don't want to, but meanwhile the Assault mode that I previously enjoyed is basically ruined by turrets because people cry and scream about the evil lights molesting their base from 500m away.

Quote

The way I see it, you're either misunderstanding what I'm saying, or have completely given up on the concept of proper role warfare.

How is wanting base caps to be viable for lights giving up on proper role warfare? This just seems dense.

Quote

In that case, remove all turrets, and let the light easy wins come. Because one of two scenarios will play out in Assault if we implement this idea:

1- Both teams camp their bases. You thought river city was bad on assault, wait until it's every other map.

2- One team camps, and another charges, the team on the charge is expected to lose more than 70% of the time by the way. Either they attack a heavily fortified position with a smaller force, since they need to keep some defenders. Or they attack with full force, and abandon the base, leaving easy for a perfect light cap victory.

Camp Warrior:Online doesn't sound like fun at all.

There would be no reason to camp without turrets present, you do not need to sit on your base all day to defend it from some lights running around, and even if you did camp that's just asking for the other team to come in and wipe you out (with a flank from any smart team) while you're sitting ducks and then the objective is right there for them to take.

Campwarrior isn't what happened at all when turrets were not around.

Edited by Pjwned, 25 July 2014 - 04:28 AM.

[Cryptic Gamer]

[IraqiWalker]

Pjwned, on 25 July 2014 - 04:14 AM, said:

It isn't a "cheat" to use your speed to deal with objectives, that's just stupid, and how would your idea of real "bases" even work in the Assault game mode anyways? You can't just say "oh this idea sounds neat so put it in" and then not think about the consequences, of which there would be many; not saying that it couldn't possibly be something for a different game mode though.

Making turrets ineffective (more so than they are now) against lights will render lights into the easy mode I am talking about. My idea is simple, slap some walls, some other buildings, tents, and other structures around, make the bases feel like bases. It's purely cosmetic. Why would that have jarring consequences on the gameplay? Turrets should never be removed because they make early caps, especially solo caps, very risky. Which is what they should be. One mech winning the game without even firing a single shot, and NO counterplay whatsoever, is just purely broken.

Also, no need to get insulting. I'm trying to have a calm debate here.

Pjwned, on 25 July 2014 - 04:14 AM, said:

It definitely takes longer than a minute to solo cap a base on Assault even with the cap acceleration module, and wow maybe some of the light mechs on the enemy team could try doing something about their base being capped or they can just push knowing that your team is down by at least 1 mech on the field. This is also assuming that nobody spots you, nobody checks on their base when there aren't any targets on the map, nobody even thinks about not straying so far away from their base that a cap attempt would guarantee a loss which is hard to achieve unless they're sitting with their thumbs in their asses, nobody tries initiating their own cap, etc.

When was the last you EVER checked on your base for no apparent reason at all?
As for no one spotting me, it's pretty much almost guaranteed that no one spots you since you just need to take an obtuse route towards your target, and if you have ECM then you can just go wherever you want. 9 times out of 10 you won't be spotted, and no one will know where you are until you step onto the base.
When the enemy team decides to charge my team because they're down one mech, maybe two. My team still wins. The enemy team becomes pressured into acting quickly, which means the rush won't be organized, and more likely than not, in disarray. A panicked force is extremely ineffective.

Light mechs can try to do something about it, and they will leave their main force undermanned, and without the support of fast light mechs. Still gonna be a disadvantage to the team reacting to the scenario.

Pjwned, on 25 July 2014 - 04:14 AM, said:

If you say "there is literally no counter play" that is just plain wrong, sorry, and no it is not just as simple as the entire team running back while getting shot.

Present a single scenario of counter play. Unless the enemy knows how many mechs (cap accel makes it seem like at least 2 mechs on base), and what kind of mechs they are (capping at 5 minutes means that even assault mechs are a possible participant)

The ONLY effective counterplay is spotting the cappers on their way to the base, and ambushing them. Once the enemy lights step on the base, and your own lights are on the front line, in any map that isn't River city (even that one is a close call, not as bad as the big maps, but still dicey) it's an almost guaranteed victory unless the enemy team moves back to their base, and do their best to not lose a single mech. Once the enemy light mech is chased away, then they can fight the charging enemy team. However, they have to be on the defensive and they lose the initiative because they lost a big chunk of their base's cap. If the enemy team draws them away, they HAVE to leave defenders behind, if they don't the light can keep harassing them by capping the base again. All the offensive team needs to do now, is snipe ONE kill, and they have 2 victory scenarios possible while the enemy has 0.

Pjwned, on 25 July 2014 - 04:14 AM, said:

Excellent, make it so that base defense actually matters for the team and the whiners & QQ'ing little babies can go play Skirmish if they don't want to deal with it. If you think it's "cheating" to go for the objective then you're an idiot, just as much as the person who ignores said objective and then complains about it.

The turrets make base defense POSSIBLE. Without them all of the above almost one sided scenarios will play out again. This is coming from the guy who clocked over 1000 wins that way. I know what I'm talking about, and I know how it works. Basically, as soon as you employ that tactic, your chances of winning go from 50/50 up to about 70%. Right off the bat.

Yes, tactics help, but gaining THAT massive of an advantage is too much. Especially since the strongest tactic in the game is poptarting and that requires team work, while this one can be done solo regularly with a very high success rate.

I don't think it's cheating to go for the objective (and again, seriously, stop with the insults. Did I insult you unknowingly?). I think it's cheating to make my mech magically super powerful at taking it. Make the objective mechanics work right, instead of breaking them even more. Right now people don't go for the objective because it's not rewarding to do so. It used to be a viable tactic to go cap the enemy base mostly because you still got a decent reward. Now you get even less for capping. So people slug it out.

Pjwned, on 25 July 2014 - 04:14 AM, said:

I don't see people throwing a fit about winning on points in Conquest, I don't see the need to do so for Assault and especially not when you don't even have to play it if you don't want to, but meanwhile the Assault mode that I previously enjoyed is basically ruined by turrets because people cry and scream about the evil lights molesting their base from 500m away.

I agree that people shouldn't whine if they get capped. That was a tactical failure on their end and they deserve to lose. Whenever I get people who say that I'm a noob for capping I simply respond with "learn basic tactics". However, I believe that there should be some challenge to seizing the objective instead of just walking in unopposed. If you believe you should be able to cap that easily, I think you need to re-evaluate the risk-reward system you want to implement.

Pjwned, on 25 July 2014 - 04:14 AM, said:

How is wanting base caps to be viable for lights giving up on proper role warfare? This just seems dense.

Viable, and "so easy I can do it in my sleep" are two different things. Base caps are already viable and easy for lights. Each turret only has 30 health total. There is not a light in the game that can't rip that open in seconds. Even Locusts can rip a turret open in a few seconds. SDR5Vs might be the only ones that can have a problem with it, because of lack of hardpoints, however, that's not even much of a problem for the ERLL build on them.

Have you tried capping a base with a light mech recently? I tore through an entire base in one run in my Firestarters. My Com-2D has no problem dealing with them either (only the ML ones actually hit me, and I can rip them open with 3 SRM4s in a few seconds. Yay for ECM nullifying half the turrets.


Try and conduct your posts without insults if possible, and actually consider the whole picture. Most preferably after experimenting with base capping right now. Go into a private match if you can, and test things there, as the testing ground don't help.


EDIT:

Base Invader COM-2D This one wrecks turrets, and caps bases fast. I still pull a base cap with it fairly regularly.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 25 July 2014 - 05:04 AM.

[Pjwned]

IraqiWalker, on 25 July 2014 - 04:58 AM, said:

Making turrets ineffective (more so than they are now) against lights will render lights into the easy mode I am talking about. My idea is simple, slap some walls, some other buildings, tents, and other structures around, make the bases feel like bases. It's purely cosmetic. Why would that have jarring consequences on the gameplay? Turrets should never be removed because they make early caps, especially solo caps, very risky. Which is what they should be. One mech winning the game without even firing a single shot, and NO counterplay whatsoever, is just purely broken.

You were talking about making turrets stronger and made it seem like you practically wanted an impenetrable fortress for each base instead of the simple cap objective that it should be, so okay if it's just cosmetic then I don't really see the point much.

There is counterplay to solo capping and I already explained what it was.

Quote

When was the last you EVER checked on your base for no apparent reason at all?

As for no one spotting me, it's pretty much almost guaranteed that no one spots you since you just need to take an obtuse route towards your target, and if you have ECM then you can just go wherever you want. 9 times out of 10 you won't be spotted, and no one will know where you are until you step onto the base.

When the enemy team decides to charge my team because they're down one mech, maybe two. My team still wins. The enemy team becomes pressured into acting quickly, which means the rush won't be organized, and more likely than not, in disarray. A panicked force is extremely ineffective.

If you don't see the enemy and you don't have any allies near your base then maybe the enemy is going for the base, wow what a tough concept.

Quote

Light mechs can try to do something about it, and they will leave their main force undermanned, and without the support of fast light mechs. Still gonna be a disadvantage to the team reacting to the scenario.

Present a single scenario of counter play. Unless the enemy knows how many mechs (cap accel makes it seem like at least 2 mechs on base), and what kind of mechs they are (capping at 5 minutes means that even assault mechs are a possible participant)

The light mech(s) going back to defend will not leave their team any more undermanned than the attacking force is. It's also not difficult to tell how many mechs are on the base based on how fast it caps (and cap accel does not have anywhere close to that benefit) and if you let assault mechs cap within 5 minutes without being aware that sounds like a pretty huge fail unless you somehow completely avoided them and then sat around doing nothing wondering where they are.

Again, I already explained some possible counterplays earlier.

Quote

The ONLY effective counterplay is spotting the cappers on their way to the base, and ambushing them. Once the enemy lights step on the base, and your own lights are on the front line, in any map that isn't River city (even that one is a close call, not as bad as the big maps, but still dicey) it's an almost guaranteed victory unless the enemy team moves back to their base, and do their best to not lose a single mech. Once the enemy light mech is chased away, then they can fight the charging enemy team. However, they have to be on the defensive and they lose the initiative because they lost a big chunk of their base's cap. If the enemy team draws them away, they HAVE to leave defenders behind, if they don't the light can keep harassing them by capping the base again. All the offensive team needs to do now, is snipe ONE kill, and they have 2 victory scenarios possible while the enemy has 0.

You're exaggerating greatly how effective it is to initiate a base cap unless there's 3 or more, at which point I sure hope it would be effective. Also, If the whole team gives up their position to chase 1 light mech then they're playing poorly.

Quote

The turrets make base defense POSSIBLE. Without them all of the above almost one sided scenarios will play out again. This is coming from the guy who clocked over 1000 wins that way. I know what I'm talking about, and I know how it works. Basically, as soon as you employ that tactic, your chances of winning go from 50/50 up to about 70%. Right off the bat.

Turrets make base defense not even a consideration the vast majority of the time.

Quote

Yes, tactics help, but gaining THAT massive of an advantage is too much. Especially since the strongest tactic in the game is poptarting and that requires team work, while this one can be done solo regularly with a very high success rate.

I don't see how jumping up and down like a spaz requires much team work, and if you solo cap with frequent success then it's probably because--you guessed it, poor play from the enemy team.

Quote

I don't think it's cheating to go for the objective (and again, seriously, stop with the insults. Did I insult you unknowingly?). I think it's cheating to make my mech magically super powerful at taking it. Make the objective mechanics work right, instead of breaking them even more. Right now people don't go for the objective because it's not rewarding to do so. It used to be a viable tactic to go cap the enemy base mostly because you still got a decent reward. Now you get even less for capping. So people slug it out.

Your mech isn't any more powerful for taking the objective than their capacity to properly defend it.

Quote

I agree that people shouldn't whine if they get capped. That was a tactical failure on their end and they deserve to lose. Whenever I get people who say that I'm a noob for capping I simply respond with "learn basic tactics". However, I believe that there should be some challenge to seizing the objective instead of just walking in unopposed. If you believe you should be able to cap that easily, I think you need to re-evaluate the risk-reward system you want to implement.

If they ignore their base then it sounds like their problem when they lose if it gets capped.

Quote

Viable, and "so easy I can do it in my sleep" are two different things. Base caps are already viable and easy for lights. Each turret only has 30 health total. There is not a light in the game that can't rip that open in seconds. Even Locusts can rip a turret open in a few seconds. SDR5Vs might be the only ones that can have a problem with it, because of lack of hardpoints, however, that's not even much of a problem for the ERLL build on them.

Have you tried capping a base with a light mech recently? I tore through an entire base in one run in my Firestarters. My Com-2D has no problem dealing with them either (only the ML ones actually hit me, and I can rip them open with 3 SRM4s in a few seconds. Yay for ECM nullifying half the turrets.

It's only as easy to cap as the enemy team lets it be. Having turrets still adds more automatic base defense than there should be, anybody that ever does come to defend their base as of now has it easy mode because of turrets, most people don't even bother because they don't need to worry about it 98% of the time.

Quote

Try and conduct your posts without insults if possible, and actually consider the whole picture. Most preferably after experimenting with base capping right now. Go into a private match if you can, and test things there, as the testing ground don't help.

Your argument is basically that people don't bother to defend their base properly and you tell me to look at the whole picture, I find that a bit funny. Also, whining about "insults" when I'm hardly being insulting is just that, whining.

Edited by Pjwned, 26 July 2014 - 12:46 AM.

[IraqiWalker]

Pjwned, on 26 July 2014 - 12:41 AM, said:

You were talking about making turrets stronger and made it seem like you practically wanted an impenetrable fortress for each base instead of the simple cap objective that it should be, so okay if it's just cosmetic then I don't really see the point much.

There is counterplay to solo capping and I already explained what it was.

I was talking about making turrets stronger, put them at 45 health for example. The walls would be a nice touch as well. The rest is cosmetic, such as buildings, more vehicles on the ground, and so on and so forth.

Pjwned, on 26 July 2014 - 12:41 AM, said:

If you don't see the enemy and you don't have any allies near your base then maybe the enemy is going for the base, wow what a tough concept.

but you ARE seeing the enemy, or at least you think you're seeing all of them. Why would you go back to base when you're seeing pretty much the entire enemy team? (if there's even one ECM on the enemy team, you will take it for granted that they are all there, and not pay attention until you get the "base is under attack" message. Which you might not even notice if the light holds off the cap until around 5 minutes in. I've initiated cap wins when there were 4 minutes left on the timer. People can draw out a fight every now and then.

Pjwned, on 26 July 2014 - 12:41 AM, said:

The light mech(s) going back to defend will not leave their team any more undermanned than the attacking force is. It's also not difficult to tell how many mechs are on the base based on how fast it caps (and cap accel does not have anywhere close to that benefit) and if you let assault mechs cap within 5 minutes without being aware that sounds like a pretty huge fail unless you somehow completely avoided them and then sat around doing nothing wondering where they are.

No they will. Here are the scenarios where I employ just my one light mech, and the enemy sends back lights to defend the base:

1- They send back one light (extremely unlikely in a solo match, as more than half the team will probably panic and run back) which leaves them at even footing. However, that one light still runs the risk of losing to me in a duel, and might ask for back up.

2- They send back multiple lights. 90% of the time that I've seen light defenders rush back they're always 2+. Meaning right now, on the front lines there are 11 of my teammates, vs. 10 of yours. Most likely after sending their only lights back to base. While we still have other lights on the front line.

If you think that doesn't make much of an impact in a fight, you clearly don't play lights often enough. All it takes for me to kill an assault mech in one of my lights is 2-3 alphas into their rear. Which I will get, unless they turn around to hit me, and then my teammates shot them in the rear.

Pjwned, on 26 July 2014 - 12:41 AM, said:

You're exaggerating greatly how effective it is to initiate a base cap unless there's 3 or more, at which point I sure hope it would be effective. Also, If the whole team gives up their position to chase 1 light mech then they're playing poorly.

You're under-estimating greatly how easy it is to initiate a base cap with just one mech. Seriously, go and play the game in a non-stock light mech, and try to take a base. It's too darn easy right now.

Pjwned, on 26 July 2014 - 12:41 AM, said:

Turrets make base defense not even a consideration the vast majority of the time.

No, they allow the team some time to respond. Plus they allow the offense team some good psychological warfare, if the enemy team keeps getting "base under attack" messages, they will either keep ignoring the messages, and most likely miss that the base is being capped later on, or rush back to defend. Either way you look at it. If the enemy team rushes back to defend, they have to perform rear guard action, and will lose serious manpower, or they rush the opposing team to finish them off quickly, and they will most likely get capped.

Pjwned, on 26 July 2014 - 12:41 AM, said:

I don't see how jumping up and down like a spaz requires much team work, and if you solo cap with frequent success then it's probably because--you guessed it, poor play from the enemy team.

You clearly don't play with people who practice that tactic, poptarting relies a lot on teamwork actually, as it does have it's vulnerabilities, all of which are nullified in a 12 drop because everyone is on comms, and coordinated salvos prevent a lot of the flanking maneuvers that could break the formation. Plus, it's very easy to get isolated when utilizing that tactic.

Again, go right now, and hop into a poptart mech. Do it in a solo drop, and then go and drop with a group. You'll see a huge difference, especially if the group knows how to support a poptart mech.

Pjwned, on 26 July 2014 - 12:41 AM, said:

Your mech isn't any more powerful for taking the objective than their capacity to properly defend it.

1-I'm talking about making lights impervious to turrets

2-That is where you are wrong. If we removed the turrets, the enemy team has actually no chance of defending the base until AFTER I start the cap. Do you see the problem here?

Pjwned, on 26 July 2014 - 12:41 AM, said:

If they ignore their base then it sounds like their problem when they lose if it gets capped.

Yeah, no problems here.

Pjwned, on 26 July 2014 - 12:41 AM, said:

It's only as easy to cap as the enemy team lets it be. Having turrets still adds more automatic base defense than there should be, anybody that ever does come to defend their base as of now has it easy mode because of turrets, most people don't even bother because they don't need to worry about it 98% of the time.

They don't need to worry about it because of the illusion of solid turret defense. When in fact all it takes is one light mech to wreck most, if not the entire base in one quick assault.

Pjwned, on 26 July 2014 - 12:41 AM, said:

Your argument is basically that people don't bother to defend their base properly and you tell me to look at the whole picture, I find that a bit funny. Also, whining about "insults" when I'm hardly being insulting is just that, whining.

Okay, you really do need to look at the whole picture. What exactly is a base? Right now, all you see it as is a cap point. However, if you stop being condescending for 2 seconds and think about it, you are assaulting a military base. There should be defenses you have to go through. Have you ever been to a military base? Right now, from how you're talking, it seems like you have 0 military knowledge about the context of not only this game, but how military action is conducted.

Military bases have lots of defenses, they're not just open to everyone. The closes thing we can get to, to simulate their defenses is a bunch of measly turrets right now. Wait until there are tanks, aerospace fighters, and so on and so forth. What you're carrying out is a base ASSAULT. You were the one talking about the game mode, and how people should understand it. Well, you clearly don't understand it. You're just making up an argument that fits what you want, with no regard to the game, the lore, common sense, and basic military tactics.

As for "whining" about insults. All I asked, is for you to stop using them, as they:1- dilute any point you're trying to make. 2- Make you seem like an A**hole.

You called me an idiot a few times, and apparently that's not an insult in your book?
Well it is in mine. If you need to re-learn basic manners, go do that somewhere else, and let the adults carry the discussions.

All I wanted was to have a civil discussion, but somehow, that seems to be too much to ask from you.

Shall we catalog:
1- Don't understand the context of the subject at hand
2- Insulting for no apparent reason
3- Completely inflated arguments that show lack of experience with turrets, and base caps
4- Lacking in understanding of military tactics, and in a few cases, common sense.
5- Condescending for no real reason.

Have a nice day.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 26 July 2014 - 01:28 AM.

[Wolfways]

Pjwned, on 24 July 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

I know why it happened, that doesn't make it less lame and now that Skirmish is a thing people can just play that instead if they don't want to deal with defending their base objective. At least before Skirmish existed there was somewhat of an argument because if people really just want a team deathmatch option then fine, that doesn't mean you have to screw over an entire weight class from using a legitimate tactic for 1 game mode that you can now avoid if you want to.

Not everyone likes every mode. If you don't like turrets don't play a mode that includes them. Problem solved.

[Pjwned]

IraqiWalker, on 26 July 2014 - 01:27 AM, said:

but you ARE seeing the enemy, or at least you think you're seeing all of them. Why would you go back to base when you're seeing pretty much the entire enemy team? (if there's even one ECM on the enemy team, you will take it for granted that they are all there, and not pay attention until you get the "base is under attack" message. Which you might not even notice if the light holds off the cap until around 5 minutes in. I've initiated cap wins when there were 4 minutes left on the timer. People can draw out a fight every now and then.

If you're actively engaging the enemy then I don't see the problem with somebody choosing to not stay and fight and risk losing the match that way because their team is undermanned. I also don't see how a cap win after a drawn out fight is a problem that needs to be dealt with by putting in turrets.

Quote

No they will. Here are the scenarios where I employ just my one light mech, and the enemy sends back lights to defend the base:

1- They send back one light (extremely unlikely in a solo match, as more than half the team will probably panic and run back) which leaves them at even footing. However, that one light still runs the risk of losing to me in a duel, and might ask for back up.

2- They send back multiple lights. 90% of the time that I've seen light defenders rush back they're always 2+. Meaning right now, on the front lines there are 11 of my teammates, vs. 10 of yours. Most likely after sending their only lights back to base. While we still have other lights on the front line.

If you think that doesn't make much of an impact in a fight, you clearly don't play lights often enough. All it takes for me to kill an assault mech in one of my lights is 2-3 alphas into their rear. Which I will get, unless they turn around to hit me, and then my teammates shot them in the rear.

1. I don't see how the solo defending light should have an easier time due to their turret butt buddies just because they might lose a 1v1, and It's far more likely the team just calls "lights RTB" rather than the mass panic that you suggest, which leads into #2

2. So you have two or more lights to quickly deal with the 1 light on the base and then they get back to the action about as quickly, if the opposing team is smart enough to press the small advantage they have from that in a not very big window of time then good on them, sounds like the sort of valid strategy that would be encouraged more without turrets being present.

Additionally, if you're running around destroying assaults easily by shooting their back then they are likely either out of position or the team left them behind, not to mention that if they know to back into a wall then that's not going to work very well for the light.

Quote

You're under-estimating greatly how easy it is to initiate a base cap with just one mech. Seriously, go and play the game in a non-stock light mech, and try to take a base. It's too darn easy right now.

Great, I'll just go do that after dealing with all the turrets and get blasted apart by anybody that may come to defend it after slowly capping the base down because of the turrets damaging me, sounds fair.

Quote

No, they allow the team some time to respond. Plus they allow the offense team some good psychological warfare, if the enemy team keeps getting "base under attack" messages, they will either keep ignoring the messages, and most likely miss that the base is being capped later on, or rush back to defend. Either way you look at it. If the enemy team rushes back to defend, they have to perform rear guard action, and will lose serious manpower, or they rush the opposing team to finish them off quickly, and they will most likely get capped.

The speed of base capping and the "base under attack" messages allows plenty of time to respond or ignore it as appropriate.

Quote

You clearly don't play with people who practice that tactic, poptarting relies a lot on teamwork actually, as it does have it's vulnerabilities, all of which are nullified in a 12 drop because everyone is on comms, and coordinated salvos prevent a lot of the flanking maneuvers that could break the formation. Plus, it's very easy to get isolated when utilizing that tactic.

Again, go right now, and hop into a poptart mech. Do it in a solo drop, and then go and drop with a group. You'll see a huge difference, especially if the group knows how to support a poptart mech.

That could be said for any build ever, the only real difference is how effective pop-tarting is even without team support.

Quote

1-I'm talking about making lights impervious to turrets

2-That is where you are wrong. If we removed the turrets, the enemy team has actually no chance of defending the base until AFTER I start the cap. Do you see the problem here?

1. Okay, well I thought it was clear that I'm only talking about removing the turrets, to be extra clear I think making lights impervious to turrets is stupid for what seems like fairly obvious reasons, hence saying why I think turrets should just be removed.

2. They know where the objective is and where it can be approached from and they should be aware of a possible base cap attempt, so no I don't see the problem if they fail to consider that.

Quote

They don't need to worry about it because of the illusion of solid turret defense. When in fact all it takes is one light mech to wreck most, if not the entire base in one quick assault.

It's funny because proper defense, spotting, and communication deals with base rushing which is the only real problem they face without turrets.

Quote

Okay, you really do need to look at the whole picture. What exactly is a base? Right now, all you see it as is a cap point. However, if you stop being condescending for 2 seconds and think about it, you are assaulting a military base. There should be defenses you have to go through. Have you ever been to a military base? Right now, from how you're talking, it seems like you have 0 military knowledge about the context of not only this game, but how military action is conducted.

Military bases have lots of defenses, they're not just open to everyone. The closes thing we can get to, to simulate their defenses is a bunch of measly turrets right now. Wait until there are tanks, aerospace fighters, and so on and so forth. What you're carrying out is a base ASSAULT. You were the one talking about the game mode, and how people should understand it. Well, you clearly don't understand it. You're just making up an argument that fits what you want, with no regard to the game, the lore, common sense, and basic military tactics.

I'm making up an argument to suit what I want and then your argument is based on hypotheticals and ignoring how the game mode is actually played now and telling me my perspective is lacking because of irrelevant factors completely outside the realm of the game, haha oh wow get a grip please.

Quote

As for "whining" about insults. All I asked, is for you to stop using them, as they:1- dilute any point you're trying to make. 2- Make you seem like an A**hole.

You called me an idiot a few times, and apparently that's not an insult in your book?
Well it is in mine. If you need to re-learn basic manners, go do that somewhere else, and let the adults carry the discussions.

That was largely in response to saying that it's "cheating" to use light mechs to cap bases, and if you're going to throw a fit because I think it's stupid then I'm going to continue letting you know that I think you're being stupid, deal with it, I've been civil other than that hence the "hardly being insulting" although you're making that more difficult.

Quote

All I wanted was to have a civil discussion, but somehow, that seems to be too much to ask from you.

Shall we catalog:
1- Don't understand the context of the subject at hand
2- Insulting for no apparent reason
3- Completely inflated arguments that show lack of experience with turrets, and base caps
4- Lacking in understanding of military tactics, and in a few cases, common sense.
5- Condescending for no real reason.

Have a nice day.

1. Trying to dismiss my argument with bogus claims is pretty low, especially when my arguments show that I understand it just fine
2. See above, also stop whining
3. If my arguments are inflated then yours are a blimp, what a hypocrite
4. Irrelevant and if you wanted to show that you're not an idiot then your "common sense" comment threw that out the window
5. Ironic considering what I just quoted

[Pjwned]

Wolfways, on 26 July 2014 - 02:35 AM, said:

Not everyone likes every mode. If you don't like turrets don't play a mode that includes them. Problem solved.

My problem is that the mode was previously enjoyable as a single base capture objective but turrets have since wrecked that because people don't want to bother defending their objective even though they could instead play Skirmish easily.

As for your advice that's what I'm doing now, I mostly avoid Assault because turrets are stupid, that doesn't mean I'm happy with it because I'd rather have it be more than just Conquest, Skirmish, and Skirmish lite with bases that are never capped outside of a complete stomp.

Edited by Pjwned, 26 July 2014 - 03:09 AM.

[Wolfways]

Imo it would be better if bases were actual bases (buildings, walls/gates, spread out defenses - similar to MWLL) that you had to get inside to capture. Each turret would not be able to defend the whole base and once "inside" the invading mech wouldn't have to worry about the rest of the defenses.
Of course that would also require bigger maps.

[Pjwned]

Wolfways, on 26 July 2014 - 03:20 AM, said:

Imo it would be better if bases were actual bases (buildings, walls/gates, spread out defenses - similar to MWLL) that you had to get inside to capture. Each turret would not be able to defend the whole base and once "inside" the invading mech wouldn't have to worry about the rest of the defenses.
Of course that would also require bigger maps.

That sounds more appropriate for some sort of attack & defend mode.

[IraqiWalker]

Pjwned, on 26 July 2014 - 03:03 AM, said:

A lot of inane dribble

This comes down to two things:
1- People that have an opinion differing from yours aren't necessarily wrong.

2- Your lack of knowledge on a subject, coupled with the preposterous notion that the mode should be warped to your weird version of capture the flag.

Those two elements, along with your idiotic stubbornness to see the glaring flaws with your arguments are why I will not bother with this discussion anymore.

You don't want a tactical simulator, you just want to cap bases easily. Right now, it's easy enough to do it, but apparently it's too much for you to handle. The way I see it, that's your lack of ability to adapt more than anything.

Not to mention the turrets you talk about no longer exist, these newer ones are too weak.