23 replies to this topic

[TygerLily]

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.


What do you think?

Edited by TygerLily, 10 February 2015 - 05:53 AM.

[Burktross]

Sounds pretty good... but seems like it'd require smaller maps.

[Draykin]

Burktross, on 28 October 2014 - 01:33 PM, said:

Sounds pretty good... but seems like it'd require smaller maps.

Not if you increase the size of the grid's individual squares, or use an independent grid from the current map we have now. And also, if the maps were smaller, it wouldn't really help as much as harm gameplay. It would make faster 'Mechs (as we currently see them with the maps in-game) less important, since they can cover a lot of ground, yes, but they can't do that if there isn't much ground to cover.

Honestly, I could see a sort of territory idea being worked into a future gamemode. I think I would honestly like to see a sort of "Capture these key points to win" mode, be it where either side is capturing and defending, or that one side is defending exclusively and the other is attacking only. Sort of like that Attack/Defend gamemode coming up, but with there being multiple points to defend. Potentially of which, each point could grant a certain bonus, such as an airfield allowing for improved airstrikes, or a mech factory allowing for ammo refills outside of your team's base. This is all just hypothetical, though, as well as my opinion.

[TygerLily]

Draykin, on 28 October 2014 - 02:50 PM, said:

Potentially of which, each point could grant a certain bonus, such as an airfield allowing for improved airstrikes, or a mech factory allowing for ammo refills outside of your team's base. This is all just hypothetical, though, as well as my opinion.

MMMmmm...What if central to each map in this Territory mode is a repair bay/rearm station. Control the GS and you control the bay. And maybe include one back at each Home Grid Square.

This ensures that players gravitate toward each other and gives a little more tactical play. Defenders can dig in to defend their Home Grid Square at the end using their repair bay. The mid field can help either team find a foothold.

Another option, is if the Home Grids are north/south there could substations the far east adn west of each map. If you own one substation then your Home Grid Square has three turrets. Own both substations and you have six. Turrets are non-destroyable unless they are deployed and once destroyed they are gone for good.

Edited by TygerLily, 13 November 2014 - 11:07 AM.

[Orbit Rain]

I can see this working with large, randomly generated maps, something that would actually make 'scouting" a real thing in this game.

[Telmasa]

All I see is a game mode that would further be dominated by deathballing towards the enemy HQ.

[TygerLily]

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 11:54 AM, said:

All I see is a game mode that would further be dominated by deathballing towards the enemy HQ.

One strategy...Although, as mentioned, grids touching your enemy's Home Grid can be captured by you so you can begin backward paths.

So if Team A is deathballing, Team B could send fast Mechs behind the deathball to cap territory around the Team A's Home Grid and attempt to break the contiguous connection preventing Team A's deathball from doing anything even if they march right up to base.

Also, since it is dropship mode, Team A's deathball will have their reinforcements spawning back "home" and having to cross the map whereas Team B will be spawning right at the base they are defending.

Edited by TygerLily, 10 November 2014 - 12:25 PM.

[Hoffenstein]

This sounds awesome! 10/10 would play.

[Prezimonto]

TygerLily, on 28 October 2014 - 01:11 PM, said:

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.


What do you think?

I love it!

[TygerLily]

Thanks Prez! I posted to Reddit as well and someone commented on Planetside 2. Currently they use a lattice system (IE bases connected by lines so that even if two bases are neighboring, if they aren't connected by a lattice line then you cannot capture it). But early in PS2, I participated in their beta and they didn't have the lattice, only adjacency. Their game is an MMO FPS that uses a massive continent of bases, so going behind enemy lines and back capping sucked for your side because there was not way to create a "front" (as the continent was too big to respond quick enough and it led to players only playing whack-a-mole).

It was a bad system for PS2 but would work great here I think.

[hYlAnDeR]

This would certainly and positively enhance the game dynamic in my estimation!

[Demon Horde]

good luck with this suggestion. PGI thus far have ignored cries for unique game modes since closed beta ... no convoy mode, Solarius mode , or drop ship defense mode . those have been the main three requested and al;l are easily doable in an online environment. So far PGI only seems interested in poping out more mechs with the occasional map. I'm really disgusted about the game modes issue myself MechWarrior deserves something more uniqe than just run of the mill FPSer game modes. This would be an awesome mode if they made it , but i'd hope they put effort to at least a convoy mode first since it has been the number one talked about mode addition since closed beta

[cRaZy8or5e]

Lattice warfare sounds like grueling fun

[DI3T3R]

Problems:

- One lance of fast Mechs could dominate the game and render the fighting moot. (-> Quidditch) Assaults would be useless.

- The battle would be more static as everyone tries to secure territory far away from the enemy.

- Clan-Mechs are slightly faster on average but Clans are outnumbered 10 vs 12. -> Balancing problem.

- This mode would have no similarity whatsoever to any battlefield-situation. "I could shot you, but I stay behind this corner and defeat you by scoring points in a game!" If you want to play Yu-Gi-Oh, please do so, but MWO is supposed to be a warfare-simulation.

[timaeus]

DI3T3R, on 18 November 2014 - 05:39 AM, said:

- Clan-Mechs are slightly faster on average but Clans are outnumbered 10 vs 12. -> Balancing problem.

- This mode would have no similarity whatsoever to any battlefield-situation. "I could shot you, but I stay behind this corner and defeat you by scoring points in a game!" If you want to play Yu-Gi-Oh, please do so, but MWO is supposed to be a warfare-simulation.

Err... clan mechs are not balanced 10 vs 12 to IS so no issue there. As to the scoring points meta, what do you think the conquest game mode is? Battlefield control is often area control, so while this is much more mechanical it doesn't seem to be out of line of "warfare-simulation."

[Ozzy Stormlight]

i like and support this idea

... now to get the Devs to listen...

good concept . well thought out OP

[DI3T3R]

timaeus, on 18 November 2014 - 06:08 AM, said:

As to the scoring points meta, what do you think the conquest game mode is? Battlefield control is often area control, so while this is much more mechanical it doesn't seem to be out of line of "warfare-simulation."

The plants in conquest-mode are so far apart that they could be placeholders for actual valuable installations. Whereas in territory-mode you would run around like a dog, setting your mark on every tree.
"I was here."
"I was here."
"I was here."
"I was here."
"I was here."
"I was here."

What's the point of camping in the middle of nowhere?
"We liberated this parking-lot from the enemy by standing around in it for a minute. We can leave now. If the enemy wants to reconquer this parking-lot HE will have to hang around here for a minute."

[Prezimonto]

TygerLily, on 15 November 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

Thanks Prez! I posted to Reddit as well and someone commented on Planetside 2. Currently they use a lattice system (IE bases connected by lines so that even if two bases are neighboring, if they aren't connected by a lattice line then you cannot capture it). But early in PS2, I participated in their beta and they didn't have the lattice, only adjacency. Their game is an MMO FPS that uses a massive continent of bases, so going behind enemy lines and back capping sucked for your side because there was not way to create a "front" (as the continent was too big to respond quick enough and it led to players only playing whack-a-mole).

It was a bad system for PS2 but would work great here I think.

I played very early PS2 as well, and the adjacency worked okay until, as you say, you had no way to break out, and everyone hopped onto the winning side to earn easy XP.

I wouldn't mind if something like this were applied both inside a match and on a planet, instead of the "flipping model" they're currently using. I like the idea of the "flip" model for establishing an initial base camp, but I'd much rather see long campaigns develop afterwards to make taking a planet actually feel epic.

[TygerLily]

DI3T3R, on 18 November 2014 - 05:39 AM, said:

Problems:

- One lance of fast Mechs could dominate the game and render the fighting moot. (-> Quidditch) Assaults would be useless.

- The battle would be more static as everyone tries to secure territory far away from the enemy.

DI3T3R, on 18 November 2014 - 08:03 AM, said:

Whereas in territory-mode you would run around like a dog, setting your mark on every tree. What's the point of camping in the middle of nowhere?
"We liberated this parking-lot from the enemy by standing around in it for a minute. We can leave now. If the enemy wants to reconquer this parking-lot HE will have to hang around here for a minute."

Thanks for the feedback, these are good points.

1) Since I created the mode with the Dropship mechanic in mind, that means each team will have a substantial number of Lights. I wouldn't be like current matches where you only 2 or 3 Lights go down and now the enemy Lights can run circles around the rest.

2) I'm envisioning maps made for this mode much like Invasion has it's own maps that cater to it's tactical goals. So there could be several main routes from either side that funnel troops around the center.

One idea, I mentioned earlier in the thread:

TygerLily, on 28 October 2014 - 05:24 PM, said:

If, central to each map in this Territory mode, there was a repair bay/rearm station there would be incentive to control that GS.

This ensures that players gravitate toward each other and gives a little more tactical play....and holding the mid field can help either team find a foothold.

3) I think in trying to incentivize combat, maybe the tied conditions could change giving kills the priority. So adjusted, maybe:

"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 Of Kills Wins (swapped)
If Tied, Most Number Grid Squares Captured Wins (swapped)"

In this way, Team A getting kill on Team B puts them in the lead if Team B want to play the avoidance game. Team B's only chance to win without fighting then is to get the least number of Squares to the Team A's Home Grid.

However, if Team A gets a kill and decides to return to base to milk the kill and ensure that Team B can't get Squares by their Home Grid then Team B has run of the field to grab all the territory uncontested an then all they need is to even the kill board. IMO, this all sounds fun! xD

4) It could also be interesting to make grid squares in to important landmarks. For example, maybe D4, E4, and F4 are the uphill road leading up to G4: the comms station which happens to have nice over looks on the map for long range fire, etc. It doesn't have to be a flat parking lot plane being fought over...

Edited by TygerLily, 18 November 2014 - 11:12 PM.

[Cynoe]

Demon Horde, on 17 November 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

good luck with this suggestion. PGI thus far have ignored cries for unique game modes since closed beta ...This would be an awesome mode if they made it

hopefully they have a big word file full of copy and pastes of good ideas like this one