Jump to content

Put The "war" Back In Mech Warrior


93 replies to this topic

#41 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 25 November 2014 - 10:38 AM

View PostSaobh, on 25 November 2014 - 02:42 AM, said:

Problem is this community in fact made of 2 very distinct player base :
- The core one which has been here since the start and are die hard Mechwarrior geeks. Who are looking for the depth that the boardgame gave but in 3D with massive visuals and yes the intense fights but not in a "Leroy Jenkins" way but rather

- The COD type free to play players who in the end are used to games where everything happens quite quickly and don't really need to adapt because the challenging part of it is only an illusion with all the health regen / quick respawn and ammo leaking out of every orifice...


This is really at the crux of it and most of us that have been around since CB saw this quite clearly upon moving to OB. The game slowly began to cater more and more to the "arcade" style gaming and we saw those still wanting that "thinking man's shooter" pushed aside and told they were no longer the target audience.

Now, with most games, developers want to include as many audiences as possible. Hence they include things like "hardcore" mode. With the upcoming (hopefully) implementation of CW, it looks like those wanting that "hardcore" mode are FINALLY getting some love.

The "arcade" crowd has the pub queues and one-off deathmatches while the hardcore crowd is (by all accounts from PGI thus far anyhow) getting their game mode as well.

Bigger maps (I've said this for years now) would offer a HUGE amount of strategy to the game without changing a single mechanic. If maps were scaled to BF4 sizing (compared to the human avatars that is) we would see a use for things like scouting and recon. Those fast little squirrels would be invaluable if you weren't in contact with the entire enemy force 20 seconds after spawning.

#42 SkyHammyr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 462 posts

Posted 25 November 2014 - 10:49 AM

Shut up.
Just, shut up.
You had me at Game Modes.

Seriously, this game needs MOAR Game Modes! And, not just ones that devolve in TDMs, one that encourage objective based gameplay.

#43 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 25 November 2014 - 10:52 AM

View PostSkyHammr, on 25 November 2014 - 10:49 AM, said:

Shut up.
Just, shut up.
You had me at Game Modes.

Seriously, this game needs MOAR Game Modes! And, not just ones that devolve in TDMs, one that encourage objective based gameplay.

You won't get that in the pub queues. Trust me, there are too many "twitch" gamers there now. They'd cry a river of salt.

Better to look to CW and keep the "more hard stuff please" suggestions to CW mode honestly. If you're looking for a "hardcore" mode look through the CW info and the first townhall meeting. Russ specifically stated that CW would not be for those style of players and would be catered to those wanting a "hardcore" mode.

I'd love to see it in all facets of the game as well though

#44 Anjian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 3,735 posts

Posted 25 November 2014 - 07:20 PM

I agree. This game needs bigger maps, ones that allow for multiple lanes of attack, instead of forcing players into bottlenecks. Many maps also have poor environmental hitboxes and trap the mech's feet.

The game also needs asymmetrical modes, a capture and a defend side. Conquest is also a problem for the game, you got too many points to capture and this should be reduced to randomly situated one, two or three points of capture.

Limited respawn mode and points, repair and reload bases, AI bots (turrets and tanks, probably even VTOLs) randomly in the map.

#45 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 25 November 2014 - 07:26 PM

You folks want the "war" in "Mechwarrior"? Remove all the nerfs.

View PostSkyHammr, on 25 November 2014 - 10:49 AM, said:

Shut up.
Just, shut up.
You had me at Game Modes.

Seriously, this game needs MOAR Game Modes! And, not just ones that devolve in TDMs, one that encourage objective based gameplay.


I say no more game modes. Place all effort in making CW spectacular.

#46 Star Witch Esperanza

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 203 posts

Posted 25 November 2014 - 07:34 PM

We definately have enough different biomes and tilesets, reusing a lot of the assets currently in the game to make new maps and gametypes would be fabulous.

#47 Star Witch Esperanza

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 203 posts

Posted 25 November 2014 - 07:38 PM

View PostLouis Brofist, on 24 November 2014 - 06:08 AM, said:


I only read this. What you, and a lot of other people it seems fail to realize is the technical limitations of this game and this particular engine as well as the limited proficiency of the developers of this game.

This engine is not ideal for a MW game and its become extremely evident over the years that PGI are just not that good and any sort of coding.



I'll be the first to admit this but they also have exclusive rights to the license for the forseeable future..

The alternative is to encourage another developer to make the same gameplay with a new IP and aint nobody gonna do that. :/

we're basically boned if they don't intend to reform is what i'm saying.

#48 Johnny Z

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 9,942 posts
  • LocationDueling on Solaris

Posted 25 November 2014 - 07:48 PM

View PostAresye, on 24 November 2014 - 12:47 PM, said:

The problem with gigantic maps is the fact there's no respawn. Sure, it adds to the overall immersion, but let's not kid ourselves. Nobody, and I mean absolutely NOBODY, is going to enjoy spending 10min of moving, scouting, and getting into a good position, only to get cored in 2 shots when they first make contact.

This means game balance will once again have to be adjusted to provide a better play experience for larger maps and (most likely) longer match times.


If they have longer matches I dont think players will mind and may prefer them over the shorter matches, but the rewards have to be slightly better than shorter matches. What I mean by slightly better is if a 10 minute matches pays 10k then a 30 minute matches should pay 35k as an example.

Players dont neccessarily like fast matches but they get into the "grind" and try head towards their goal of that new mech or mod and want to be expedient about it. Longer even drawn out and even slower paced matches are fine if the rewards are there.

Edited by Johnny Z, 25 November 2014 - 07:52 PM.


#49 Jack Corban

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 560 posts
  • LocationPort Arthur

Posted 27 November 2014 - 04:41 AM

I think longer matches should be totally possible. I mean the Dropship mode kinda mandates longer match times anyways as there will be up to 96 mechs over the course of the game. The only thing is will the time increase mean a higher score at the end. I think it will because most of what we do for our score will happen more often if you have the means to respawn somehow. If not simply increasing the rewards to a level that makes em on par with 15 minute battles would do the trick aswell.

Edited by Jack Corban, 27 November 2014 - 04:41 AM.


#50 Trashhead

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 261 posts

Posted 17 December 2014 - 03:28 PM

to long, didn't read all of the thread.

+1 on OP.

I absolutely agree this game lacks depth.
I too like the occasional brawl, but currently assault, conquest and skirmish are all more or less brawls.
When playing a light in conquest i often try to sneak in behind the enemy and cap their bases while they are fighting with the rest of my team.

I love fulfilling the objectives, other then "kill enemy team", because i simply suck at fighting (K/D of 0.9 here).

I also would really like to play, actually play a scout.
The maps are to small.
We all meet at the same points over and over again, so scouting is of little to no use here.
And even if i find some enemies and report that to my team, usually no one cares.

So, PGI, if you have to give the CoD-Kids their own "Instant-respawn"-mode, with weapon damages increased 5 or even 10 times to allow insane insta-kills: go for it.
But in return only let them get 10% of the cash of a normal game and NO exp at all - you have to play normal assault/conquest/skirmish with NO respawn (or CW with respawn) to get exp and the normal amount of cash.

And for the more serious players:
give us what OP suggested.
I really would like to get into my Locust and run across the map to find the enemy, report back, and see the events unfold.

CW added some really cool features - most notably the DropShips (only the DropShips, though; i do not like the respawning; having only one life means that this one life counts!).
On the other hand its just business as usual, which is: a brawl. Just with respawn this time.


I think PGI should not have making selling mechs their main source of income, but rather selling premium time. (MMORPG's like EverQuest or WoW always made you pay2play, and while nowadays they are Free2Play, they greatly restrict F2P-players by for instance not allowing them to carry the best weapons or wear the best armor... which in MWO would not work, as this would turn the game into Pay2Win and scare of many players).

Anyone not buying premium time could have had the numbers of available mechbays restricted to like 8 in total, unless they pay.. or not being able to SPEND the GXP they earned... something like that.
So PGI could have focused more on the actual gameplay rather then new mechs every few weeks.

A very interesting question PGI should try to answer is:
where is the money ?

Does it come from "lets just shoot mechs to bits"-players
or from players who'd like to see something like what OP suggested ?

For me, a longer time to kill does not bother me; i can wait 5 minutes until i actually SEE the first enemy mech.
As long as there is tension in the game you will not recognize the time going by while you wait for the first contact with the enemy... .

So, PGI:
get CW up and running stable, then go on and give us some ACTUAL warfare. ;)

#51 Angel of Annihilation

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Infernal
  • The Infernal
  • 8,872 posts

Posted 17 December 2014 - 04:37 PM

View PostJack Corban, on 24 November 2014 - 02:28 AM, said:

What this game needs is actual maps that stop beeing Arena maps.

They need to increase the size drastically to make this game for once use actual tactics and movement.

What good is a scout Mech if you only have to walk 200m to have scouted the entire enemy team allready. "Rivercity, Forrest Colony" i'm looking at you at the moment.

"Alpine and Terra Therma" were moves in the right direction but to be honest they are too small still and are too focused on the middle of the map.
Maps 2-3 Times the Size of "Alpine" would be maps i would call worthy of a mechwarrior experience. Not only would it increase the posibilities of movement it would also increase time to kill because most teams would have to fan out to actually be able to cover given ground effectively.

Asymetric game modes would be very nice too for instance one team attacks one team defends. For this to be interesting there should be multiple goals at the same time though. Simply having one team storm onto one capturepoint and the other team defending that one capturepoint results in nothing but a big brainless brawl, like every match i've been playing ever since beta first started.

This game needs depth to battles and while i do like the idea of Community Warfare around the corner which tries to achieve context to battles the actual battles still feel brainless and half-arsed.

What i want when i play a match of MWO is i want to take my lance onto a big map i want to enter a valley without knowing theres gonna be a team sitting behind the next turn because the map ends after that and its the last place the enemy is able to hide. Looking at you "Canyon Network". I want to be actually able to ambush a lance or even a company using terrain to my advantage. The old Mechwarrior games had plenty of good scenarios and map layouts that made this type of gameplay possible. MWO as of now has not.

Don't get me wrong MWO's maps are nicely done and really nice to look at. But the question we have to ask ourselfes is do we really want to keep playing a MOBA (Multiplayer Online Battle Arena) or do we want to start playing something that resembles warfare in the Battletech Universe. I know why we don't get Solaris Arena Mode. Its because we allready have it and noone dares to say it out loud. There i did it.

What i really think this game needs to become worthy of its name is these features i'm trying to portait to you now.

1. Bigger maps! 2-3 times the size of Alpine as a standart mapsize. Maps don't need to be clutterd with objects every 5 meters to be good maps. If Itemcount is of any concern during map production.

2. Asymetric Gamemodes as

2.1 "Secure Bridgehead" One team lands using Dropships or a Dropship (preferably Union Class or similar) @ a random location on the map. The other team starts in lances scatterd across the map @ random locations.

Team one (landing party) has to kill all opposition and secure the Landingsite for the ongoing Invasion. Team two (local garrison) has to take out the Dropship and destroy 1/2 of the landing party.The local garrison has a weight advantage as the Invading Party send a reconnicance expedition first to scout the actual landingsite. (Though process behind that is that a Union Class Dropship is far from defenceless and the weight advantage should make up for that factor, secondly the Dropship is a key component to making this mode asymetrical as it is a fearsome foe and if ignored to long will become very dangerous)

2.2 "Attack on key asset" This can be anything from an HPG to a local Garrison maybe even a Palace or a Starport. The Invasion is underway and waring factions begin to engage in landlocked combat around Key Locations. The attacker has the advantage of tonnage over the defender but the defender has stationary defences and terrain advantages (Minefields, Entrenched infantry, Defensive structures like walls with guarded gates etc.) The Attacking team has to secure between 2-3 Sub targets might that be a munitions depot or a mechbay for later repair & rearming (context is allways nice) or some other form of valuable target that gives context to why the factions are fighting over this specific piece of land.

2.3 "Convoy" Team one is guarding a convoy through contestet territory. (Politicians, Royal family, mobile M.A.S.H. unit, you name it) The convoy needs to reach a certain exit location or team one needs to eliminate all hostiles in the area for a win. The Convoy takes a random predefined path across the map. Team 2 is scattered across the map @ random locations in groups of two. They got intel somthing is comming their way but they needed to fan out thin to be able to make sure they do not miss it. Team two's objective eliminate all hostiles in the area or liberate the convoy from its defenders.


These are Gamemodes that resemble Warfare in the Battletech Universe and i'm sure if you think about this for a while you will come up with even better examples.

Fact is MWO as is at the moment is stale and i think that this will be the downfall of it rather sooner then later. And the fact that PGI needs to make up tournaments for "free stuff" shows that playercounts have been dropping. Now with the addition of CW on the Horizon these or similar Gamemodes could be implemented to make battles on planets or over planets last longer be more engaging and give the game a whole lot more depth to it.

And even if you use modes like these uncoupled from CW you can make both teams switch sides after the first round. The team that does best overall after 2 rounds wins.

What i'm trying to achieve with modes like these is to stretch out battles rather then having them all center around one location on the same spot every time you play a certain map.

The key to achieving that is random placement. It forces the player and subsequential the team as a whole to adapt to a new situation each game rather then running "attack pattern Bravo" - (circle caldera counterclockwise till everyone is dead)

3. Bring back the classic Radar mechanic so players can lure enemies using active radar or try to infiltrate enemy territory using passive radar. It would also benefit the BAP and ECM mechanics as they behave completly different in these enviroments. ECM decreases the detectionrange of enemy Radar whilst not giving away its own location at the same time. Where as BAP increases Radar ranges and makes passiv Radar users detectable earlier and also detects Powered down mechs.

Discuss!

Finding any typos or grammatical errors? Keep em.

Cheers,

Jack Corban



1 Million percent on the money with this post. Been saying this sort of stuff since Closed Beta. What we got now is really Solaris IV, not Battletech. Nothing about this game feels even remotely like fighting a real battle.

#52 Lokesh

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 53 posts

Posted 17 December 2014 - 04:49 PM

1000% yes

#53 Gamuray

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 866 posts

Posted 17 December 2014 - 05:11 PM

How about a really huge, mountain leveling, hurricane making YYEESS!!

Seriously.. when I heard originally that MWO was in development I expected an experience either like the original "Mechwarrior Reboot" trailer or something like the other mechwarrior games but with better graphics. You're right on the mark that MWO is nothing more than an arena shooter. It's just a slightly scaled up solaris. EVEN CW MATCHES are just solaris, but with gates and one objective. The maps aren't even bigger, they just make the fighting area super small by adding blockades to the 2-3 paths that exist. All the other mechwarrior games had large maps that took 5-10 minutes to cross when they were small-medium sized. Even alpine takes only a minute or two...

#54 Jack Corban

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 560 posts
  • LocationPort Arthur

Posted 21 December 2014 - 07:03 PM

Seeing how Community Warfare turned out to be i think the game needs the changes i proposed sooner then later. Modes like i described should be integrated to make the fight for a planet a more engaging player experience. Also PGI needs to hire some mappers that know what they are doing because the 2 Maps we have in CW are god awful. They are basically everything is predicted would happen in my original post. 2 Teams fighting over one spot ending the game in a brainless brawl.

PGI why do you never listen when intelligent people try to show you the way.

You should really take a look at some of the MechCommander maps and how they use control towers for gates, turrets and sensor towers. And you should take a good look at how maps are open and give the attacker lots of different options to plan their attack.

I will repeat myselfe here.

- bigger maps
- random spawn locations / unit placement
- unrestricted map usage unlike the 2 funnel maps you present us with in community warfare
- asymetric game mechanics

If you cannot handle it contact me. I will draw you up some maps.

Corban out...

Edited by Jack Corban, 21 December 2014 - 07:12 PM.


#55 Davers

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,886 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanada

Posted 21 December 2014 - 07:24 PM

View PostWolf Ender, on 24 November 2014 - 02:42 AM, said:

I didn't read the whole post but I agree with the larger maps at least. The current maps all seem to funnel you into, at most, 3 ways to go, and the engagements usually happen in the same 2-3 places the vast majority of the time. It's boring and leaves no room for creativity for lance commanders.

Any deviation from the formulaic routes usually results in utter death. At least a third of the maps in the current pool should be larger than alpine is. IMHO Alpine is like a medium sized map.

This is actually by design, if you read the original Dev Logs.

#56 Jack Corban

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 560 posts
  • LocationPort Arthur

Posted 21 December 2014 - 07:27 PM

View PostDavers, on 21 December 2014 - 07:24 PM, said:

This is actually by design, if you read the original Dev Logs.


Does it make that good or just plain stupid.

#57 Davers

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,886 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanada

Posted 21 December 2014 - 07:37 PM

View PostJack Corban, on 21 December 2014 - 07:27 PM, said:


Does it make that good or just plain stupid.

It makes it a design decision. For every player who says they want larger maps there are players who complain about being left behind/taking too long to get into combat, powered down mechs hiding, and how long it takes to play a match now. Who is right?

My opinion is that with the current game modes we have now, the map sizes are fine. If there were multiple objectives that required you to split your forces, then sure, bigger maps would work. But as long as everyone just points their mech to the enemy spawn and runs….well, no need to add more run time.

#58 Jack Corban

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 560 posts
  • LocationPort Arthur

Posted 21 December 2014 - 07:51 PM

View PostDavers, on 21 December 2014 - 07:37 PM, said:

It makes it a design decision. For every player who says they want larger maps there are players who complain about being left behind/taking too long to get into combat, powered down mechs hiding, and how long it takes to play a match now. Who is right?

My opinion is that with the current game modes we have now, the map sizes are fine. If there were multiple objectives that required you to split your forces, then sure, bigger maps would work. But as long as everyone just points their mech to the enemy spawn and runs….well, no need to add more run time.


Well true. But at the same time if you have read my original post you know that multiple objectives and in general better game modes is what i am asking for. This should be in everyones intrest. I cannot believe there is people actually satisfied with what MWO has to offer at this point.

They do not utalize half the features CryEngine offers. They have not put forth a single piece of engaging content since the game first went into playtesting. They stick to their philosophy of funneling enemy teams onto each other. And i have yet to see where apart from the mechs ingame this resambles anything like a MechWarrior game.

They constantly fail to deliver the core experience me and so many other originally funded back in closed beta. Counting you in as you are a founder aswell.

Have you looked at the concept art that is in the background of this forum ? Union class Dropships performing a hot landing. Aerofighters buzzing through the sky etc. This is not impossible to create. They just have to HTFU and get into gear allready.

I'm so fed up with this game at this point i cannot even start to describe how disapointed i am.
They got the combat mechanics in and they work mostly. So when will we see anything else in terms of game development. Things that make this a Battletech worthy experience. When ? And if your answer to this is never then well you might aswell go and put a cross on the grave of dreams that MWO has become over the last 3 years.

#59 Davers

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,886 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanada

Posted 21 December 2014 - 08:05 PM

View PostJack Corban, on 21 December 2014 - 07:51 PM, said:


Well true. But at the same time if you have read my original post you know that multiple objectives and in general better game modes is what i am asking for. This should be in everyones intrest. I cannot believe there is people actually satisfied with what MWO has to offer at this point.

They do not utalize half the features CryEngine offers. They have not put forth a single piece of engaging content since the game first went into playtesting. They stick to their philosophy of funneling enemy teams onto each other. And i have yet to see where apart from the mechs ingame this resambles anything like a MechWarrior game.

They constantly fail to deliver the core experience me and so many other originally funded back in closed beta. Counting you in as you are a founder aswell.

Have you looked at the concept art that is in the background of this forum ? Union class Dropships performing a hot landing. Aerofighters buzzing through the sky etc. This is not impossible to create. They just have to HTFU and get into gear allready.

I'm so fed up with this game at this point i cannot even start to describe how disapointed i am.
They got the combat mechanics in and they work mostly. So when will we see anything else in terms of game development. Things that make this a Battletech worthy experience. When ? And if your answer to this is never then well you might aswell go and put a cross on the grave of dreams that MWO has become over the last 3 years.

I don't disagree with you. I guess I came to terms with how unambitious their design goals are. Will it ever expand beyond this? I would like to see that. I had always hoped for a hardcore military sim, as I am sure others did as well. But that was never the game that was planned. PGI kept things a little vague and we all interpreted things as we wanted them to be.

#60 Tlords

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Scythe
  • The Scythe
  • 176 posts

Posted 21 December 2014 - 08:09 PM

+1 OMG... I love the OP.

I remember the first time I saw Alpine. I thought - wow a great map. Long range combat. ERPPC fire hitting moving targets at 1000+ meters. Then Tourmaline Desert came along. I thought the same thing. Less funneling, let us determine where to engage. Give us maps that are huge in scale.

Make this game epic!!!!





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users