33 replies to this topic

[Goldhawk]

Here's an idea that I haven't seen on the forums. After your mech gets shot to hell, and if the battle is not going well, you get regulated to the "Back" as a tactical advisor and you are there to "possibly" lead a retreat to the dropship. If more then one mechwarrior gets killed and the team wants to retreat to the dropship, the DISPOSSESED mech pilots can get regulated to firing the turrets on the dropship. That might allow the wounded mechs to get away because the turrets actually hit them.

[Hayashi]

That requires there be a dropship in the first place. But if there was, what's the advantage of retreating... the remaining live 'Mechs won't have to pay repair costs?

'Cause you know, retreating from battle = instant defeat in battle.

[Angelicon]

Both teams camp around their dropship for the draw?

[Tearalum]

I like the idea with having a chance of still blowing stuff up, even after I'm dead. But Hayashi has a point. What would the game play function of a retreat be?

Or is there a "you win the game when destroying the enemy dropship"-mode, and the said destruction gets harder the more mechs you kill on the way there? That would perhaps spell awesome, tactics wise. Either you go in, guns blazing and get all the enemy mechs at your six, or you kill all enemy mechs and get a far more fierce dropship to take down.

[CyberCrist]

No retreat, no surrender. I fire at the enemy until my reactor goes critical!

[MethosFurey]

No retreat, no surrender. No guts, no galaxy. etc. etc.

I understand how a retreat option would be nice to save repair bills, but we should encourage active fighting. IMO, when you are destroyed, that's it, you sit there waiting for it to end. Maybe there could be an option to eject and then run around as an unarmed MW so you can see what is going on, but that's probably extra needless coding.

The ability to retreat could also be abused 'hey we won't want to fight these guys, they are good!' or 'Oohh.. our mechs won't match up well with those let's retreat.'

Edited by MethosFurey, 25 April 2012 - 06:40 AM.

[Hayashi]

Tearalum, on 25 April 2012 - 06:23 AM, said:

Or is there a "you win the game when destroying the enemy dropship"-mode, and the said destruction gets harder the more mechs you kill on the way there? That would perhaps spell awesome, tactics wise. Either you go in, guns blazing and get all the enemy mechs at your six, or you kill all enemy mechs and get a far more fierce dropship to take down.

This sounds like it has potential.

CyberCrist, on 25 April 2012 - 06:38 AM, said:

No retreat, no surrender. I fire at the enemy until my reactor goes critical!

Sounds like we have a Swayback pilot without heat sinks here.

[Simon Osis]

thats the stupidest idea ive heard for this game yet..............maybe its just that im a claner but RETREAT = DISHONOR

[Havoc2]

Please god no.

I say this because I have seen the following trend happening in all PvP games:
Bigger bonuses for obtaining objectives than for getting kills.
Base trading in WoW and SWTOR, collecting bags or whatnot and minimal rewards for actually killing the enemy.

One of things that I LOVED in MW was the fact that you were fighting other people, not trading objectives, not racing them to a nav point. KILL.
Same with DAoC which I played for years. Sure you can capture towers/keep (small or large objectives) but you ultimately had to FIGHT your way in.

The title on the first MW game I've ever played (MW2) stated right on the box what the game was about: 31st Century Combat.

If you want to win, fight better/smarter than the other guy. Sure retreat should be an option, but if the objective is to kill a dropship, you don't get rewarded for killing the other guy (or your reward doesn't count on you killing the other guy) and it leaves too much room IMO for people either ignoring the other team, legging them and then running off to the dropship etc.

[Hayashi]

}{avoc, on 25 April 2012 - 07:20 AM, said:

legging them and then running off to the dropship etc.

If there is an advantage to dying, then, yup, we'd see legging 'Mechs very often. Along with shooting off all the hardpoints of 'Mechs and letting them run around like headless chickens.

[Havoc2]

Hayashi, on 25 April 2012 - 07:23 AM, said:

If there is an advantage to dying, then, yup, we'd see legging 'Mechs very often. Along with shooting off all the hardpoints of 'Mechs and letting them run around like headless chickens.

Yeah. . . . I used to do that to Nova Cats in MW4 all the time, arms gone and it's pretty much useless.

[LakeDaemon]

This is another fun idea that unfortunately doesn’t fall into the scope of the game. There were a lot of ideas sort of like this in past threads but, really, the game focuses on mech vs mech role combat and not combined arms like combatant drop ships or turrets. Maybe in the future after launch if they decide to add extra dimensions like this to the game we might see something like this but I doubt it.

[Motionless]

So far the only official game modes I've heard of are limited respawn games. Meaning the penalty for death is ultimately losing the game, and possibly spectating the rest of the round if you weren't the last person to die.

Hayashi, on 25 April 2012 - 07:23 AM, said:

If there is an advantage to dying, then, yup, we'd see legging 'Mechs very often. Along with shooting off all the hardpoints of 'Mechs and letting them run around like headless chickens.

Well, in the drop ship game mode dying while you still have mechs in the dropship (this dropship in is in the air, remember the MWO trailer of the atlas being dropped) then death means you get a new mech, while you may have been destroyed in something with no weapon systems left. Which is why you need some sort of 'kill-myself' feature if your mech is 100% useless or you're bugged out and stuck in a wall somewhere, eject or self-destruct.

[Hayashi]

Motionless, on 25 April 2012 - 08:04 AM, said:

Which is why you need some sort of 'kill-myself' feature if your mech is 100% useless or you're bugged out and stuck in a wall somewhere, eject or self-destruct.

[Goldhawk]

Well, after reading many of the postings, it just seems like people are going to be super tentative about their warfare tactics. It's called, oh no! My Catapult is out of missiles, I'm going to retreat to the back! Bleh. It doesn't seem like there is any danger....

[MaddMaxx]

Goldhawk, on 25 April 2012 - 09:12 AM, said:

Well, after reading many of the postings, it just seems like people are going to be super tentative about their warfare tactics. It's called, oh no! My Catapult is out of missiles, I'm going to retreat to the back! Bleh. It doesn't seem like there is any danger....

With no Missiles, 10T of Armor and 4 Medium Lasers, the only place a Catapult should be going is forward with the Commander...

[Pvt Dancer]

The simple answer to the OP's suggestion is hit escape after you die and go play another mech while the first battle finishes up.

Rinse, wash, repeat

It has been stressed by the Devs that this is Mech on Mech combat and that there will be no 'naked dudes' (mech pilots) running around the battlefield, much less vehicles, dropship gunners, ect. They have talked about mods with multiple mechs (effectivily a Lance) that you just drop in the next mech after your first has been destroyed, but those matches sound like they may take forever, specially if you rather be grinding on a single mech. But since your mech is never truily destroyed and you never really die, it is an option.

[Havoc2]

Goldhawk, on 25 April 2012 - 09:12 AM, said:

Well, after reading many of the postings, it just seems like people are going to be super tentative about their warfare tactics. It's called, oh no! My Catapult is out of missiles, I'm going to retreat to the back! Bleh. It doesn't seem like there is any danger....

You'll still be more productive by firing until you run out of missiles and then running hit-and-run / drawing fire than you would be by firing until you run out of missiles and ejecting so you could ride a turret in the off chance that your lancemates try and retreat.

[JadeTimberwolf]

Goldhawk, on 25 April 2012 - 09:12 AM, said:

Well, after reading many of the postings, it just seems like people are going to be super tentative about their warfare tactics. It's called, oh no! My Catapult is out of missiles, I'm going to retreat to the back! Bleh. It doesn't seem like there is any danger....

I can see using a tactical retreat for situations like this.... If they include field repair/reload bays in the game. In that case the long range support might run out of ammo all they would need to do is back off reload and return as long as they have a bay to return to.

[AlphaKale]

The only good tactical retreat is one where you are drawing the opfor into an ambush.