13 replies to this topic

[AWOL 01]

This idea comes from the same reasoning and uses some of the basic ideas from ScarecrowES's Rush gamemode idea and Rebas Kradd's Invasion gamemode idea, so if you haven't read them, you should check them out first!

ScarecrowES's Thread: http://mwomercs.com/...well-ever-need/

Rebas Kradd's Thread: http://mwomercs.com/...igger-maps-fun/

Right now, we have separate maps for Invasion and Quick Play, and this comes with a number of problems. One, players new to FP have no way to learn the maps other than through "trial by fire" - not a good way to retain players. Two, PGI has to create twice as many maps if they want to evenly produce content for both QP and FP players.

We also have problems with the Invasion gamemode itself, which have already been outlined in numerous threads, so I assume they are common knowledge.

My suggestions are:
1. Combine similar QP and FP maps into one map (for example, Grim Portico and Grim Plexus).
2. Remake maps without commonly themed QP or FP maps so that they are playable on both modes (maps like Vitric Forge and Viridian Bog).
3. Improve the Invasion gamemodes with the changes listed below.

I will use Polar Highlands and Boreal Vault as an example. Excuse the image if it is a little too crude.


Map Legend:
Blue Stars: Initial Invader Dropzone
A, B, & C: Initial Defender Dropzone
Red Stars: Final Defender Dropzone
Yellow Lines: Sensor Range
Red Lines: Base Walls
Gs: Gates
X: Sensor Control/Power
O: Final Objective

This map shows Polar Highlands overlayed with Boreal Vault, since they have similar themes/assets.

The gamemode would work in phases:
The invading team drops on the blue stars while the defenders initially drop on A, B, and C.
The first objective of the invaders is then to capture these points, which become their new drop zones. If the lance on the far right captures C, those defenders will be sent to the spawn points inside the base (red stars). If not, defenders will continue to spawn at C.
The invaders can then choose to rush the base, or take down the sensor net, which provides the defenders with enemy positions inside its range (similar to a UAV). However, the sensor control can be targeted by defenders from inside the base, so trying to destroy it is not easy, and will likely result in casualties.
The final objective can be an orbital cannon, or it could be a satellite/artillery/air control depending on Scouting bonuses. Once inside the base the match would play out similar to the current Invasion mode.

What do you guys think? There's more I could say but I wanted to keep the initial post short, so I understand if there are questions.

Edit - additional map examples:

Grim Portico and Grim Plexus:

Spoiler

Hellebore Springs and Canyon Network:

Spoiler

Edited by AWOL 01, 14 August 2016 - 09:15 AM.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Good idea. It would make an interesting mode for a "Raid" for mech parts of supplies. A very lore friendly theme which is very prominent in battletech, but we have yet to see anything of the sort.

[patataman]

Looks nice. A few thoughts coming to my mind:

- Spreading the initial deployment areas further could promote lance vs lance engagements.
- The polar highlands half of the map feels a bit empty with all the objectives near the base. Still, the objectives being close to the base make sense.
- How about a turret generator outside of boreal beta gate? That way the attackers can chose between 2 external objectives once they take the advanced LZs and focus one, or split and attack both.
- Actually... this mixed map makes a lot of sense for scout mode, with the attackers gathering intel about the enemy base and defenders trying to stop them.

I'm just brainstorming, as i said, i like the idea behind this map, with at least the first wave fighting outside the walls and the defenders being deployed in the rear once the A, B and C LZs are lost.

Hmmm can the defenders abandon the advanced LZs? If not, the attackers could just deathball, conquer A and B, while leaving C alone, then camp the lance spawning in C until they loose all their mechs and proceed to rolfstomp the A and B lances 12 vs 8.

[AztecD]

also drop 1/1/1/1 on those invasion points

[Mechwarrior1441491]

More of our modes need objective based decision making. The drop commander has a choice of say 6 supply dumps on a map. 3 of these need to be destroyed. Attacker plugs in which 3. Defender doesn't know which supply dumps are the target. Scouting the enemy is needed.

[ScarecrowES]

Mechwarrior1441491, on 11 August 2016 - 02:27 PM, said:

More of our modes need objective based decision making. The drop commander has a choice of say 6 supply dumps on a map. 3 of these need to be destroyed. Attacker plugs in which 3. Defender doesn't know which supply dumps are the target. Scouting the enemy is needed.

The opportunity for expanding on objective types and implementation is quite good within MWO's basic systems. A hallmark of my Rush-based game mode (linked in the OP) is the use of varied objectives and map design to create something that feels like a real mission. With each map having a different scenario - depending on which side of the map the attackers are chosen to start from - and different types of objectives in each stage of the scenario, there is certainly some emphasis on including some objectives that are more cerebral in nature. I wouldn't want to play stage after stage where you're just blowing up up the next mcguffin the game throws at you.

The idea you've put forth here is one I had thought to include if PGI ever asked for specific stage objectives. Much of the tuning for the multiple simultaneous objective sets are designed to do exactly what you've described... force attackers and defenders to make tough choices and set real strategies. When you have many possible opportunities to win - needing only a few to be successful - it affords a lot different options for how to tackle a given stage. It's much more dynamic and interesting than what we have now, for sure.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Could be a drop commander could choose between intel based objectives. Destroy objectives. capture supplies objective. destruction of a certain amount of enemy force or a combination of a few. The wait time for people to ready up is enough for a drop commander to choose from a few choices and then the targets. If no commander chooses, match randomly decides objectives.

[Troutmonkey]

Any RUSH style mode gets a like from me. Much better than the current objective structure.

[AWOL 01]

patataman, on 11 August 2016 - 01:52 PM, said:

Looks nice. A few thoughts coming to my mind:

- Spreading the initial deployment areas further could promote lance vs lance engagements.
- The polar highlands half of the map feels a bit empty with all the objectives near the base. Still, the objectives being close to the base make sense.
- How about a turret generator outside of boreal beta gate? That way the attackers can chose between 2 external objectives once they take the advanced LZs and focus one, or split and attack both.
- Actually... this mixed map makes a lot of sense for scout mode, with the attackers gathering intel about the enemy base and defenders trying to stop them.

I'm just brainstorming, as i said, i like the idea behind this map, with at least the first wave fighting outside the walls and the defenders being deployed in the rear once the A, B and C LZs are lost.

Hmmm can the defenders abandon the advanced LZs? If not, the attackers could just deathball, conquer A and B, while leaving C alone, then camp the lance spawning in C until they loose all their mechs and proceed to rolfstomp the A and B lances 12 vs 8.

A lot of these are exactly what I was thinking but I left out some of the specifics for the sake of length.

- the Invader LZs could definitely be moved back/spread out more to promote lance-on-lance fights. I also placed the Defender's initial spawn points (A, B, C) on/near the outposts on Polar Highlands. Some of them even look like mech hangars:


- the Polar Highlands side is meant to play out similar to a QP match, with mostly skirmishes going on outside the base, but I could see other objectives being available too. Any suggestions? Maybe some MechCommander-esque salvage containers for extra C-bill rewards?

- a turret generator would be a great idea. It would split the lanes of attack and promote very different games every time. The attackers could split and risk one group being destroyed by all 12 defenders while the other gets lucky with no opposition, or they could stick together for better defense, but a much longer time to complete both objectives. Same for the defenders - they could split up to defend both and risk being overrun, or group up and abandon one of the generators.

- having a base in all game modes - even if it's empty/abandoned - could be really cool. I also thought about having a base on both sides, but decided it wouldn't make sense for an invading team to have a major installation a few kilometers from an enemy base.

Also, I'm proposing doing this to most of the maps in-game, not just Polar and Boreal. I'll try to get another example up later today.

I didn't think of the attackers not capping and farming kills instead, so thanks for bringing that up. Maybe you could pick between spawn points after your first death? There could also be 3 different spawns in the base too - some by the bottom near the gates and some near the objective? This could also be used defensively; by dropping in a hot LZ the dropship could damage some of the attackers.

[Davegt27]

Awol 1 what are the win conditions?

say if time runs out ?

[AWOL 01]

Davegt27, on 12 August 2016 - 05:09 AM, said:

Awol 1 what are the win conditions?

say if time runs out ?

I was originally assuming it would be the same as the current win conditions, but after thinking about it I honk it would be cool to have tiered win conditions with rewards changing depending on how well you do. For example:

Achieving no objectives results in a small/no C-bill reward, with no gain to planetary possession.
Capturing the LZs results in a decent C-bill reward, and a small increase in planetary possession.
Destroying the generator(s) would each provide a greater reward.
Destroying the final objective inside the base would provide massive rewards, and a large increase in your faction's possession of the planet.
Along with achieving objectives, there would be rewards for destroying all enemy mechs.

They could also implement extractions, so that the attackers could achieve some of the objectives and leave before suffering too many losses, but it would take longer to conquer the planet

[Rebas Kradd]

AWOL 01, on 12 August 2016 - 04:13 AM, said:

A lot of these are exactly what I was thinking but I left out some of the specifics for the sake of length.

- the Invader LZs could definitely be moved back/spread out more to promote lance-on-lance fights. I also placed the Defender's initial spawn points (A, B, C) on/near the outposts on Polar Highlands. Some of them even look like mech hangars:

- a turret generator would be a great idea. It would split the lanes of attack and promote very different games every time. The attackers could split and risk one group being destroyed by all 12 defenders while the other gets lucky with no opposition, or they could stick together for better defense, but a much longer time to complete both objectives. Same for the defenders - they could split up to defend both and risk being overrun, or group up and abandon one of the generators.

I hate to be critical after you linked my Front Rush proposal, but I do want to address this...

The mechanics you're suggesting so far are unlikely to stop deathballing. You could drop two enemy lances right in front of each other's faces and if they still have the option to retreat, regroup, and come back with 12 mechs against the other 4, they'll do it. Even if it takes time. It's the prisoner's dilemma - the other team will probably do it, so why wouldn't we?

You have to introduce a mechanic that provide some advantage to deathballing OVER outnumbering the enemy team. That's pretty hard to do, given that outnumbering is the likeliest strategy to kill the enemy with this many mechs in the game. Even accomplishing the objective won't really do it - for some people, killing is the only objective they're interested in.

With that in mind, the only way to really incentivize lance warfare is to actually make it strengthen the enemy team somehow. Your suggestion of extra caches was close, but instead of C-Bills, make it artillery emplacements or some other benefit that actually boosts your team's real-time strength. (My idea was cap points that give you artillery, PLUS a new spawn point closer to the front.)

[AWOL 01]

Rebas Kradd, on 12 August 2016 - 09:34 AM, said:

I hate to be critical after you linked my Front Rush proposal, but I do want to address this...

The mechanics you're suggesting so far are unlikely to stop deathballing. You could drop two enemy lances right in front of each other's faces and if they still have the option to retreat, regroup, and come back with 12 mechs against the other 4, they'll do it. Even if it takes time. It's the prisoner's dilemma - the other team will probably do it, so why wouldn't we?

You have to introduce a mechanic that provide some advantage to deathballing OVER outnumbering the enemy team. That's pretty hard to do, given that outnumbering is the likeliest strategy to kill the enemy with this many mechs in the game. Even accomplishing the objective won't really do it - for some people, killing is the only objective they're interested in.

With that in mind, the only way to really incentivize lance warfare is to actually make it strengthen the enemy team somehow. Your suggestion of extra caches was close, but instead of C-Bills, make it artillery emplacements or some other benefit that actually boosts your team's real-time strength. (My idea was cap points that give you artillery, PLUS a new spawn point closer to the front.)

Don't worry about it, this is by no means a finished idea so critiques are welcome.

I agree that this idea is not likely to stop deathballing, but that wasn't really my main focus in the first place - I wanted to focus on utilizing PGI's current assets to their full potential by combining/remaking maps to be used in both FP and QP, and also modifying the current Invasion mode into one that has more depth and options.

I do agree though that deathballing is pretty detrimental to gameplay and needs to be discouraged.

I think one of the best ways to split up the team is to have multiple objectives that need to be protected/captured/destroyed simultaneously. That's why I like the idea of having multiple LZs and multiple generators - there are three different areas of interest. And to prevent either team from deathballing through them all, there needs to be a time incentive.

For example, the defenders could have 3 generator stations for to the turrets, gates, and sensor net (each separate buildings). If the sensor net is crossed or one of the stations is attacked, the base goes into alert and the turrets/defenses come online in 1 to 2 minutes. All 3 stations must be controlled/destroyed by the attackers to get inside the base. If the control is destroyed that system is down in that area, but if it's captured it stays in operation (ie attackers can open that gate and the turrets defend them once all other stations are destroyed/captured). This way, it would be best to attack all 3 simultaneously, and if all 3 are being attacked, it would be best to split up and defend them too.

It's just an idea, and any other suggestions or criticisms are welcome.

BTW Rebas, I would much rather have your gamemode, but it seems a little too ambitious for PGI to me, so I figured this would be a little easier to implement in the short term.

[AWOL 01]

Updated the OP with additional map examples.