Jump to content

Convoys In Incursion...


9 replies to this topic

Poll: Approval Rating (9 member(s) have cast votes)

To what extent do you approve of this idea?

  1. I strongly approve. (4 votes [44.44%])

    Percentage of vote: 44.44%

  2. I slightly approve. (3 votes [33.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.33%

  3. Unsure. (1 votes [11.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.11%

  4. I slightly dissaprove. (1 votes [11.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.11%

  5. I strongly dissaprove. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Livaria

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • 405 posts

Posted 28 April 2017 - 10:37 AM

I think it'd be a much nicer replacement to the power cell fetch system that we have now. Mechs don't have to risk as much by walking into the open or by separating themselves from the team. It'd also reduce the amount of tedious travel work that players have to do by making extremely long journeys back and fourth in order to obtain power.

Essentially all that would happen, is that during every interval of 3 minutes or so; a small convoy, would have to be protected. Then the amount of power cells that a team gains is influenced by how many vehicles successfully make it to the base without being destroyed.

Once the convoy arrives, then the power cells would spawn at the base, and are free to be spent on any tower. The convoy would likely consist of 3 transport vehicles, and an optional 3 defending battle tanks.

EDIT#1: In order to prevent spawn camping It's also suggested that convoys have alternating spawn locations. Spawn locations should also be positioned slightly closer to the allied base than the enemy base and spawn near the edge of the map.

Edited by Livaria, 29 April 2017 - 11:42 AM.


#2 Livaria

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • 405 posts

Posted 29 April 2017 - 09:24 AM

Remember that I'm still interested in hearing opinions, This is not just poll-only. I want to know what you guys think.

Edited by Livaria, 29 April 2017 - 09:46 AM.


#3 Marcel Bekker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 131 posts

Posted 29 April 2017 - 10:44 AM

Makes a lot more sense than the "carry powercell with your armless, handless Mech". Posted Image
It would also add more tactical options, especially for fast Mechs. A slow Mech can't respond to a raider attacking a convoy fast enough, a fast Mech can. This gives especially Mechs that sacrifice weapons for speed and agility(ECM Spider for example) a more useful role to fullfil, akin to what their actual role is in canon Battletech.

In summary, I'm all for it!

#4 Livaria

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • 405 posts

Posted 29 April 2017 - 11:38 AM

Good to hear. Cannon is a good benefit to point out at least. It may not be the most important of all features; but It's worthwhile. There does need to be some priority to retain some of the Battletech identity and familiarity.

When all is said and done however; I just think it'd make the process of power cell acquisition a lot more manageable. By the way; I will continue to update the original proposal to improve it's mechanics. But I'm rather optimistic that there shouldn't be too many issues regarding gameplay.

Edited by Livaria, 29 April 2017 - 11:41 AM.


#5 Generic Internetter

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 273 posts

Posted 30 April 2017 - 01:14 AM

1. Incursion is mostly fine, the community meta just hasn't caught up yet. We're still at phase 1.5 where people have learned to zerg the enemy base, but are starting to counter this by waiting in their own base to defend. Some of the most fun battles I've had were defending against zergers and, it's worth noting, we won every single time we defend.

2. Don't overcomplicate, at least not for quick match. New, more complex game modes should be trialed in quick match temporarily, but then later moved to their rightful place in FW (EG: Incursion).

3. Even though I only skim-read it, what you are suggesting already seems great, but I think it would be good enough to be it's own "Convoy" game mode.
The AI exists for convoys already, since they would use the same navigation routines as a VIP.
The AI exists for shooting targets, since they would use the same AI as base turrents and/or dropships.

So grab a bunch of small vehicle models from MW4, put together some convoy AI as explained above and BOOM you've got the tools to make a whole new game mode(s).

#6 Metafox

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 360 posts

Posted 30 April 2017 - 02:58 AM

I kind of like the idea. Another option might be to have a convoy for each power cell/tower. Each convoy could continually go back and forth delivering a cell every two or three minutes, spaced apart so that the two teams' convoys don't meet in the middle. Once a convoy is destroyed, it's gone for the rest of the match.

#7 Livaria

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • 405 posts

Posted 30 April 2017 - 08:12 AM

View PostGeneric Internetter, on 30 April 2017 - 01:14 AM, said:

1. Incursion is mostly fine, the community meta just hasn't caught up yet. We're still at phase 1.5 where people have learned to zerg the enemy base, but are starting to counter this by waiting in their own base to defend. Some of the most fun battles I've had were defending against zergers and, it's worth noting, we won every single time we defend.

2. Don't overcomplicate, at least not for quick match. New, more complex game modes should be trialed in quick match temporarily, but then later moved to their rightful place in FW (EG: Incursion).

3. Even though I only skim-read it, what you are suggesting already seems great, but I think it would be good enough to be it's own "Convoy" game mode.
The AI exists for convoys already, since they would use the same navigation routines as a VIP.
The AI exists for shooting targets, since they would use the same AI as base turrents and/or dropships.

So grab a bunch of small vehicle models from MW4, put together some convoy AI as explained above and BOOM you've got the tools to make a whole new game mode(s).


Sure, but how does this complicate things further? A new game mode isn't really within the agenda of this topic.

Edited by Livaria, 30 April 2017 - 08:13 AM.


#8 toncrell

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Nova Captain
  • Nova Captain
  • 43 posts

Posted 03 May 2017 - 08:16 AM

this would rock so much. Its about time we killed something other then mechs. the world of mech warrior always included armory an soldiers. if their looking to make a splash,or do something different they need to add lrm srm carriers Po tanks, Static defence shields ( its lore its in the jade falcon trilogy) and helicopters etc... this WILL shake up game by how we chose mechs and attack and defend. I don think this should be a stand alone mode though it should be added to all modes that way we must choose what we attack or defend correctly. We seem to be content just playing a 2 dimensional game when we fell in love with a 3 dimensional game and books. the only reason this shouldn't be done is if they cant program the tanks and extras. They want a new thing then this I it Guns will always be guns, targets though give the guns something to shoot at that's worthwhile.

#9 Livaria

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • 405 posts

Posted 04 May 2017 - 06:18 PM

At least we have turrets... But yeah the game could perhaps use some variety.

#10 Reno Blade

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 3,459 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 04 May 2017 - 09:58 PM

Yes please!
The Convoy vehicles could go paths similar to the Escort mode sami-random pathing.

And having the convoy located requies scouting (using ECM and some AMS equipped tanks).
Then if you don't hunt down the enemies convoy, they will have 3-5 cells every 5 minutes to power their towers.
The existing generators could be moved to the outskirts and the convoys would just be a means to get automatic delivery of power cores for defense, so you don't need to leave the base.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users