132 replies to this topic

[Hastega]

Rakashan, on 27 February 2013 - 03:50 PM, said:

It's easy to cast blame in this case. Everyone who wanted to engage the enemy but failed to do so is to blame. If you were one of the people on that list, then wear the mantle with pride. You could have 1) scouted, 2) defended, 3) gotten other people to defend, 4) not rushed the enemy cap.

If you want to engage the enemy, then it's easy to make that happen.

So you are promoting Lone Wolf play in a team-based game. Eight players rarely agree on what course of action to take, but as is often the case, the majority rules (or the majority defaults to "follow the ECM Atlas"). ECM players in general tend to be the leaders of the pack as everyone wants to benefit from the coverage. I'm not too sure how effective scouting is for an LRM boat moving at 70 kph but I'll look into it, thank you for your suggestion.

[Kyutaru]

Tarman, on 27 February 2013 - 03:54 PM, said:

Hrm, by your own admission this barely even happens unless someone sucks at opening their eyes. So open your eyes.

I believe his point was that the scouts failed, not him. As much as I would love to play every position on the team at the same time to guarantee results I don't think it's possible. We can't play for our team. I do think base caps need to be looked at because it's not a match type that works with solo queues. Other FPS games replace it with Assault/Defend where one team is the attacker and one team is the defender. The same objective style gameplay exists but neither team is unclear in where they should be and what they should be doing. Puzzling all of that out in the brief moments before a PUG match starts is a nightmare.

[Funkadelic Mayhem]

Or take the base out of assault. Play conquest if you want a CTF type of game. All assault is is conquest with less to cap.

[Tarman]

Kyutaru, on 27 February 2013 - 04:19 PM, said:

I believe his point was that the scouts failed, not him. As much as I would love to play every position on the team at the same time to guarantee results I don't think it's possible. We can't play for our team. I do think base caps need to be looked at because it's not a match type that works with solo queues. Other FPS games replace it with Assault/Defend where one team is the attacker and one team is the defender. The same objective style gameplay exists but neither team is unclear in where they should be and what they should be doing. Puzzling all of that out in the brief moments before a PUG match starts is a nightmare.

To me his point sounds like he wants to make sure there's a huge dustup in every single match. That's only going to occur in a deathmatch mode, because there won't be other options to take advantage of. And if doublerush caps only happen as rarely as he says, then rejigging the game to force a brawl every match isn't really needed.

I'm all for more game modes but this one is playable as is. OP is playing with a DM mentality in a non-DM environment.

[Mystere]

Mercules, on 27 February 2013 - 03:20 PM, said:

I did. The easiest solution is still learning how to play.

No. Learning is very hard. QQ is much easier.

[Hastega]

Mystere, on 27 February 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

No. Learning is very hard. QQ is much easier.

No, constructive posting is very hard, trolling is much easier.

[Mystere]

Hastega, on 27 February 2013 - 05:20 PM, said:

No, constructive posting is very hard, trolling is much easier.

Well, given that people have already told you that your idea of base defense is so one dimensional and that there are other ways to do it (and on a problem that you yourself admit only happens around 5% of the time), what else can we say or do?

Edited by Mystere, 27 February 2013 - 05:33 PM.

[Vahnn]

Brilig, on 26 February 2013 - 11:18 PM, said:

I'd prefer a mechanic that made a base uncap back to neutral unless there was a mech standing on it. Have it so you can't win by cap unless bot bases are fully captured. That could ensure that people will have to fight each other at some point.

Add this or I quit.

[Merebear59]

I say give the base rader, so freindly units can rain missiles on atttacking units

[Deamhan]

Defend your base...

There isn't anything more fun than two teams standing at their base waiting for the other team to show up. Except that the other team is not coming.

So you Split your team up. The other team doesn't and either the assaulting group has to face an entire team of defenders (by the time reinforcements come it is too late) or the group that stayed back and defends faces an entire team of assaulters (again, reinforcement won't make it back in time).

If the opposing group goes to help, by the time they get their, the first group will be all but gone and the enemy team will continue the roll.

"Defend your base" is a **** poor excuse and a fool's tactic in a game like this. Numbers mean too much.


Either design the maps to force the teams to cross paths, or design the objectives so that both teams compete over common cap points.

Alternatively put a lock on caps until one side has any combination of 3 "dead" or "disconnected".

[jay35]

The real answer is to offer other game modes that don't involve base capture mechanics so people who don't want to play that mode don't have to. Problem solved.

[Galathon Redd]

Mystere, on 26 February 2013 - 11:27 PM, said:

I have something even better and does not require any changes by PGI:

Defend your base.

I regret that I have but one "LIKE" to give...

[Cest7]

lol it takes atleast 5 minutes for most of the team to walk to the base anyway......

The real solution is put the scoring back to how it used to be for assault and use the assault scoring for a deathmatch gametype.

Edited by Cest7, 27 February 2013 - 07:56 PM.

[Oy of MidWorld]

Just give us Team DeathMatch! And for anyone advising to suck it up and defend that stupid red square: I won't!

Because i don't want to.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Remove the damn bases from Assault entirely. Why are they even here? They serve no purpose except to ruin the matches for people wanting a TDM. Put bases in other modes. Or leave Assault as is and CREATE a TDM that doesn't have one. Either way, PROBLEM SOLVED.

Why is this so hard for Piranha? I've never know.

[CrashieJ]

Each base has a couple LRM, Pulse and Ballistic turrets that must be destroyed before being open to capture.

this forces the mech that wants to capture have to try different tactics and destroy the defending structures before capping
this helps whoever is defending the base at least Survive longer than alone and atleast have a freaking chance against 6 other cappers.

[Rocdocta]

having base cap means we light pilots have a role ie looking for the enemy. MWO calls itself a thinking gamers FPS. if you want solo play where each player just shoots and scoots then try a different game. As it is the mode is very smart and forces each group to act tactically.

1. dont want to be base capped? send out a couple o fast scouts for the obvious assault routes. defending your base does not mean everyone literally stands on the base marker and waits. The little guys find the enemy and then the big boys may move up. The scouts can then flee back to their base area in case an enemy scout pops up. Or they can move on to cap the enemy base. i dont have voice but do a quick type and let everyone know where the enemy main force is after getting to cover. These are tactics. if you have 8 heavy/*** mechs dematerialise out of no where near your cap then your own scouts have failed you.

2. imagine a game without capping. tactics would be 2 large blobs converging on each other till one wins or the scouts flee and hide. That would get old fast.

idea 1. means every mech has an important place and is not inferior to the other. Idea 2. means everyone would be in *** mechs and frying any scout that gets near.

The very simple key that works in real life is
1. information is everything and dont commit your big guns until you know what the enemy is doing. Has worked since the yaer 0. Will still work in 3050.

whenever i read posts like these i think...uuurgh another assailt pilot is annoyed cos he slowly stomped his way into doing nothing all game and wasnt supported by his mates.

[Hastega]

Rocdocta, on 27 February 2013 - 09:33 PM, said:

Constructive post

Thank you very much for your post, I can respect your point of view.

[Terror Teddy]

Mystere, on 26 February 2013 - 11:27 PM, said:

I have something even better and does not require any changes by PGI:

Defend your base.

Yea, 20% stay and defend and get ROFLSTOMPED by the congaline of enemies as (usually) BOTH lances tend to beeline for the enemy base.

The mechanic needs changing.

[Rocdocta]

Hastega, on 27 February 2013 - 10:02 PM, said:

Thank you very much for your post, I can respect your point of view.

Thanks. I like playing smash face as much as the next guy, but bases add so much subtle depth into the tactics. I hope i didnt come across as a jerk to people that dont like the mode. Maybe they should have a death match mode without bases but rely on the timer and so formula to determine the winner ie % of starting armour/components left.