Jump to content

Possible Fix For Point Capping Wins In Conquest


2 replies to this topic

#1 Arctourus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 482 posts

Posted 18 March 2013 - 04:49 AM

I hear a lot of complaining about teams winning through point capping in conquest mode, especially when it's one light left on a team who can outrun opposing heavies. So here's a thought. Instead of making the three mid-map "bases" make points, instead make taking and holding them give you some other sort of tactical advantage. Say, if you hold a specific point and a member of your team enters it and shuts down, that player will see a slow repair to damaged armor or a slow replenishment of ammunition. Keep in mind, the repair/refit would come somewhat slowly and require shutdown to keep this from being "overpowered."

Another option for controlling these mini bases could be the activation of some sort of base-centered module. Perhaps holding one point would activate an advanced radar around that point that would show enemy mechs close to it on your tactical map. Maybe there could be a low-powered turret that will activate when you own it...perhaps an lrm 5/10 or a single LLas or ERLLAs. Something that would make holding them beneficial but prevent points-based wins.

#2 Arktiswylf

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 18 March 2013 - 05:03 AM

But the whole idea of this game mode is to cap points and win the game. If the idea was to only win via killing enemy mechs than this would simply be a "Team Death-match"

And remember they need to keep as close as possible to lore.

#3 Arctourus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 482 posts

Posted 18 March 2013 - 05:12 AM

Then maybe it can be a new mode of play...I personally like the win by points option. I just hear a lot of people gripe about it. This just seemed like an alternative that would include the competitive struggle to take and keep parts of the map while wiping away the complaints of a good fight suddenly ended due to point accumulation.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users