327 replies to this topic

[Mercules]

Teralitha, on 27 March 2013 - 09:05 AM, said:

Why are you rewording what the poll choices actually are? Just so you can argue, thats why. The polls choices are correctly defined. Your just another troll seeking a pointless argument.

If your really so against TDM, start your own topic about it.



Wrong again. The tactics you can use to destroy all enemy mechs are still dictated by the presence of base capping. Therefore they are limited. No bases... no limit. Its a pretty simple concept.

Also, if the mode that people like to play is still a choice, there is absolutley ZERO reason why they would care if other game modes exist. NONE strawman....

You understand that any product like this has limited resources. When those resources are spent on A they are not spent on B. Adding A to the game means we either don't get B or don't get it until much later. Adding another game mode is going to take resources. If we are going to add another game mode I would prefer it has an actual different mode of play. Conquest was a slight change, but splitting up the bases did lead to battles in different areas and non-blob tactics.


I am not rewording the poll choices. I am explaining to you the meaning behind the wording you used. While not all answers need to be binary choices this poll is strongly biased in the "Yes" direction the two options are "Yes" and "Sure".

[Zeh]

Yea, bad poll. Voted for the only thing that wasn't "YES", but still would like to have voted "No."

It won't ADD anything to the game except simplicity IMO.

Other modes, like koth, a real attack/defend scenario? Sure. TDM? No.

[Teralitha]

Mercules, on 27 March 2013 - 09:25 AM, said:

You understand that any product like this has limited resources. When those resources are spent on A they are not spent on B. Adding A to the game means we either don't get B or don't get it until much later. Adding another game mode is going to take resources. If we are going to add another game mode I would prefer it has an actual different mode of play. Conquest was a slight change, but splitting up the bases did lead to battles in different areas and non-blob tactics.


I am not rewording the poll choices. I am explaining to you the meaning behind the wording you used. While not all answers need to be binary choices this poll is strongly biased in the "Yes" direction the two options are "Yes" and "Sure".

I know what the meaning behind my own words are, you just dont get it. Do you see anyone else spewing the same garbage as you are? No, because they got it.

I know it will take resources. Everything being added to the game does. It seems to me that most ppl agree it would be resources well spent to add TDM. Its time they stop spending resources on things that break the game and spending it on things that mend it.

Edited by Teralitha, 27 March 2013 - 09:41 AM.

[Anton Shiningstar]

Actually its because we are tired of this argument. TDM has no meaning, no goal. no reward. Capturing a base can yield tech, intelligence supplies. Team death match just blows stuff up. Lame scenario.

[Teralitha]

Poll results so far reveal that a majority of players would choose to play TDM over other current game modes. Just like we keep telling you devs... alot of players want it. 62%. it just might be worth implementing after all.

Anton Shiningstar, on 27 March 2013 - 09:42 AM, said:

Actually its because we are tired of this argument. TDM has no meaning, no goal. no reward. Capturing a base can yield tech, intelligence supplies. Team death match just blows stuff up. Lame scenario.

Opinion. Not fact, sorry...

Edited by Teralitha, 27 March 2013 - 09:47 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

OP:

If we have a Team Deathmatch option... wouldn't it be neat to have the ability to challenge another Clan/House to a ToG (Trial of Grievance) ... or ToA (Trial of Annihilation)?

[Noobzorz]

Teralitha, on 27 March 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

Its a nice post, but this statement has no relevance to the rest of your post.

A true assault mode should have only 1 base, 1 attacker, 1 defender. I would like that mode. But for the high end competitive team play, only TDM will suffice. And high end competitive play is what Im here for. If we dont have it, there is no reason for players like me to waste our time here.

Instead of calling it Team death match, it should be called "Ranked Play", and assault can be for everyone else.

For high end competitive play, TDM is THE ABSOLUTE WORST possible mode. PERIOD. I can't believe I'm reading this. It's. . . it's so dumb I don't know what to say about it.

There is a reason why competitive BF3, CoD 1-9, TF2, CS1.6, CS:S, UT, Gears, Halos 1-4+Reach+ODST, etc. etc. etc. has no team deathmatch. In fact, literally the only game I can think of with a competitive deathmatch scene is Quake III, and that's 1v1 only.

I suspect what you're implying is that "capping is for noobs and team deathmatch is for pros" and that is so awe-inspiringly moronic that it makes me wonder if I shouldn't change my vote to "no."

[Teralitha]

Mister Blastman, on 27 March 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

OP:

If we have a Team Deathmatch option... wouldn't it be neat to have the ability to challenge another Clan/House to a ToG (Trial of Grievance) ... or ToA (Trial of Annihilation)?

Well we really only need a pregame lobby for that, but yes I would prefer to do that kind of thing in TDM, so there is no way to soil the outcome.

[Mercules]

Teralitha, on 27 March 2013 - 09:38 AM, said:

I know what the meaning behind my own words are, you just dont get it. Do you see anyone else spewing the same garbage as you are? No, because they got it.
I know it will take resources. Everything being added to the game does. It seems to me that most ppl agree it would be resources well spent to add TDM. Its time they stop spending resources on things that break the game and spending it on things that mend it.

Zeh, on 27 March 2013 - 09:29 AM, said:

Yea, bad poll. Voted for the only thing that wasn't "YES", but still would like to have voted "No."

Zphyr, on 27 March 2013 - 08:39 AM, said:

Misleading poll is misleading.

Fiona Marshe, on 25 March 2013 - 02:54 AM, said:

Vote is invalid as there isn't a strait "NO" option.

Alois Hammer, on 25 March 2013 - 05:25 PM, said:

Why do they make troll non-polls with only one real answer, like this one?

Kaldor, on 27 March 2013 - 06:40 AM, said:

Bad poll is bad.

Najonii, on 24 March 2013 - 07:22 PM, said:

Make my vote a No! I will be playing other modes and i still care!

Cubivorre, on 24 March 2013 - 07:24 PM, said:

Maybe try changing your poll to Yes or No, then I'll vote..

Klaus, on 24 March 2013 - 07:37 PM, said:

Where is the "no" option?

Mal, on 24 March 2013 - 06:47 PM, said:

Missing an option in your poll. There is no 'no' option.. saying I don't care, is not the same as saying no. Biased poll is biased?

I see a bunch of other people informing you that you poll is meaningless.


TDM won't fix the game, it will simply add other issues. You have TDM in two existing game modes.

[Teralitha]

Noobzorz, on 27 March 2013 - 09:52 AM, said:

For high end competitive play, TDM is THE ABSOLUTE WORST possible mode. PERIOD. I can't believe I'm reading this. It's. . . it's so dumb I don't know what to say about it.

There is a reason why competitive BF3, CoD 1-9, TF2, CS1.6, CS:S, UT, Gears, Halos 1-4+Reach+ODST, etc. etc. etc. has no team deathmatch. In fact, literally the only game I can think of with a competitive deathmatch scene is Quake III, and that's 1v1 only.

I suspect what you're implying is that "capping is for noobs and team deathmatch is for pros" and that is so awe-inspiringly moronic that it makes me wonder if I shouldn't change my vote to "no."

You havent played too many games have you... I noticed you didnt list any previous mechwarrior games either. TDM were the #1 most popular modes in past mechwarrior titles.

If TDM were added to this game... guess what, you wouldnt have to play it. So, what reason have you to argue against it?

Mercules, on 27 March 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

I see a bunch of other people informing you that you poll is meaningless.


TDM won't fix the game, it will simply add other issues. You have TDM in two existing game modes.

No, it will add diversity and higher level of competitive play. But more than that, higher player retention. (pssst.... 62% of the playerbase will stay instead of leave)

I see those people as players who will play assault mode instead of TDM. That is all. Their few opinions do not outweigh the poll results.

And no... we have a fake TDM in the current 2 modes. They are not TDM no matter how you try to spin it. they cant be TDM because they have bases. Lets try to stick to the facts shall we?

Edited by Teralitha, 27 March 2013 - 10:02 AM.

[Znail]

The anti-TDM league extends it's thanx to Teralitha for helping the cause make sure that TDM never shows up.

[Deathlike]

Creating flawed polls will create flawed conclusions.

I don't care whether TDM exists or not, but those who think TDM will solve things will be greatly mistaken.

The QQ will change from "capping sucks" to "hiding sucks".

Right now, there is no "fair" solution that reduces the probability of people running the hell away...

Edited by Deathlike, 27 March 2013 - 10:04 AM.

[Noobzorz]

Teralitha, on 27 March 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

You havent played too many games have you... I noticed you didnt list any previous mechwarrior games either. TDM were the #1 most popular modes in past mechwarrior titles.

If TDM were added to this game... guess what, you wouldnt have to play it. So, what reason have you to argue against it?

I have played lots of games. I see someone suggesting that TDM is the top end of competitive play, and then telling me about all their experience, and it really is the dumbest thing I've read on these boards. There aren't words for how incredibly stupid this is. And I wouldn't have said anything, but you had the ******* gall to go and make sure that your post carried the heavy implication that "capping is the noob way to play, let me and my pros play TDM."

There are reasons to argue against TDM, but I'm not. I voted yes for it in the poll. What I take exception to is how insanely insulting and obnoxious your attitude is.

So yes. Give you and your fellows a TDM mode so you can go scrub it up. I'm cool with that. It's fun. I'll scrub it up too if it's fun to play! But "ranked play?"

**** off.

Edited by Noobzorz, 27 March 2013 - 10:04 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

Noobzorz, on 27 March 2013 - 09:52 AM, said:

For high end competitive play, TDM is THE ABSOLUTE WORST possible mode. PERIOD. I can't believe I'm reading this. It's. . . it's so dumb I don't know what to say about it.

There is a reason why competitive BF3, CoD 1-9, TF2, CS1.6, CS:S, UT, Gears, Halos 1-4+Reach+ODST, etc. etc. etc. has no team deathmatch. In fact, literally the only game I can think of with a competitive deathmatch scene is Quake III, and that's 1v1 only.

I suspect what you're implying is that "capping is for noobs and team deathmatch is for pros" and that is so awe-inspiringly moronic that it makes me wonder if I shouldn't change my vote to "no."

Mechwarrior is a different game, though. It has always revolved around deathmatch. The destruction of the enemy is paramount to determining whether you take a planet or not. About the only time in past league play where you didn't have a deathmatch scenario was when you did a raid on a planet.

Mechwarrior has always been about planetary warfare and domination of the Inner Sphere/Clans. To do this, you load dropships full of mechs and then attack a planet. Sometimes you'd have 400 mechs on a planet. Battles could take a week or more! Multiple nights of fighting nonstop versus another unit. The only way to determine the outcome was the complete destruction of enemy forces.

Capping doesn't factor into this. When a unit DID do a raid, it applied in that situation but those were few. Typically smaller units like Merc units would do raids to mess up production in the back end.

Planetary warfare leagues like ADL/NBT were extremely deep and took a large amount of time for leadership to plot, scheme, negotiate, politik and execute.

You can't compare Mechwarrior to Team Fortress 2 (which I have competed in for five years straight up until a year ago under another alias) and certainly not to other games like CS, Halo etc.

I've competed in leagues since Mechwarrior 2--going all the way back to 1996/1997. Learn a little more about what we're all about.

[Zerberus]

Voted "Will be playing other modes". For the same reason I don`t support extending match duration on alpone or tourmaline, I have no interest in searching for a powered down mech at the edge of the map for 5 minutes after the other 7 have been dispatched, nor watching others do it afrom a spectator perspective.

Unless someone is playing Capwarrior, Assault is already essentially TDM... and exactly what I described is unfortunately becoming the norm....

*edited to remove brainfart*

Edited by Zerberus, 27 March 2013 - 10:41 AM.

[Commander Kobold]

could add weight class only modes too like assault TDM heavy TDM medium TDM ect

[Writer]

All we're doing is playing Counterstrike with Gundams. I don't see why we even bother with Capture the Blue Square.

If you want a "Real" assault mode, make an Offense vs Defense with only one base to cap, instead of 2base. Or make a "King of the Hill" mode where there's only one base to capture and a team must hold it for 2-3 minutes to win.

[Mercules]

Teralitha, on 27 March 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

You havent played too many games have you... I noticed you didnt list any previous mechwarrior games either. TDM were the #1 most popular modes in past mechwarrior titles.

No they weren't we avoided TDM and played missions in MW4. Literally everyone I knew avoided it and played missions where you had tactics come into play.

Teralitha, on 27 March 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

If TDM were added to this game... guess what, you wouldnt have to play it. So, what reason have you to argue against it?

If stock mech matches were added into the game people wouldn't have to play that, but if theynever had any intention of playing that mode and understood it will prevent something else from coming into the game they would probably argue against that as well and be well within their rights to do so.

Teralitha, on 27 March 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

No, it will add diversity and higher level of competitive play. But more than that, higher player retention. (pssst.... 62% of the playerbase will stay instead of leave)

You have no data to prove your made up statistic. Your biased poll with limited sample doesn't count.

Teralitha, on 27 March 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

I see those people as players who will play assault mode instead of TDM. That is all. Their few opinions do not outweigh the poll results.

There are no results from the poll, at least not any you can use unless it was written on toilet paper.

Teralitha, on 27 March 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

And no... we have a fake TDM in the current 2 modes. They are not TDM no matter how you try to spin it. they cant be TDM because they have bases. Lets try to stick to the facts shall we?

A = TDM
B = Kill all mechs
C = Capture base
D= Assault

A = B
D = B + C
Ergo
D = A + C

[Felicitatem Parco]

Poll has left out a choice: "No"

I DO NOT want a game-type that lets a single player prevent the game from ending just by powering down and hiding in some crevasse or running away for 15 minutes. At least in Assault mode, you can cap and end the game if someone is hiding or becomes disconnected and you can't find them.

Granted, I have seen this kind of grievery play out in Assault Games before, where the only living participants are a Lone Assault and a Lone Light, where the Assault just base-camps and the Light refuses to attack... but a DeathMatch Mode WILL NOT END (for a long time) unless you kill everyone on the other team, so if you're a team of 3 Heavy Mechs and the enemy is a single Light, you can't force the game to end by sending 2 to cap and 1 to defend,... your ONLY option is to chase-down the sole Light Mech with your Heavies.

I think the Assault Gametype has it's merits, which is this: Real War is more than killing the enemy; real war has objectives. You can lose wars by killing your enemy's forward combat units at the expense of your Nation's power-grid. Assault makes you remember that there's more going on than just killing those things in front of you, and DeathMatch encourages little more than just "CHARGE!"

Edited by Prosperity Park, 27 March 2013 - 10:19 AM.

[Noobzorz]

Mister Blastman, on 27 March 2013 - 10:03 AM, said:

Mechwarrior is a different game, though. It has always revolved around deathmatch. The destruction of the enemy is paramount to determining whether you take a planet or not. About the only time in past league play where you didn't have a deathmatch scenario was when you did a raid on a planet.

Mechwarrior has always been about planetary warfare and domination of the Inner Sphere/Clans. To do this, you load dropships full of mechs and then attack a planet. Sometimes you'd have 400 mechs on a planet. Battles could take a week or more! Multiple nights of fighting nonstop versus another unit. The only way to determine the outcome was the complete destruction of enemy forces.

Capping doesn't factor into this. When a unit DID do a raid, it applied in that situation but those were few. Typically smaller units like Merc units would do raids to mess up production in the back end.

Planetary warfare leagues like ADL/NBT were extremely deep and took a large amount of time for leadership to plot, scheme, negotiate, politik and execute.

You can't compare Mechwarrior to Team Fortress 2 (which I have competed in for five years straight up until a year ago under another alias) and certainly not to other games like CS, Halo etc.

I've competed in leagues since Mechwarrior 2--going all the way back to 1996/1997. Learn a little more about what we're all about.

Let me be very frank:

I know what "it" was about, and I competed in leagues too. But that was the early 90s. This view dates you very, very badly. When I look back at what "competitive play" entailed back then, it's a joke. If MWO takes off and gets a real competitive seen going, you and I and Teralitha will get ******* devoured by the LoL-kiddies and SC2 player equivalents. If you want to have a silly little niche competition and call it TDM, that's fine, but don't for an instant imagine that real eSport esque competitive league will proceed through TDM.

TDM is not a competitive mode. We are not kids anymore; we are dinosaurs. The days you imagine are at least fifteen years dead.

Edited by Noobzorz, 27 March 2013 - 10:18 AM.