327 replies to this topic

[Teralitha]

This is not a question of who doesnt want it vs who does. This poll is just to find out the number of players that would prefer this mode over other modes.

Not long ago a Dev stated that TDM was going to be implemented. Now, today they have said its a waste of time to bother implementing. If you want TDM, place your votes, and definitely post your feedback.

Just to clarify the definition of Team Death Match mode... No bases to cap. No alternative objectives. No respawn. Just team vs team to the death.

Also with 8 vs 8 premades in mind, an extended timer, for a longer more drawn out tactically satisfying game

Having more choices is a good thing. Its keeps players around for the long term instead of getting bored and leaving. Case in point, Me. Im bored to death of assault mode and I wont even touch conquest because I think its garbage. Without another choice in game mode I am a player that quits playing and never returns. I am not alone either. Does PGI really want to lose more players? How many players like me have already left for good or just stopped playing for the same reason? By adding TDM you would be bringing us back into the game, and increasing the player base.

Lokust Davion, on 16 February 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

Our objectives should be to destroy things... not capture things. Capturing is for MechPussies not MechWarriors...

What he said.

Arguments Against:

Last enemy runs and hides.

Solution:

The team with the most remaining mechs(remaining tonnage for a tie breaker) when the time runs out wins. Losers receive a death. No point in running. Anyone who still does it is intentionally griefing and should be reported. (Idea came from Shismar)

Really this ruleset could be used for any game mode, because running and hiding til time runs out(or to protect stats) happens in all of them.

Updated:

Edited by Teralitha, 29 March 2013 - 02:36 PM.

[Teralitha]

Post your comments as well as your votes!

[Duncan Fisher]

It's said every time this thread comes up: when you have slow, ponderous robots and relatively large maps, you need another win condition other than "Destroy all mechs." That's not even accounting for the zero-motivation-to-move-forward meta you would get with a competitive TDM. Sure, they could change the objective mechanics, maybe prevent you from capping for the first 5 minutes or something, but if you take a moment to really think, you will realize that pure deathmatch style games do not fit in here.

[Dirkdaring]

Teralitha, on 24 March 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

This is not a question of who doesnt want it vs who does.

Umm, thats not what the poll question says.
Do you want Team Death Match Mode.

• Yes.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

why do people make polls anymore when the voices in the devs' heads outnumber us on the forums?

They specifically told us that we, here, dont matter to them anymore in the third person thread.

[Teralitha]

Duncan Fisher, on 24 March 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

It's said every time this thread comes up: when you have slow, ponderous robots and relatively large maps, you need another win condition other than "Destroy all mechs."

And its also said every time someone says that... not having another win condition didnt matter in all the previous mechwarrior titles(and every other shooter type game in existence!!!!), why would it matter now?

Edited by Teralitha, 24 March 2013 - 06:10 PM.

[Duncan Fisher]

Teralitha, on 24 March 2013 - 06:07 PM, said:

And its also said every time someone says that... not having another win condition didnt matter in all the previous mechwarrior titles(and every other shooter type game in existence!!!!), why would it matter now?

Now I don't happen to have a record of every game variant ever implemented in public matchmaking in a shooter in my head, but generally in public random matchmaking if there are no respawns, there is always an alt win condition. If you set up a custom match where you know everyone wants to fight it out of course that's fine, but when there is a public matchmaking system like this, you will not (or at least should not) have "pure single-life deathmatch" game modes. It's generally search-and-destroy or attack-and-defend types.

*also I don't think that response is said every time because my previous point makes it very clear exactly why it would matter now...

Edited by Duncan Fisher, 24 March 2013 - 06:18 PM.

[MeatForBrains]

Why don't you go play Call of Duty?

This was a snarky comment, and under the assumption there would be continual spawn before the OP was fleshed out the way it is.

Either Assualt needs to leave spawns where they are, yet move the bases closer to the center of the map, or we need Team Deathmatch.

Would be nice to throw in some random spawn points as well.

Edited by MeatForBrains, 29 March 2013 - 06:02 AM.

[Marj]

Duncan Fisher, on 24 March 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

It's said every time this thread comes up: when you have slow, ponderous robots and relatively large maps, you need another win condition other than "Destroy all mechs." That's not even accounting for the zero-motivation-to-move-forward meta you would get with a competitive TDM. Sure, they could change the objective mechanics, maybe prevent you from capping for the first 5 minutes or something, but if you take a moment to really think, you will realize that pure deathmatch style games do not fit in here.

Not in competitive play. MW4 had pure TDM leagues for years. Manouvering around a large map to gain an advantage over the enemy is half the game. It allows for strategy other than rush or camp. What we have now is boring in comparison. I've lost very few assault 8 mans where I've camped my base...don't do it anymore because it's boring. I lost one conquest where I took 8 3L's in, but that was due to a screw up. I haven't lost one with that loadout since...so I stopped playing conquest in 8 mans when I'm DC'ing. Again, boring.

I played plenty of pug TDM matches in MW4 too, you didn't get people running off to hide because there was no point, it just delayed the inevitable. I suppose you might get the odd troll that would do it now. But it allowed much more freedom to manouvre than having a base to tie you down. It made for a much more interesting game.

MeatForBrains, on 24 March 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:

Why don't you go play Call of Duty?

Because COD is an arcade game. MW with TDM is a strategy game. MW with bases is basically an arcade game, little thought required...why don't you go play COD?

[Duncan Fisher]

Marj, on 24 March 2013 - 06:22 PM, said:

Because COD is an arcade game. MW with TDM is a strategy game. MW with bases is basically an arcade game, little thought required...why don't you go play COD?

The only thing that seems to have taken very little thought is this statement.

[Teralitha]

Duncan Fisher, on 24 March 2013 - 06:17 PM, said:

Now I don't happen to have a record of every game variant ever implemented in public matchmaking in a shooter in my head, but generally in public random matchmaking if there are no respawns, there is always an alt win condition. If you set up a custom match where you know everyone wants to fight it out of course that's fine, but when there is a public matchmaking system like this, you will not (or at least should not) have "pure single-life deathmatch" game modes. It's generally search-and-destroy or attack-and-defend types.

*also I don't think that response is said every time because my previous point makes it very clear exactly why it would matter now...

Actually, in MW4, there was a server mod, with a voting system, and one thing that was available to vote on was to end a match. Players waiting around on the server for their current round to end could create a vote to end a match if someone was running and hiding til the time ran out. I honestly forgot about this and just remembered it because it was so rare that it ever happened. Out of tens of thousands of matches I had played in MW4 in either pubs or league I can barely remember a vote ever being cast for this situation so few times I probably could count it on one hand. But then again, we had a pretty mature player base, and they were public league servers.

Edited by Teralitha, 25 March 2013 - 07:06 AM.

[Mal]

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?

[Teralitha]

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?

If you dont like a game mode, you can play another, so what the point of having a "no" option? its just for people who like to argue for the sake of arguing. So if your not going to play TDM, your going to play a different mode. so the options are correct.

[Mal]

Teralitha, on 24 March 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

If you dont like a game mode, you can play another, so what the point of having a "no" option? its just for people who like to argue for the sake of arguing. So if your not going to play TDM, your going to play a different mode. so the options are correct.

Odd, given your apparent attitude that if you don't support something as the vocal minority, then it doesn't belong in the game... you'd think you'd want the vocal minority to have all the available options.

Again, "I don't care" is not the same as "No".

[DrSecretStache]

I probably shouldn't have voted, but I guess "I don't care" is the same as "no" in this poll.

Something else that gets brought up every time: Atlas on one side left, jenner on another. jenner runs and hides. Everyone gets mad.

Make another game mode instead. TDM would just give me a reason not to select "any," and thus, I would never play assault, either.

Edited by Zoughtbaj, 24 March 2013 - 07:06 PM.

[Corbon Zackery]

I think you see more of a king of the hill style of game play were you have 8-12 people trying to claim a hill in the center of the board.

[Warrax the Chaos Warrior]

Duncan Fisher, on 24 March 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

It's said every time this thread comes up: when you have slow, ponderous robots and relatively large maps, you need another win condition other than "Destroy all mechs." That's not even accounting for the zero-motivation-to-move-forward meta you would get with a competitive TDM. Sure, they could change the objective mechanics, maybe prevent you from capping for the first 5 minutes or something, but if you take a moment to really think, you will realize that pure deathmatch style games do not fit in here.

Agreed.

Even without the last mech going to hide, the team that turtled-up and camped better would win most of the time. Very high probability of matches running 10+ minutes if the players knew what they were doing.

If you had 8 baddies vs. 8 baddies, then the matched would be over pretty quick (and the people involved would probably enjoy themselves), but it would only take a few competent players to "ruin all the fun" for the Rambos (and then they'd have something new to whine about on the forums).

Corbon Zackery, on 24 March 2013 - 07:09 PM, said:

I think you see more of a king of the hill style of game play were you have 8-12 people trying to claim a hill in the center of the board.

This is a way better idea than TDM for a more action-oriented game mode.

[Larth]

Do me a favor, for all the players who don't visit the forums. Every game you play, especially pug matches, tell people about this poll and ask them to check it out on here. That way we can get a better feel of most of the players.

[Marj]

Mal, on 24 March 2013 - 07:01 PM, said:

Odd, given your apparent attitude that if you don't support something as the vocal minority, then it doesn't belong in the game... you'd think you'd want the vocal minority to have all the available options.

Again, "I don't care" is not the same as "No".

Do you want to vote No because it will further split the player base and is therefore bad? I think a simple change like removing the bases would bring more people to 8 mans so it wouldn't be an issue. I rarely have to wait for a game when pugging, so there seems to be enough people to support a third mode. Do you have trouble getting matches in your timezone?

Zoughtbaj, on 24 March 2013 - 07:06 PM, said:

I probably shouldn't have voted, but I guess "I don't care" is the same as "no" in this poll.

Something else that gets brought up every time: Atlas on one side left, jenner on another. jenner runs and hides. Everyone gets mad.

Make another game mode instead. TDM would just give me a reason not to select "any," and thus, I would never play assault, either.

There are ways to deal with this, but it would take time to code and balance.

Corbon Zackery, on 24 March 2013 - 07:09 PM, said:

I think you see more of a king of the hill style of game play were you have 8-12 people trying to claim a hill in the center of the board.

But then you're just fighting around the middle of the map again. It doesn't give the freedom of TDM. If the cap was exposed with no cover for 250m in any direction it might work, since standing on it would be a big risk if you hadn't already severely damaged the enemy. Basically, if they have cappinng it should be difficult and it shouldn't restrict movement options.

[Teralitha]

Mal, on 24 March 2013 - 07:01 PM, said:

Odd, given your apparent attitude that if you don't support something as the vocal minority, then it doesn't belong in the game... you'd think you'd want the vocal minority to have all the available options.

Again, "I don't care" is not the same as "No".

If you are able to play a different game mode, then you have no reason to care or debate the issue.

Warrax the Chaos Warrior, on 24 March 2013 - 07:14 PM, said:

Agreed.

Even without the last mech going to hide, the team that turtled-up and camped better would win most of the time. Very high probability of matches running 10+ minutes if the players knew what they were doing.

If you had 8 baddies vs. 8 baddies, then the matched would be over pretty quick (and the people involved would probably enjoy themselves), but it would only take a few competent players to "ruin all the fun" for the Rambos (and then they'd have something new to whine about on the forums).



This is a way better idea than TDM for a more action-oriented game mode.

hey, this topic is for TDM, if you want to promote another mode, go start your own topic about it.