215 replies to this topic

[Marj]

Noobzorz, on 29 March 2013 - 07:14 AM, said:

How is capping a problem in these?

Make up your mind.

"With bases all the above is impossible. You MUST defend the base. To not do so is to lose. Whether you do that from the cap square or the center of the map is irrelevant. You are bound to the two cap points on the map. Without bases you are free to use the entire map in your efforts to gain an advantage, be it setting up a line of snipers with a defensive line of brawlers, a group of harassers flanking the enemy and distracting them from your LRM boats, a group of brawlers shutting down in a ravine waiting as an enemy spotted by your scouts approaches. There is a vast number of possibilities, which is what keeps the game interesting. Having the same fight around the dropship on Frozen City or the caldera on Caustic Valley is going to get old. TDM allows more possibilities which extends the life of the game. At least for people that like to see something new every now and then."

[Mercules]

You can still set up a line of snipers with defensive brawlers. In fact this used to happen on Caustic a LOT. There are areas where you can see the most common approaches and with just a shift see the alternate ones as well.

I have frequently flanked people and even in PUGs notified my team we were about to start the flank and to push over about a count of 10 after they heard the first shots. I also consistently flank in my Lights and fast Mediums. If, however, the enemy can easily shift their focus to focus fire me down I can move past and use the base as pressure as well.

It does mean that people, being people, will go to the most common "lines" and form up there but I think you are fooling yourself if you thing TDM will change that very much.


What I would love to see is larger maps with multiple spawn locations for bases and having the two be random. Now you can't just run the normally "safe" path and have to scout out the base before you can ever capture it.

[Hammerfinn]

Teralitha, on 28 March 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

Uh... what does scouting or not have anything to do with it. Thats just a jib on some imaginary group of players.

This shows the problem. If your team scouts, THEY CAN'T CAP WITHOUT FIGHTING.

Edited by Hammerfinn, 29 March 2013 - 07:47 AM.

[Marj]

Mercules, on 29 March 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

You can still set up a line of snipers with defensive brawlers. In fact this used to happen on Caustic a LOT. There are areas where you can see the most common approaches and with just a shift see the alternate ones as well.

I have frequently flanked people and even in PUGs notified my team we were about to start the flank and to push over about a count of 10 after they heard the first shots. I also consistently flank in my Lights and fast Mediums. If, however, the enemy can easily shift their focus to focus fire me down I can move past and use the base as pressure as well.

It does mean that people, being people, will go to the most common "lines" and form up there but I think you are fooling yourself if you thing TDM will change that very much.


What I would love to see is larger maps with multiple spawn locations for bases and having the two be random. Now you can't just run the normally "safe" path and have to scout out the base before you can ever capture it.

It won't change much in pugs, but it will in competitive matches. I'm thinking more of league play.

You can flank in close, like around the caldera, but you can't send half your force to hit them from behind. The enemy will work out you're split and roll the remaining defenders.

[Oy of MidWorld]

[Redacted]

I used to drop 29 bucks a month into this game. Without even hope that there's a real gamemode coming, that's not going to happen anymore. Dev's can't split the playerbase for a proper gamemode half of us want, but they can split it for 3rd person? I feel lied to and cheated.

Edited by Egomane, 29 March 2013 - 07:50 AM.
Removed flamebait

[Egomane]

I said no more flamebaits and I mean it!

[Alois Hammer]

Teralitha, on 28 March 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

These are merely your opinions, and do not represent facts.

Just like every word of every post you've ever made.

[Teralitha]

Belorion, on 29 March 2013 - 03:33 AM, said:

I will never understand people's insistence that other people play a certain way.

Exactly. Why must I be forced to play assault/conquest mode? There should be more modes. Including TDM

[WardenWolf]

Garth Erlam, on 28 March 2013 - 10:45 AM, said:

We'll add TDM, but it'll have to be 4v4, but it'll only use small maps, and also we'll add a bunch of options to either insta-kill the last surviving member of a team that hides or maybe highlight them so everyone can kill them because TDM is clearly superior to Assault.

(Yes we do listen, and if you can't take some jokes you need to relax; don't do it, when you wanna go to it.)

Do you suppose Garth is just joking here, or is he teasing us with their plans for Solaris?

[Alois Hammer]

WardenWolf, on 29 March 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

Do you suppose Garth is just joking here, or is he teasing us with their plans for Solaris?

Six of one, half-dozen of the other.

But the whole issue of the last player standing should be a non-issue. If the TDM zealots think removing all thought except "kill all enemy" equals skill, let'em have it. I'm now officially in favor of TDM, on the following non-negotiable condition: There are no mechanics to prevent one huge-engined ECM light from holding up the end of the match by fleeing, and further no timers- if it's all about your skill in killing every last mech on the other team then that's the only way the match ends. If it means your match lasts a month, well...looks like you need to brush up on those "mad 1337 skillzz."

Edited by Alois Hammer, 29 March 2013 - 08:52 AM.

[Noobzorz]

WardenWolf, on 29 March 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

Do you suppose Garth is just joking here, or is he teasing us with their plans for Solaris?

I hope its the latter. That sounds awesome.

[Havok1978]

solaris is very much in the works, you guys should tune into the NGNG podcasts and ask garth himself, hes pretty cool, a bit mono-toned at times but hes a gamer just like the rest of us.

[WardenWolf]

Alois Hammer, on 29 March 2013 - 08:52 AM, said:

But the whole issue of the last player standing should be a non-issue. If the TDM zealots think removing all thought except "kill all enemy" equals skill, let'em have it. I'm now officially in favor of TDM, on the following non-negotiable condition: There are no mechanics to prevent one huge-engined ECM light from holding up the end of the match by fleeing, and further no timers- if it's all about your skill in killing every last mech on the other team then that's the only way the match ends. If it means your match lasts a month, well...looks like you need to brush up on those "mad 1337 skillzz."

I dunno, I think a lot of people would DC if they saw that they got a map like Alpine and were on TDM mode with no other mechanic to end the fight. HOWEVER, I think there are far better options than a base cap (which can be exploited for a win even if you are really losing the battle). Check out this idea:

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2127610

[Gallowglas]

Egomane, on 29 March 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

I said no more flamebaits and I mean it!

Does anybody want a peanut?

Sorry...Princess Bride moment...

[Viper69]

Oy of MidWorld, on 29 March 2013 - 07:44 AM, said:

[Redacted]

I used to drop 29 bucks a month into this game. Without even hope that there's a real gamemode coming, that's not going to happen anymore. Dev's can't split the playerbase for a proper gamemode half of us want, but they can split it for 3rd person? I feel lied to and cheated.

I feel the same with regards to completely ignoring us on the 3pv issue. Bryan with his "Too bad so sad" crapolla he is pulling peeves me off to no end. They blatantly lied in their crowd funding campaign and they feel its a-ok in the grand scheme.

I voted I dont care because I dont really care anymore, probably get redacted but that will only reinforce my point that it does not matter what we want as a community.

Edited by Egomane, 29 March 2013 - 11:19 AM.
Stretching my powers to correct the quote

[Hammerfinn]

Viper69, on 29 March 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

I voted I dont care because I dont really care anymore, probably get redacted but that will only reinforce my point that it does not matter what we want as a community.

Recall that "we" the forumites are actually only a small, albeit extremely vocal, minority of actual players. Business decisions can cause changes in plans and vice-versa. It happens. It's doesn't prove they don't listen; it proves that they make decisions based on the direction they think the game needs to go. The recent issues with LRM damage and Coolshot implementation do prove that they listen to the community--but they don't necessarily always AGREE with the community.

[Azrell]

4 mech TDM plz.

[Viper69]

Hammerfinn, on 29 March 2013 - 11:19 AM, said:

Recall that "we" the forumites are actually only a small, albeit extremely vocal, minority of actual players. Business decisions can cause changes in plans and vice-versa. It happens. It's doesn't prove they don't listen; it proves that they make decisions based on the direction they think the game needs to go. The recent issues with LRM damage and Coolshot implementation do prove that they listen to the community--but they don't necessarily always AGREE with the community.

Very true. However where are they getting their info on the pulse of the community if not from the forums? So far as I know I have never seen an ingame questionair to get a feel for peoples wants or desires. So I would like to ask you or anyone where are they getting their idea of what people want.

[Mercules]

Viper69, on 29 March 2013 - 11:36 AM, said:

Very true. However where are they getting their info on the pulse of the community if not from the forums? So far as I know I have never seen an ingame questionair to get a feel for peoples wants or desires. So I would like to ask you or anyone where are they getting their idea of what people want.

I seriously hope they don't have a marketing department doing that for them.

I love mine. I really do.

Asked if they had any plans to support Chrome over a year ago. Response, "Our data shows that our customers do not use Chrome." Finally I got serious and provided the folks in charge who were listening to them with reams of data showing Chrome usage growing and it currently being roughly 33% of the market. I then got marketing's data presented to me that they were going by.

They were observing the traffic on several of our websites and watching which browsers were being used. In their data it showed that less than 5% of our customers used Chrome. They were embarrassed when I copy and pasted the "It is recommended that you use either IE or Firefox with this page as Chrome is not currently supported." posted on all of those pages they were drawing data from in big red letters in a yellow box. I asked them if they knew what the term Biased Sample meant.

[Havok1978]

Mercules, on 29 March 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

I seriously hope they don't have a marketing department doing that for them.

I love mine. I really do.

Asked if they had any plans to support Chrome over a year ago. Response, "Our data shows that our customers do not use Chrome." Finally I got serious and provided the folks in charge who were listening to them with reams of data showing Chrome usage growing and it currently being roughly 33% of the market. I then got marketing's data presented to me that they were going by.

They were observing the traffic on several of our websites and watching which browsers were being used. In their data it showed that less than 5% of our customers used Chrome. They were embarrassed when I copy and pasted the "It is recommended that you use either IE or Firefox with this page as Chrome is not currently supported." posted on all of those pages they were drawing data from in big red letters in a yellow box. I asked them if they knew what the term Biased Sample meant.

statistics will always support whatever the person wants them to support with the selective inclusion/exclusion of information.
people will misconstrue information to support thier stance typically.. in that case it seems it was a gross oversight, I assume they corrected it?

Marj, on 28 March 2013 - 11:36 PM, said:

Of course. ForumWarrior is far more fun that assault or conquest!

AMEN! ROFL...