215 replies to this topic

[Taemien]

Zoughtbaj, on 28 March 2013 - 04:24 PM, said:

If you don't want to be ninja capped, leave a mech behind to defend the cap. They are leaving a mech out of the fight, so it shouldn't matter that you are too.

Skill based solutions are taboo with this generation of gamers. Instead it MUST be the devs fault that they are losing with their ever so perfect strategies and tactics. Anyone that deviates from how they think the game must be played is wrong and <insert insult here>.

[Teralitha]

Zoughtbaj, on 28 March 2013 - 04:24 PM, said:

The poll isn't biased. His comments don't inherently affect the poll. If they do, then I have lost faith in the forum warriors.

The reality of it is that TDM does not belong in the queues. It is not a new player friendly. The only fair way to keep the light v assault situation from happening is by adding an objective, which is, in effect, not TDM.

And neither does TDM belong in CW. It doesn't go along with the idea of there being a point to the battles... as the supporters have said, TDM is about big stompy mechs fighting big stompy mechs.

It DOES have a place in a private lobby system. As there, groups that don't intend to troll can take full advantage of the mode. However, we don't have a private lobby system.

Voted no. There's better modes to add to the game. KOTH, CTF, and Attack/defend being among them.

If you don't want to be ninja capped, leave a mech behind to defend the cap. They are leaving a mech out of the fight, so it shouldn't matter that you are too.

These are merely your opinions, and do not represent facts. If people really want modes like KOTH and CTF, let them create polls and lobby for it.

As you can plainly see, TDM has alot of the player base supporting it, and should be added, regardless of how the people who wouldnt be playing TDM feel about. Your opinions are noted, but in the end they dont really matter much since you are not going to play the mode in question.

This poll is reflecting (so far) that 42% of the whole player base wants TDM. My poll which has been going on longer reflects that 62% of the players want TDM. An average between the 2 would be 52%. Thats half the player base.

You may not like the results since they dont agree with your opinions, but all I can say is... tough *****.

Its up to the devs now to decide if making 52% of the player base happy and keep them for the long term is worth it.

Edited by Teralitha, 28 March 2013 - 04:56 PM.

[1sh0t]

Mercules, on 28 March 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

Losing sight of the objectives and having tunnel vision in combat should be put one off. However, blaming the game mode instead of honestly asking yourself, "Was there something I could have done different?" is not right. You know when you are being capped, the game now gives you total awareness that it is happening. I know there are times when a person can't break away, but it is ever true that no one can break away? Part of the issue is how teams are put together and the lack of communication in PUGs.

I agree with the second part of your post, a big problem is the average skill level and lack of communication. Is this a new problem that the devs didn't foresee? Of course not, it's an obvious issue relevant to all f2p games. That's why we're arguing for a better mode for pugs.

Regarding the first part of your post, no, for the average pug player there isn't anything they could do different. Disengaging from battle is extremely difficult in this game. You want someone who's barely piloting their mech to turn around and slowly run back to their base while getting shot in the rear? That's a death sentence.

Gallowglas, on 28 March 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

I'd rather not have a mode that encourages the last enemy to go hide in his 3L in some remote corner of Tourmaline while the last remaining Atlas spends 10 minutes slogging the length of the map to end a battle that has already functionally concluded. While I support the idea of TDM, people suck. People will take advantage of the mechanics to be idiots. I don't like the base cap mechanic as it stands either, but at least it provides some outlet for a win in a case where someone is deliberately just drawing out a match.

This non issue has been solved countless times in a variety of ways. If this is your only argument against TDM then you're just not paying attention to the argument at hand.

Vividos, on 28 March 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

1) if your estimation says 50% of matches are won by capping then you are terrible at both math and estimating. i've been playing for 8 hours so far today and there have been only one or two (cant recall for sure if there was a second) match won by base capping.

2) comparing to CS is not laughable, actually. if you want to use the objectives as your argument then you shouldnt be arguing for TDM, you should be arguing for MORE objectives than just the base in assault mode. pick 1 argument and stick to it, people will take you more seriously.

3) we're not "TDM haters" we're just people with brains, and we actually use them. TDM is boring, played out, and uninteresting. TDM would lower the number of people in the matchmaking queue. TDM is a basic, non-tactical game mode compared to assault - and this is billed as a tactical team game. there would need to be a REASON to implement it into the game right now as opposed to later down the line and the only reason im seeing you or anyone else post is that you want it. that in itself is not a reason. not one way has been stated in which TDM would enhance the game. and dont give me the "new player" bull, because not once have i ever heard an ACTUAL new player state that reasoning. the number of people requesting it are the MINORITY, and on top of that they're the annoying, whiny minority that dont use facts or logic to present their case.

4) if your team loses to a solo light capping your base, then the problem is not the game mode - THE PROBLEM IS YOUR TEAM AND THE FACT THAT THEY SUCK. when ONE enemy light goes to your base, do you have ANY IDEA how easy it is to stop them? ANY light on your team could go put an end to them. ANY treb or cent on your team could go and stop them. heck even a DRAGON could go and stop them. dont blame the game mode for your (and your teams) lack of cognitive functions.

Reading comprehension isn't one of your strong points is it...

1) I said 50% of the matches where capping is the deciding factor in winning, not 50% of matches are won by capping.

2) Wrong again. CS shines in the simplicity of its game modes. You are either planting the bomb or defending against the plant.

3) I'm an "actual new player".... To this game at least. And already I can see the serious flaws in game design which you and many others seem oblivious to. A TDM-like mode would remove an annoyance, losing a match you clearly won due to the lame cap mechanic.

4) No, the problem is the game mode. Yes my team sucks. So does yours. That's a fact of playing a f2p game. You and the devs are not going to change the overall skill level of who is playing. Instead they should be making design choices based around these obvious issues we've presented over and over. Just because your argument devolves into "you're stupid", "just turn around and kill the light", etc doesn't mean we haven't been making logical argument after argument against what has essentially amounted to troll replies.


This will be my last post on the subject. If the majority of players want a flawed game then so be it. I understand that most of you probably aren't "gamers" are are just looking for an outlet for your robot fetish.

[mattkachu]

There's a certain individual that advocates competitive play and TDM.
The most competitive MWO can get right now are the "run hot or die" sort of leagues or 8 man groups

just out of curiosity,

I dont play RHoD, so i dont know, but how many of those high skill games end in ninja base capping?
Im asking about 0-0 caps or within the first 2 minutes

[Gallowglas]

1sh0t, on 28 March 2013 - 04:57 PM, said:

This non issue has been solved countless times in a variety of ways. If this is your only argument against TDM then you're just not paying attention to the argument at hand.

People may have suggested solutions to fix the problem I describe, but that doesn't make it a non-issue. Nor does it mean that creating those fixes would be trivial or easily balanced without creating another solution similar to the things people don't like about assault. In essence, unless the map is small and there are no places to hide, you're creating other artificial mechanics to create something that probably isn't a pure TDM either.

Edited by Gallowglas, 28 March 2013 - 06:51 PM.

[Marj]

People want TDM precisely because it is not DUUURRRRRRRRR CHARGE! The whole point of TDM is you don't have to stand between the enemy and the base. It allows you to go wherever you want. That's it.

By going wherever you want it opens up more tactical options. What options? You can flank an enemy. What happens if you do this in assault? They ignore you and cap...and you're too far away to stop them. You can also draw the enemy into ambushes, which is impossible if the enemy decides they're going to make a beeline for the cap and ignore your bait. You can use speed to outmanouvre an enemy, surrounding them and hitting from multiple angles. If you try this in assault the enemy will see you're spread out and just rush the flag. IN TDM they have to kill the mechs, so they only have a chance if they have speed, i.e. not assault mechs.

You can split your force and not instantly lose...since you can use speed to manouvre. Yopu don't have to just sit between the enemy and the base! You can send off your sneaky snipers to harass the enemy, get them to turn their backs then bring in the brawlers...surprise attack! What would happen in assault? They'd ignore you and cap. There is no reason to respond to a threat if that threat can't kill you before you get to the enemy base.

Mediums will be useful! Mediums rely on speed to survive while having enough firepower to be a credible threat at range. It takes time for them to do anything useful though, so if the enemy can just ignore them and cap there's not much point in using them. IN TDM however, they are great for pinning fast mechs in place while your heavier mechs move up or harassing the enemy with long range weapons.

Assault forces you to stay near the enemy so you can't manouvre to get to a better position. Assault is the DUUUUUUURRRRR CHARGE mode. Anyone who has run 8 mans disagree? What strategies have you used that don't involve sitting near your base or rushing the enemy? Prove me wrong.

Assault. Take 8 assaults and sit on your base. Either the enemy gets bored, moves in and dies, or it ends in a draw. You can't lose.

Conquest pug matches. Teams with more lights win. You haven't noticed this?

Conquest in 8 mans. Take 8 lights, win. It's boring. Are you going to dispute this? Have you ever taken 8 lights and lost? If you can cap twice as fast as the enemy you're going to win. If the enemy splits up....what happens when 8 ravens meet 2 atlases? I think you know.

If you can't see the advantages of TDM over assault I'm probably not going to convince you. I hope the devs put a bit more thought into it though. Because as far as competitive play goes (NOT pugs), the current modes are awful.

Gallowglas, on 28 March 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

People may have suggested solutions to fix the problem I describe, but that doesn't make it a non-issue. Nor does it mean that creating those fixes would be trivial or easily balanced without creating another solution similar to the things people don't like about assault. In essence, unless the map is small and there are no places to hide, you're creating other artificial mechanics to create something that probably isn't a pure TDM either.

That's for the devs to deal with. If they see a lot of support for something but decide it would take too many resources or would have too many problems then they won't implement it. They're not complete idiots.

Edited by Marj, 28 March 2013 - 06:58 PM.

[strygalldwir]

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

These are merely your opinions, and do not represent facts. If people really want modes like KOTH and CTF, let them create polls and lobby for it.

As you can plainly see, TDM has alot of the player base supporting it, and should be added, regardless of how the people who wouldnt be playing TDM feel about. Your opinions are noted, but in the end they dont really matter much since you are not going to play the mode in question.

This poll is reflecting (so far) that 42% of the whole player base wants TDM. My poll which has been going on longer reflects that 62% of the players want TDM. An average between the 2 would be 52%. Thats half the player base.

You may not like the results since they dont agree with your opinions, but all I can say is... tough *****.

Its up to the devs now to decide if making 52% of the player base happy and keep them for the long term is worth it.

The problem with using your poll is it does not give me the choice of saying no. You made a poorly constructed poll in an attempt to force a result you wanted.

[Teralitha]

Gallowglas, on 28 March 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

People may have suggested solutions to fix the problem I describe, but that doesn't make it a non-issue. Nor does it mean that creating those fixes would be trivial or easily balanced without creating another solution similar to the things people don't like about assault. In essence, unless the map is small and there are no places to hide, you're creating other artificial mechanics to create something that probably isn't a pure TDM either.

He means that for players wanting TDM, they are non issues. Only the people arguing against TDM care about them for some weird reason...

[Teralitha]

strygalldwir, on 28 March 2013 - 07:04 PM, said:

The problem with using your poll is it does not give me the choice of saying no. You made a poorly constructed poll in an attempt to force a result you wanted.

Uh oh... looks like the yes votes are creeping up on ya! I suspect in the end this poll and my poll will have relatively the same results, which would indicate that my poll was not biased. Which makes complete sense, because its not.

[DrSecretStache]

Teralitha, on 28 March 2013 - 07:32 PM, said:

Uh oh... looks like the yes votes are creeping up on ya! I suspect in the end this poll and my poll will have relatively the same results, which would indicate that my poll was not biased. Which makes complete sense, because its not.

Apparently half the player base disagrees with you. Not that polls are indicative of what the player base thinks or anything.

[darkfall13]

Teralitha, on 28 March 2013 - 07:32 PM, said:

Why were you complaining when people against your poll were in "your" thread, but you're the biggest poster in this thread?

[Qraz]

Arena style TDM would be crazy fun! Stomping team vs team, sports-like arena with few walls or such there to give hiding places.

So I vote: Hell yeah!

[Noobzorz]

Teralitha, on 28 March 2013 - 07:32 PM, said:

Uh oh... looks like the yes votes are creeping up on ya! I suspect in the end this poll and my poll will have relatively the same results, which would indicate that my poll was not biased. Which makes complete sense, because its not.

Even if the no votes equalize, this would not prevent your POS poll from being biased.

I even want TDM in the game and I think you are being ****ing ridiculous.

Edit: Modifying language for civility purposes. I lost my cool.

Edited by Noobzorz, 29 March 2013 - 06:46 AM.

[Teralitha]

darkfall13, on 28 March 2013 - 07:47 PM, said:

Why were you complaining when people against your poll were in "your" thread, but you're the biggest poster in this thread?

Want to make sure the poll gets as much exposure at the top of the forums as possible for the most votes. It is after all a poll about TDM, which I obviously care about.

[MacKoga]

I would like to see TDM with many teams.

• Lance TDM: 4v4v4v4. Or once 12v12 is an option, add two more lances in there.
  
• Three-Way: Three sides. Current maps: 5 mechs each. Bigger maps: 8 mechs each.
  
• Three Musketeers TDM: Teams of 3 mechs.
  
• TDM Duet: Teams of 2. Almost free for all, but with someone to watch your back. Group-focused equipment is still useful.
  
• Free-for-All: This would be awesome. But some gear would make much less sense here than in other kinds of matches.

[HRR Insanity]

Noobzorz, on 28 March 2013 - 06:26 AM, said:

1. One light mech can escape a group of assault mechs for a period of time that is virtually indefinite. That's it. That's all.

Who cares. Let them run. If you have more kills at the end, your team wins. That's it. The game lasts 15 minutes. It also encourages people to run things OTHER than assaults, because then you can counter opposing fast light/mediums.

Quote

2. Camping is real. It is not soluble or counterable in TDM. That's it. That's all.
....

a ) Artillery will solve this.
No. It wont. By definition "the most advantageous position" will be sufficiently protected from artillery to justify its use over any other. That camping team also has access to artillery, and there is no reason they cannot use it back. Further, the (necessarily vastly more powerful) equivalents in Call of Duty do absolutely nothing to resolve camping.

Artillery is a potential counter. By definition, a camping team is largely stationary and thus much more susceptible to airstrikes/artillery than a freely mobile/non-camping team. You may not have played MW4 competitively, but the LongTom was a great example of a weapon that emerged in the metagame exactly for this reason. It destroyed camping teams. And yes, competative MW4 was played in a NoRespawn environment just like MWO.

Quote

3. I strongly believe that TDM will lead to loadout homogenization, and everyone will run an assault mech.

All sane impementations of TDM (or any game-mode) use weight trading to balance the game. Pick a weight that everyone starts at, say 60T. If someone takes less tonnage than the 60T, say, a Raven... then 25T are available for other people to use to upgrade their 'Mech. So... for one Raven, two people could bring Cataphracts and one could bring a Catapult.

TDM doesn't have to be an assault-fest. It only will be if implemented poorly.

Quote

TL;DR
Anyway, in summation, TDM is a slapdash, clusterf**** . There is no rhyme or reason to it; it's just a good ol' fashioned scrubfest. And that's fine. Frankly, I see no reason not to include it since people want it and it doesn't sound costly, but those of you foolish enough to propose the game cannot be competitive until such time as it is included should get over it.

MW4 used TDM as the main form of nearly every planetary league for 10+ years. TDM is a valid competative format and is a much preferred one by the vast majority of the hardcore players who play this game because it is MechWarrior.

We want our planetary leagues back. We want them with updated 'Mechs and a thriving community.

[Vahnn]

I don't. Voted No.

TDM = last 1-2 players hide for 15 minutes in an attempt to maintain their K:D, since their chance of winning is slim.

Assault = last 1-2 players attempt to cap base/lure remaining enemies to the cap zone for an ambush/last stand in an attempt to win.

Conquest = Same as Assault, but the team with the upper hand must try to predict the movement of the remaining enemies, or else they could easily stand to lose the game.

Of course, enemies could simply hide and wait out the match in any game type, but I have a feeling this behavior would be extremely predominant in a TDM mode. Nevermind that you get more CB for doing more damage or destroying components... As long as the stats that only you can see look good, anything is worth doing, including wasting 10 minutes of time, eh?

[Vahnn]

I voted moments before you changed the subject. I am not able to recast my vote... My vote still stands. So...

How is this poll now "unbiased" and "no-nonsense," and a "do-over?"

[shabowie]

Teralitha, on 28 March 2013 - 07:32 PM, said:

Uh oh... looks like the yes votes are creeping up on ya! I suspect in the end this poll and my poll will have relatively the same results, which would indicate that my poll was not biased. Which makes complete sense, because its not.

Even if it stays roughly evenly split like it is now it means TDM is 3-4 times more popular than 3rd person, lol.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

More people hit NO, so I hope you're all happy with your capracing.