24 replies to this topic

[simple1]

First, "thank you" to the man responsible for trying to make a MWO game.

There aren't any rewards for playing the "Battletech intended" role of your mech.

Example: Conquest mode and capping but not getting much, if any, damage/kills.
Having also "lit up" the enemy team locations and targeting w/them.
The lance is down to 2, you and the Stalker that didn't die (but it's being hunted
and about to die... making it just you against 5 remaining enemies).
Cap win"!"
You won the match for the team, w/only 23 damage. Stalker lives too.

I've just played (for the most part) the intended role for my Raven 3L w/ECM. What is my reward"?"

My point is that players who wish to play Battletech, and just new players in general are dissapointed in the reward system.

The rewards are a better match with UT3. I understand. Really I do.

*I know there are threads concerning the upcoming "rumored really" clan warfare.

I doubt the matchmaker and the reward system can/will change with actuall lances and "role" intended mechs doing what they do best.

This leaves it up to "us" the community to form and agree upon lances and playing the intended roles of our mechs... the rewards being the grats from your mates and and overall WIN perhaps.

With lobbies and CW this can be close to possible, but the reward system will not change unless there are dedicated servers for CW and plain 'ol lance vs. lance drops.

As far as I know this isn't on the horizon, so I am willing to joing any serious players willing to dedicate the team to Battletech style "role intended" play.

*a feeler, for some proof to the contrary... please"!"

[wwiiogre]

I agree with your post.

Currently if you go around capping in conquest and your team wins but you did little damage you are penalized for the play style the map calls for.

Quite sad really.

Chris

Edited by wwiiogre, 05 April 2013 - 08:17 AM.

[PurpleNinja]

Right now, all Mechs have one role, kill all the others Mech.
Your reward for capping is to hear all the cries of the other players.

[LordBraxton]

There are two roles really, the anvil of assaults, and the hammer of everything else.

If the enemy engages your assaults the exact same time the rest of your team engages you will probably win.

Its all about having all of your mechs firing at once, with as few of theirs returning fire as possible.

Edited by LordBraxton, 05 April 2013 - 09:03 AM.

[Durant Carlyle]

You can get C-Bills and XP for spotting for your team, assuming they have LRMs. This can be quite rewarding, as you can get up to 56 spotting bonuses per match if you're good at it.
You can get C-Bills and XP for using TAG and/or NARC to light up targets, again assuming your team has LRMs.
You get C-Bills for every resource point you gain in Conquest mode, even if your team loses.
You get XP for assisting in the capture of the base in Assault mode, assuming a cap win.

Yes, the main C-Bill and XP rewards are for getting kills and assists. If you don't want to engage in direct combat, just make sure to shoot every enemy 'Mech once during the match. If you do it while they are already engaged with a bigger friendly, they likely won't notice your shots. Those assist bonuses add up.

Running around capping bases makes for a boring game, so the rewards for doing so are lower. Combat is encouraged because it's far more fun to blow stuff up.

Right now, we always know where the bases are. Scouting isn't important, beyond finding the enemy initially. If we had randomized base locations every drop and the bases didn't appear on the map until you had eyes-on, scouting would be more important because it would be necessary to locate the bases so they can be captured. Bigger maps would also encourage scouting.

[Mackman]

Durant Carlyle, on 05 April 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

You can get C-Bills and XP for spotting for your team, assuming they have LRMs. This can be quite rewarding, as you can get up to 56 spotting bonuses per match if you're good at it.
You can get C-Bills and XP for using TAG and/or NARC to light up targets, again assuming your team has LRMs.
You get C-Bills for every resource point you gain in Conquest mode, even if your team loses.
You get XP for assisting in the capture of the base in Assault mode, assuming a cap win.

Yes, the main C-Bill and XP rewards are for getting kills and assists. If you don't want to engage in direct combat, just make sure to shoot every enemy 'Mech once during the match. If you do it while they are already engaged with a bigger friendly, they likely won't notice your shots. Those assist bonuses add up.

Running around capping bases makes for a boring game, so the rewards for doing so are lower. Combat is encouraged because it's far more fun to blow stuff up.

Right now, we always know where the bases are. Scouting isn't important, beyond finding the enemy initially. If we had randomized base locations every drop and the bases didn't appear on the map until you had eyes-on, scouting would be more important because it would be necessary to locate the bases so they can be captured. Bigger maps would also encourage scouting.

This guy covers all the major points, but I just want to elaborate on one point:

The main draw of this game is that you pilot giant stompy robots and fight against other giant stompy robots. I would imagine that's what has drawn almost all of the "gamers" to this game (maybe not the TT crowd?).

Now: Capping needs to exist to add a layer of strategy to the match, to allow for unexpected, skill-based upsets, to draw people out of their foxholes, etc.

But capping, particularly ninja-capping by groups of 4 Ravens, should never, ever be the primary method of winning a match. That's not what we came here to do. The "fun" of using four lights to sneak around the enemy and cap the base does not outweigh the anger and frustration it causes the other team, who are playing the game because they want to pilot huge, stompy robots against other huge, stompy robots.

And if the reward for capping was anywhere close to comparable with the reward for annihilating the other team, the natural human response would be to run with lights every game and always go for the ninja cap. Every single match would either be over in 3 minutes as one team ninja caps the other base, or they would become a 15-minute stalemate, with each team afraid of leaving their base for fear of being ninja capped.

Not fun.

As it is, I think they've struck a pretty good balance. My games are filled with epic battles, with the occasional come-from-behind cap victory: Which is exactly how it should be. Just yesterday, for instance, we won a game where the final score was 750-748.

[Victor Morson]

I hate to tell you but in BattleTech there are often objectives beyond killing each other, in both the fluff and the scenarios for TT. Honestly CTF isn't much different than what you'd find in many campaign books to simulate an area cap.

[simple1]

My post is here to gain info for those who have expressed... well less than enthusiasm about their loadouts not being the intended loadout for that particular mech.
ie: my 4x when it had a gauss rifle and/or lrm5 OR {insert your story here},
AND they've expressed concern for mechs/variants being used for roles that are intended for mechs on the oposite end of the spectrum. Brawlers like the A1. I mean LRM boats like the A1. I mean... I don't know what's going on out there anymore"!"

Not only do pilots receive grief from other pilots, but they are consistenly told not to use those mechs the way they are using them.

*Um... yes you get Cbills.

It's the amount that you get.

It's not enough to buy mechs you want quickly and you get burnt out on the slow grind. (new pilots?)

SO the reward is not enough incentive to play the "typicaly intended" role OF ANY MECH except of course for the short-range brawlers. What were they again?

It IS extremely fun because \\\it's robots with massive firepower/// and the game engine helps.

SO there's that kind of incentive.

WHICH IS WHY I LOVE IT, hence the thank you.

Really exciting to see this game either way. Calling for more Battletech-ish.

[Liege]

Mackman, on 05 April 2013 - 10:50 AM, said:

Just yesterday, for instance, we won a game where the final score was 750-748.

...and I lost a game like this yesterday.

Fantastic match.

[simple1]

Dont get me wrong, Ive had hundreds of EPIC drops, and do everyday.

That's what keeps me playing.

This is so the people saying that they may quit playing the game because it's not really as Battletech-is will, perhaps,
have some hope to continue.

Looking forward to seeing how the CW is handled.

[Jeff K Notagoon]

People who want to play battletech should play battletech instead of a first-person realtime action game based on the same universe as battletech

[simple1]

Jeff K Notagoon, on 05 April 2013 - 06:48 PM, said:

People who want to play battletech should play battletech instead of a first-person realtime action game based on the same universe as battletech

I want to mention that I wrote, "Battletech "style" play".

I should've rephrased to say Mechwarrior, not Battletech.

The idea is that if the game is based on Battletech, then lets have it be more Battletech like, in the play/reward department.

Right now it's UT3 w/robots. However it is fun that we all don't share the same loadout, or respawn.

A pickup or two is all we need... lol"!"
Perhaps a boost to heat cutoff when you complete a cap (conquest), or 5% heal for every 20+/- seconds spent capping (assault).

If we had dedicated servers that catered to "team only" drops, and a different set of rules for the clan specific... warfare, it would be a different story.

A fun and engaging story alongside the timeline etc.

New pilots will not have to deal with dropping against teams that have orginization (who might wish to play the match as a lance with roles for each variant).

Each pilot can play his role and be rewarded accordingly, for dropping as "that mech".

[Durant Carlyle]

The only way to have BattleTech role based play would be to have a stock-only game mode. No customizations whatsoever. There would be no easy-mode ECM-Streaker builds, most lights have paper-thin armor (even with armor doubled like it is in MW:O), heat management would suck the big one, ammo amounts suck, etc.

I have a feeling that very few players would actually play that mode.

And to those who are apparently sensitive to what others think ... who cares if somebody is telling you that you're running a 'Mech contrary to the way it's supposed to be?

Another thing ... you don't get penalized for not blowing 'Mechs up. You simply don't get rewarded as much. Capping might be one of the ways to win a match, but it's no fun for anybody playing. Encouraging battle by giving higher rewards for it is a good thing.

[Ph30nix]

Mackman, on 05 April 2013 - 10:50 AM, said:

This guy covers all the major points, but I just want to elaborate on one point:

The main draw of this game is that you pilot giant stompy robots and fight against other giant stompy robots. I would imagine that's what has drawn almost all of the "gamers" to this game (maybe not the TT crowd?).

Now: Capping needs to exist to add a layer of strategy to the match, to allow for unexpected, skill-based upsets, to draw people out of their foxholes, etc.

But capping, particularly ninja-capping by groups of 4 Ravens, should never, ever be the primary method of winning a match. That's not what we came here to do. The "fun" of using four lights to sneak around the enemy and cap the base does not outweigh the anger and frustration it causes the other team, who are playing the game because they want to pilot huge, stompy robots against other huge, stompy robots.

And if the reward for capping was anywhere close to comparable with the reward for annihilating the other team, the natural human response would be to run with lights every game and always go for the ninja cap. Every single match would either be over in 3 minutes as one team ninja caps the other base, or they would become a 15-minute stalemate, with each team afraid of leaving their base for fear of being ninja capped.

Not fun.

As it is, I think they've struck a pretty good balance. My games are filled with epic battles, with the occasional come-from-behind cap victory: Which is exactly how it should be. Just yesterday, for instance, we won a game where the final score was 750-748.

i just find it funny how prejudiced you are against ravens.... Whys it gotta be ravens bro? it couldnt be commandos or Jenners? heck cicadas do it too.....

[DegeneratePervert]

Durant Carlyle, on 11 April 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

The only way to have BattleTech role based play would be to have a stock-only game mode. No customizations whatsoever. There would be no easy-mode ECM-Streaker builds, most lights have paper-thin armor (even with armor doubled like it is in MW:O), heat management would suck the big one, ammo amounts suck, etc.

I have a feeling that very few players would actually play that mode.

And to those who are apparently sensitive to what others think ... who cares if somebody is telling you that you're running a 'Mech contrary to the way it's supposed to be?

Another thing ... you don't get penalized for not blowing 'Mechs up. You simply don't get rewarded as much. Capping might be one of the ways to win a match, but it's no fun for anybody playing. Encouraging battle by giving higher rewards for it is a good thing.

You do get penalized. On a great game while playing my Spider, where I cap pretty much the whole round and try and pick at people who are weak (IE blowing up the Atlas' big gun with 3x medium lasers so that the friendly atlas brawling it has an edge), and being the last one alive usually, I get rewarded 400xp. That's terrible, for all the work I'm doing. The game only rewards heavy brawling and obscene damage.

[EyeOne]

They've got to get some XP and cbills for capping in Conquest (mainly). I ran around in my super fast Death's Knell and capped points on Alpine. We ended up winning by points and it looked like I did nothing to help our team on the score board.

But I wish capping in Assault should just go away completely, really. But at least make it more complicated. It just feels so dumb right now.

Edited by EyeOne, 11 April 2013 - 10:35 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

You get paid based on performance. If you want more XP, then do more of those things that generate XP. If your Mech is not designed to do those things, then why do you think you should get rewarded the same as those Mechs who are, but are also not often ineligible to do those that your Mech can?

[Novakaine]

And that is why this game just.....Yawn....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

[SirLANsalot]

Did I take a wrong turn at Albuquerque? I think that last time I checked this game is called Mechwarrior Online, not Battletech Online.


Role warfare is still quite incomplete and probably will be expanded more on once the main parts of CW come down the line (like planetary conquest).

[Dracol]

When my group drops, I run a treb while the others in the four man are usually two assualts and a light. My job is to watch for flankers, spot incoming targets (jj are great for this), and to land my dual ppcs into the exposed inards of the enemy.

Do I get much in exp, kills, or bills? Compared to the other three , nope.

So why do I do it? Because this no better feeling then when a well timed flank by the enemy is crushed because I was looking away from the battle line and reported it in time enough for us to reposition.

For me, the battle itself is the reward. Everything else is icing on the cake.