6 replies to this topic

[Alistair Winter]

Do you think the game will be very different when we start using 12 man matches? Also, do you find that 8 vs 8 on large maps (e.g. Alpine) plays out significantly different from 8 vs 8 on small maps (e.g. River Colony)?

At least at my ELO level, playing the current 8 vs 8 matches on Tourmaline desert usually end up like matches on any smaller map. I'm not seeing a lot of changes in terms of different tactics, certain roles being made more viable, etc. Certainly not in assault mode, anyway. Conquest is a bit different now that you can have 8 assault mechs vs 8 light mechs, but that'll change soon enough.

Maybe 12 vs 12 will change a lot, if the victory conditions are the same. If 3 mechs can capture a base in assault as quickly in 12vs12 as they can right now, I guess you need to pay more attention to flanking, as it's harder to keep track of all the enemy mechs.

Thoughts?

[Wintersdark]

I suspect we'll see more distributed tactics.

Currently, on a small map, a blob is extremely effective. However, when all clumped together things are pretty hectic at best.

When we move to 12 man, on a small map, a tight blob of mechs will be an absolute mess of friendly fire or simply blocked firing lanes. I suspect it'll take some of the edge from the PUG matches where people don't stick together, make them a more enjoyable experience, if that still happens.

On larger maps, splitting into lances will be much more useful. Either for flanking, or base capping.

Regardless, I think we'll see somewhat less "landslide" matches. They will of course still happen, but losing 2 mechs early in a 12 man isn't nearly as bad as losing 2 mechs early in an 8.

As things stand, flanking does work but is dangerous, because it's hard to leave a solid force in one location and still flank. With 12, as there's definitely a point where more mechs in a location results in little gain, it'll be more viable.

[N0ni]

My thoughts for when 12v12 hits: Pack a ton or two more ammo for my Ilya.

[Chemie]

I hope the tiny maps will stay 8v8

[Ravenspyre]

The current set up, IMO, the maps are still too small even for 8v8. Bumping up with 4 more mechs will just turn the matches themselves in a giant cluster of lasers and AC shells (cause who the **** uses missiles anymore). The maps need to be way bigger, and support things such as real objectives, not kill all the mechs for the win.

[Timuroslav]

I'm just hoping that Giant maps, increase REAL scouting. Not just PUG radar sharing. Then Again I don't know how else one can get the PUGS to cooperate without drowning their 8 man in a BEHEMOTH of a map. Big Maps Force people to communicate for fear of base rushing etc. I know people Hated Alpine when it first came out, but I love solely for the fact that at least tactics are switched up. You can pretty much, guess where the big fights are going to be in River city... That map needs to be expanded by idk. at least Double.

Game points, and experience needs to be buffed for scouts and a more coherent point system, of Why the Game rewards you in exp need to be expressed.
Still seems too often that PUGS base their usefulness on Damage.
Hopefully, Giant maps change that.

[Ravenspyre]

Sadly even in Alpine I can tell you where the big fight will be almost 90% of the time, and the other 10% of the time is the other direction. Scouting is still a moot point even on the "big" maps because people still go to the same points and even the big maps the bases are still within seeing distance of other base, so it's not exactly like we can't see the other mechs mobilizing. Alpine is only slightly trickier because there is a mountain in front of one of the bases.