12 replies to this topic

[AlixX]

Often on the big maps the base gets capped and no one can do anything about it. Its a goal and its fine, but can PGI add another?

Can we get a neutral base in the middle of the map that needs to be captured in order to win? (or killing the whole team will give u the win also)

I would like to see a bigger zone where u can cap in and the rate of it to be slow. Maybe some cover in the zone for small mechs.

What u guys think?

[Maliconus]

More Maps and More Modes the More Better...

[EyeOne]

I guess that's a possible change. It would be much easier for them to either 1) remove base cap all together or 2) give you a reward for doing it.

As it stands you get nothing for base capping. I was playing yesterday on River City. My team wondered around the lower city, after seeing no one we went up to cap. When the enemy turned to stop us I said "Ok stop capping, let's fight" to our team. But they didn't and we "won" I got 44k cbills for it. However, the next game we fought hard and lost and I got 65k cbills. I got more for losing and fighting. I'd rather do that any day.

[Galenit]

Then we have 2 base, 3 base and 5 base maps.
If 2 bases are not enough, go to the 5 base mode.
Another mode should give another mechanic.

[Mercules]

AlixX, on 15 April 2013 - 05:45 AM, said:

Often on the big maps the base gets capped and no one can do anything about it. Its a goal and its fine, but can PGI add another?

Can we get a neutral base in the middle of the map that needs to be captured in order to win? (or killing the whole team will give u the win also)

I would like to see a bigger zone where u can cap in and the rate of it to be slow. Maybe some cover in the zone for small mechs.

What u guys think?

I think it would be a worse game mode. All it does is turn it into King of the Hill.

Better solution... learn to play Conquest.

[AlixX]

Mercules, on 15 April 2013 - 05:54 AM, said:

I think it would be a worse game mode. All it does is turn it into King of the Hill.

Better solution... learn to play Conquest.

Well more modes make a game a bit more versatile. Different tactics as well. You cant really compare it with the others because its totally different. Thats all I am looking for

[Ph30nix]

only downside to this would be you just turned all maps into a one fight location arena. WHich isnt THAT differnt then it already is, E5 on alpine anyone?

but it would be something,

[Galenit]

AlixX, on 15 April 2013 - 06:07 AM, said:

You cant really compare it with the others because its totally different.

Between 2 bases and 5 bases its total different.
Betweeen 3 and 5 bases i see not that much difference.
But 1 base (king of the hill) would make a difference.

And then its time to find something other then basecapping for gamemodes ...

[Mercules]

AlixX, on 15 April 2013 - 06:07 AM, said:

Well more modes make a game a bit more versatile. Different tactics as well. You cant really compare it with the others because its totally different. Thats all I am looking for

It would be a change but you still have to evaluate if it is a change that would be good for the game and add value to it that is worth the effort of coding it as well as coding in the changes to allow it to happen like altering the matchmaker to include it.

In my opinion all it would do is change the focus point from two parts of the map to one central part. A large portion of the PUGging population already run towards a given spot on the map and fight it out there already so really all this mode would do is alter team composition towards the heavier and slower end.

The basic tactic would be to move forward and hold that center point. Why? Because the enemy team HAS to come there. There is no choice.

It doesn't really add anything of value to the game. Check out Conquest. What ends up happening in 90% of the games is the two teams each take a side objective and then meet up around one of them for a brawl. It does get changed up from time to time but that just adds a bit more variety. The caps are not all important, but can suddenly become very important when you realize you have 3 guys left and 1 opposing mech out there and you are behind on points.

Yes, with Conquest the way it is the enemy team can avoid you and win. You need to understand there is nothing wrong with that.

[AlixX]

@Mercules

Well why have conquest even there if its going to end up in a brawl anyway? This just puts the focus on 1 part of the map. I dont see any harm in it if it would be added. It mixes things up.

Galenit, on 15 April 2013 - 06:12 AM, said:

Between 2 bases and 5 bases its total different.
Betweeen 3 and 5 bases i see not that much difference.
But 1 base (king of the hill) would make a difference.

And then its time to find something other then basecapping for gamemodes ...

What about a defend the president/ commander game mode?

[Mercules]

AlixX, on 15 April 2013 - 07:15 AM, said:

@Mercules

Well why have conquest even there if its going to end up in a brawl anyway? This just puts the focus on 1 part of the map. I dont see any harm in it if it would be added. It mixes things up.

The most effective way to prevent the enemy from gathering resources is to remove the enemy. However if you can't be certain the enemy will be eliminated it is in your best interest to gain some resources yourself so they simply don't win by gathering resources.

It doesn't put the focus on one part of the map, but it doesn't tend to play out that way most of the time. Because the enemy has the option to not go where you expect them, having multiple locations to attack lets them change that up on you.

[Gallowglas]

I'd prefer to simply have the bases locked for capture for the first 5 minutes of the game. Maybe have a few base defenses. I think that would solve most, if not all, of my issues with assault.

[Pygar]

I have had a couple ideas about this... not to replace the current game modes, but to maybe add in some other interesting versions...

A: Central capture point (only)- would be a good way to force groups to go directly at each other with no hesitations or diversions. Downsides- The matches would almost never end in cap victory, so only Heavy and Assault mechs need apply...it's pretty much TDM at this point, along with all of TDM's problems.

B: Alternating bases- Instead of having teams trying to attack and defend at the same time, force teams to alternate between attacking and defending. Downsides- would likely require matches going to a best 2 out of 3 format, maybe having the 3rd match be a regular assault with both bases present...would be interesting, but time consuming.

C:Base Destrution- instead of capturing bases, bases need to be destroyed... faster mechs which are good at capping usually carry less guns, so this balances their ability to "rush" really early in games. Downsides- could put light or medium mechs out of a job, and currently capturing bases gives pilots a nice "plan B" to go with if they get all of their guns stripped or run out of ammo. Also, on certain maps some bases can be shot from very long distance, so unless maps were changed you would have to fear your base getting destroyed in the first few minutes of the game rather than "rushed".

I like the "Alternating" idea the best, but as I mentioned it might require that teams play "Best 2 out of 3" which results in long matches.