21 replies to this topic

[TyGeR STD]

its the most basic mode in all of gaming, but it is a game mode that MWO requires. Teams, Clans, House's, and units of players all want to test their combat skills vs another team, not capping base's. Not gathering points. MWO NEEDS a TDM game mode.

[Mercules]

So what you are saying is that your combat skills have been found lacking and you want a game mode that won't rudely point that out to you?

Combat does not equal shooting. It is also maneuvering and acheiving objectives.

[Tatula]

Mercules, on 25 April 2013 - 06:04 AM, said:

So what you are saying is that your combat skills have been found lacking and you want a game mode that won't rudely point that out to you?

Combat does not equal shooting. It is also maneuvering and acheiving objectives.

Yes, but why can't the objectives be killing enemy mechs by out-maneuvering them? And combat may not equal ALL shooting, but should have at least SOME shooting. Otherwise, why call it combat?

[Mercules]

Aloha, on 25 April 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

Yes, but why can't the objectives be killing enemy mechs by out-maneuvering them? And combat may not equal ALL shooting, but should have at least SOME shooting. Otherwise, why call it combat?

I promise you that if you move out from your base in a manner that allows you to intercept mechs trying to do an end run for the base, there will be shooting. AKA, "protect the objective".

[Tatula]

Mercules, on 25 April 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

I promise you that if you move out from your base in a manner that allows you to intercept mechs trying to do an end run for the base, there will be shooting. AKA, "protect the objective".

But that involves a lot of if's. IF my PUG team will move out in a manner that will cover ALL approaches to our base (we all know how well that works). IF the enemy doesn't have an elite light pilot who can sneak by anyway because he knows the maps better in addition to having ECM. IF my PUG can agree on how to "protect the objective." Etc.

Why CAN'T we have a TDM game mode? Is it such a bad thing? If anything, it will give us a place to go so we won't bother you super elite players with our bad playing and complaints about capping.

[Mercules]

I PUG and I've found that if YOU take the responsibility and find the enemy mechs then the pugs will shoot them If, however, YOU decide to not do this then you might get lucky enough to have someone else go out and do it for you... or maybe not. Remember, for every PUGger ignoring the approaches to your base there is YOU as someone else's PUGger doing the same.

Edited by Mercules, 25 April 2013 - 09:01 AM.

[Kivin]

I still can't believe people continue to nay say this. In many shooters, TDM is one of the most popular game modes, over objective-oriented combat. In a particular shooter I am wont to play, several of the objective modes get turned in to TDMs by the players. We also see this in MechWarrior Online: Assault is a base-cap mode, yet base capping just... isn't... fun.

I think we can all agree that shooting Mechs is fun. It happens to be the principle reason that most of us log on to the game. Why would it upset you so very much to have a game mode dedicated to it without the distraction of the rotten base system?

As it is, I already shut off Conquest mode because I don't like it. Does it upset you that I don't like it, or that I shut it off? Why does it? Why should it? If TDM bothers you so much, just shut it off. Good heavens.

Edited by Kivin, 25 April 2013 - 09:12 AM.

[Tatula]

Mercules, on 25 April 2013 - 09:01 AM, said:

I PUG and I've found that if YOU take the responsibility and find the enemy mechs then the pugs will shoot them If, however, YOU decide to not do this then you might get lucky enough to have someone else go out and do it for you... or maybe not. Remember, for every PUGger ignoring the approaches to your base there is YOU as someone else's PUGger doing the same.

You just added two more if's. LOL. And still have not given one reason why having a TDM mode is bad.

I mean, I get what you're saying about defending the base and all that. But that only applies to the current game modes. What I'm saying is that I wouldn't mind having a game mode that will allow me to get in my baddest mech so I can go out and duke it out with someone else's baddest mechs. Maybe not ALL the time, but when I feel like it.

[Mercules]

Aloha, on 25 April 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

You just added two more if's. LOL. And still have not given one reason why having a TDM mode is bad.

The two "if's" I added were both in your control and so really not iffy, if you get my meaning. Bascially it boils down to knowing that if you don't do it, it is likely no one will. I just want you to remember that when complaining about others in your PUG not doing any of that, you are a PUG not doing that when I join a game.


TDM is a dated format for a game. There is a reason many games avoid it. In mechwarrior TDM encourages even MORE of what some people are already complaining about. Assault mechs and Heavy mechs, alpha builds, slow mechs, Poptarting, and more.


For every person who explains that there can be a depth of tactics in TDM including enfilading fire and such there are ten players who will simply run straight forward shooting whatever they can. At least with Assault those "derp" pilots are in for a rude awakening when they get bypassed and lose to a base capture.

One of the other things TDM promotes is moving to a secure spot and then holding it. Mobbing up and sitting still. It turns into even more of a sniper-fest than MWO currently is. Having a secondary objective that requires the team to spread out a bit discorages that and leads to more interesting play.

[8RoundsRapid]

Mercules, on 25 April 2013 - 06:04 AM, said:

So what you are saying is that your combat skills have been found lacking and you want a game mode that won't rudely point that out to you?

Combat does not equal shooting. It is also maneuvering and acheiving objectives.

I am not a fan of team deathmatch, as I feel it is overly simple and doesn't really reflect good game design/gameplay. It encourages bad play and engenders bad habits amongst players, making them tactically inflexible, and fomenting the idea that the game needs to be balanced around the team deathmatch format.

All that being said, I think it should be added. Why? Because the more game modes they make, the more people will be happy and play this game. It won't fracture the community like some say, it will just give those that really like TDM a home instead of forcing them to play a game mode they despise and causing resentment toward PGI.

And really, it would probably be one of the easiest modes to implement, and lord knows we need to keep things simple and easy for this group of devs.

[TheMightyWashburn]

Mercules, on 25 April 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

I promise you that if you move out from your base in a manner that allows you to intercept mechs trying to do an end run for the base, there will be shooting. AKA, "protect the objective".

This just leads to the equally infurating base camp situation.

The game needs TDM, end of story. There is NO reason not to have it. 95% of people just want to shoot each other. This isnt a frekkin total war game (which I love) this is a slow paced FPS.

A huge problem with this game is a group of 6 will beat a group of 4 every damn day. Which is why we try to fight 8 on 8 at once because if we dont the smaller group will lose base cap or no base cap.

[xDeityx]

TyGeR STD, on 24 April 2013 - 09:25 PM, said:

its the most basic mode in all of gaming, but it is a game mode that MWO requires. Teams, Clans, House's, and units of players all want to test their combat skills vs another team, not capping base's. Not gathering points. MWO NEEDS a TDM game mode.

What TDM brings:

-Entire teams of long range poptarters that move to the most advantageous spot on the map and never move.
-Last man standing light 'mechs that drag out the round by hiding and evading the entire time.

Until you can solve these two problems with TDM there is no point in furthering a discussion of that game mode. It's true that Assault and Conquest are crap game modes, but focus your energy on suggesting a good game mode, not an inherently flawed one that's even worse than what we already have. Assault mode is an evolved TDM that solves those two problems above but creates a different set of problems due to players being lazy or bad. I'd rather have the problems that Assault brings that I can solve by not being a halfwit than the ones that TDM creates by being too shallow of a game mode that relies on people playing by a gentleman's agreement to meet each other in the middle of the field and slug it out.

And really, it's not hard to protect your cap. You just don't feel like it.

[Homeless Bill]

TDM needs to happen, but you also have to fix the problem of someone that decides to run around and hide from everyone. That's why I favor a single-base, king-of-the-hill approach to deathmatch.

We know, we know: "Defend your base." **** that. Why should everyone have to play the game you want them to play? Why do you arrogant ******** insist that your playstyle is "better" and "more tactical." You have no tactics. You have the predictable, uninteresting, and annoying Raven reacharound.

I'd like to fight out a real 'mech battle, and I'm pretty sure no one was standing in a box to win in any iteration of Battletech (or war, for that matter). It's not that objective modes suck - it's just that lots of us don't want to play them.

[Mercules]

TheMightyWashburn, on 25 April 2013 - 11:25 AM, said:

This just leads to the equally infurating base camp situation.

No...
It...
Doesn't...

I am not saying to sit in your base. It seems a lot of the people who complain about base capping seem to thing their options are limited to a very binary set of tactics:
1. Go Fight
2. Sit in Base

It seems like they don't seem to understand that on MOST of the maps you can scout out the paths to your base with a speedy medium or even speedy heavy. You do not have to sit in your base and you shouldn't as that gives the enemy the initiative. When PUGging your best bet is to find the enemy and light them up. First thing I look for are lights and mediums flanking us by running and peeking into the main routes to our base.

If you make the team aware of a light flanking you, someone will shoot at it, especially if you do too. Once someone engages it you can go search out others.

TheMightyWashburn, on 25 April 2013 - 11:25 AM, said:

The game needs TDM, end of story. There is NO reason not to have it. 95% of people just want to shoot each other. This isnt a frekkin total war game (which I love) this is a slow paced FPS.

I would argue with the 95% of the people just want to shoot each other. Maybe about half want to "just shoot each other". In the (unbiased) polls that occurred not that long ago it was coming up with the majority against adding in TDM.


I think if you can hold on the Community Warfare will help resolve some of the TDM desire. Right now the devs have stated they are not going to split the community yet again with another game mode, at this time. TDM is out, for now, according to them.

[Mercules]

Homeless Bill, on 25 April 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

It's not that objective modes suck - it's just that lots of us don't want to play them.

http://hawken.wikia.com/wiki/Game_modes

They even have "medics". Enjoy.

[Homeless Bill]

Mercules, on 25 April 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

http://hawken.wikia....wiki/Game_modes


They even have "medics". Enjoy.

Translation: Play like I want or ****. New game modes not allowed.

[Mercules]

Homeless Bill, on 25 April 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

Translation: Play like I want or ****. New game modes not allowed.

It duplicates the two existing modes too much without ADDING anything. Both modes are objective based with TDM being an alternate win but if you look....
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2293207

You will see that most of Assault matches end up in death anyway. Why ask for something that is even more limited?

[8RoundsRapid]

So, if the argument against having a TDM mode is that you don't like the play style, why don't you just not queue up for it? Or are we assuming that we will be forced to play this mode?

I don't like TDM either, so I simply wouldn't play it. I'm not gonna try and convince the people who do like it that they don't like it. That is just silly.

[Homeless Bill]

Mercules, on 25 April 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

It duplicates the two existing modes too much without ADDING anything. Both modes are objective based with TDM being an alternate win but if you look....
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2293207

You will see that most of Assault matches end up in death anyway. Why ask for something that is even more limited?

I'm not asking for something more limited; I'm asking for something different that would add a bit of variety. 90% of Assault matches play out the same exact way (camp ridge on Frozen, camp caldera on Caustic, Epsilon area on Alpine, the crater on Tourmaline, etc.). The only one that doesn't produce consistent results is River City, and while that can be good, a lot of the time it ends up in the no-shot-fired capture. I play Conquest a lot of the time anymore just for some variety (but then it has even worse run-around problems).

King of the Hill would focus the battle on different parts of maps (think about how many good spots on Tourmaline get zero action), prevent lights running around better than assault, and allow for real offensive tactics that aren't constantly held hostage to bases two kilometers behind the main force.

You say it's a duplicate of the existing modes, but it really facilitates an entirely different type of play. I'd argue that the current Assault implementation is horrible, causing matches to play out in a similar, overly cautious manner that favors camping and sniping. King of the Hill adds variety in location, adds variety in tactics, and it frees players like me from the chains of babysitting a box.

Don't like it? Don't play it. A lot of us simply want one mode where capturing isn't a valid tactic to win - one where fighting is the only way to victory.

[Tatula]

Mercules, on 25 April 2013 - 09:47 AM, said:

The two "if's" I added were both in your control and so really not iffy, if you get my meaning. Bascially it boils down to knowing that if you don't do it, it is likely no one will. I just want you to remember that when complaining about others in your PUG not doing any of that, you are a PUG not doing that when I join a game.

EXACTLY! If I don't WANT to do it, then I'm being punished for wanting to play an ASSAULT mech in the ASSAULT mode.

Quote

TDM is a dated format for a game. There is a reason many games avoid it. In mechwarrior TDM encourages even MORE of what some people are already complaining about. Assault mechs and Heavy mechs, alpha builds, slow mechs, Poptarting, and more.

Says you, but I haven't played all that many other MMO games. And I would like to have the opportunity to decide for myself whether or not I like TDM in MWO.

Quote

For every person who explains that there can be a depth of tactics in TDM including enfilading fire and such there are ten players who will simply run straight forward shooting whatever they can. At least with Assault those "derp" pilots are in for a rude awakening when they get bypassed and lose to a base capture.

But why is that a bad thing? Why CAN'T we get in an ASSAULT mech and go ASSAULT something? Just for the fun of it. Why MUST every game be TACTICAL (according to YOUR definition of tactical)? For the record, I have no complaints about poptarting or boating. At the very least, they're shooting something.

Quote

One of the other things TDM promotes is moving to a secure spot and then holding it. Mobbing up and sitting still. It turns into even more of a sniper-fest than MWO currently is. Having a secondary objective that requires the team to spread out a bit discorages that and leads to more interesting play.

GREAT! I like NEW challenges! Especially when it doesn't involve backtracking to my spawn point because a light was able to sneak through. You know what's the MOST boring part of this game is? The WALKING. On a big map, it take several minutes of walking to get a spot where the INTERESTING things happen. That's the FIGHTING part. If there is actually a "secure" spot on a map, wouldn't it require the most balance team to get there first and hold it? Wouldn't it present new challenges on figuring out how to successfully breach the so called "secure" spot?

MWO is one of the few games I enjoy playing and I want to be able to enjoy all aspects of it, from playing lights to playing assaults. Even poptarting (for the record, I don't own any mechs with JJs). You're telling me that if I don't want to play a light or a fast medium that can scout and be fast enough to get back to defend the base, then it's MY fault that my team loses to a light pilot who like to cap in ASSAULT mode.

I see that you've included Bryan Ekman's stat in your sig. I will grant you that maybe 8% of the games ended in cap wins are out of necessity - out of ammo, no weapons left, etc. And that last 10% are won by turbo cappers or by MM not giving a team lights or mediums fast enough to get back to prevent a base cap, or simply by people not wanting to head back because they're too busy having fun and fighting. How many people who played in that last 10% do you think actually ENJOYED the game ending that way?