100 replies to this topic

[Phoenix182]

I disagree with the OP.

The problem isn't that some people want to play team deathmatch, it's that there is NO team deathmatch mode.

This forces everyone to be in the same queue, and leaves us with no one getting what they want. If there was an actual deathmatch mode, then everyone who wanted that playstyle could take their alphastrikers in there, while cappers could flock to conquest, and balanced play could exist on assault. Without a deathmatch server, half the players on assault and conquest are ONLY there to fight.

This also touches on the issue of PUG vs premades. Strategy and balance can and often do exist in premade games, but is nearly impossible in PUGs (even with communication available it wouldn't help). There's no planning phase, potential language barrier, total newbs learning how to drive in with experienced players, rambo's, etc. Until PGI realizes that PUGs and premades need their own queues, even offering a deathmatch mode won't totally fix the issue (though it would certainly help).

So my thoughts:

0. Make the game actually work (until we drop under a 20-40% bug rate, all the rest is irrelevant)

1. Make a deathmatch or freeforall mode, or both (duel mode ala Solaris wouldn't hurt either).
2. Make a PUG only, mixed, and premade only filter.
3. Finish all the gameplay additions like in-game communicaiton, planning phase, etc.

Edited by Phoenix182, 30 April 2013 - 01:46 PM.

[silentD11]

DV McKenna, on 30 April 2013 - 01:37 PM, said:

Um, do two things, make assault actually assault....ie give the maps a base to take, complete with turrets etc etc.

Two: Implement a TDM mode we have a crappy mode in conquest, soon to be a respawn dropship mutator, incoming third person and regional server splits.....their argument of we don't want to fracture the playerbase by adding TDM, is both dumb and see through.

Having the computer do your base defense for you will still cause TDM to break the meta and turn into boating whatever the best weapon there is. Because it removes the need to have players defend the base and actually move around the map. No TDM game has ever had balanced weapons, EVER. Because in TDM one thing is always slightly better and others are worse. So arguing over weapon balance or game balance for TDM is pointless. As long as players aren't forced to actively defend their base and move around the map to look for people classes and weapons will remain perpetually broken. Arguing against capping and defending is just arguing to keep the game in a permanent state of unbalanced and OP going back and forth, with the various factions simply wanting their favored weapon to be the top one.

[Trauglodyte]

Assault, in and of itself, doesn't really make sense. Battle Tech, both in the novels and in the published game scenarios, always depicted a defense and attack situation. You either dropped/moved into an area to take it or you were based there as protection. Even in real world combat, there has never been a situation where you've got two opposing sides in the same areas where the goal is to capture the other's side. You either want it or you want to keep it. So why are we supposed to pass each other in the war zone and stand on a resource? Furthermore, why does evey weight class cap at the same speed? If an Atlas trudges all that way, it should damn well cap faster than the 20 ton Flea that used MASC to get there in a blink of an eye.

Basically, they need to just scrap Assault from one side. You could do a myriad of things: have one Assault variant be a supply depot or maybe a bridge. You could also have it be something where an opponent just landed and you've got to assault their side before their big guns come on line (which your intel has found out that you cannot withstand). 15 minutes to take a position would be much better AND it would still end up being the Death Match that we all love but you can at least have it be something worth sitting back and defending as opposed to a mindless walk to the easiest center area so that we can duke it out.



For that matter, Conquest doesn't make sense either.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 30 April 2013 - 01:48 PM.

[TruePoindexter]

Roland, on 30 April 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

Give us a TDM mode then, then the folks who don't want to fight won't be bothered by folks who do.

The alternative game goals are required to keep specific mech roles viable. Everything would just de-evolve to using whatever mechs offered the best killing performance. Just look at MW3/MW4 to see that happen.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

Neverfar, on 30 April 2013 - 01:24 PM, said:

If you change/nerf one weapon, what happens to the next best one? Or the one that just got boosted.

Yep. More boating. If mechanics allow it and the metagame permits it, people will bloat and boat.

It's hilarious how many people whine about capping.

Hardpoint Sizes

Whoa look everything can be balanced on a mech to mech basis

[Roland]

TruePoindexter, on 30 April 2013 - 01:47 PM, said:

The alternative game goals are required to keep specific mech roles viable. Everything would just de-evolve to using whatever mechs offered the best killing performance. Just look at MW3/MW4 to see that happen.

A lot of us are perfectly content to focus entirely on killing other mechs. Maybe you're not, and that's cool. You wouldn't have to play.

The argument that "certain mech roles" aren't viable is silly though. Scouts were essentially required in any competitive NR play in MW4.

No respawn TDM does not, in any way, limit how complex a game can be. It merely doesn't rely on silly game mechanics to try and impose complexity, and instead derives its complexity from the players themselves. Just like all truly great games do.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

Neverfar, on 30 April 2013 - 01:58 PM, said:

You go from having a Stalker boating 6 PPCs to being forced to use 2 and 4 smaller weapons.

Why is that bad?

Not doing anything is far worse than leaving the game the broken pile of **** it is now.
If you honestly think the current metagame is a "L2Play" issue then I dont know what to say except you dont know what youre talking about.

It's a beta. These are gameplay balance forums. Its where you go to post about gameplay balance, something that isnt in the game right now.

[Corvus Antaka]

Neverfar, on 30 April 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

One primary problem is that so many people think it's "griefing" to actually capture the enemy base. Even those on your own team. Bloat-boat people are upset that anyone decides to outrun them and not be their cannon fodder.

QFT

[AntiCitizenJuan]

Neverfar, on 30 April 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

Saying "honestly" doesn't transmute your opinion into fact or make it any more valid than mine. If you remove that meaningless word altogether you actually sound a little more persuasive.

"If u dont liek it leave" isn't a good way to response to what is, yes, a post about gameplay balance.

Your "magic" solution would, in my opinion, only lead to the next easiest maximum damage thing being bloat-boated into the center of every battleground, with the same complaining if anyone uses speed to try to capture objectives, instead of having a little speed of your own on your side to counter that.

It's better than what we have now. High damage 3 shot kills isnt fun, I dont care how much you use cover, you're going to get poptarded by high damage alpha strikes. Something has to change.

[FunkyFritter]

Everyone, please continue playing TDM. I enjoy the free cap wins.

[silentD11]

AntiCitizenJuan, on 30 April 2013 - 02:05 PM, said:

It's better than what we have now. High damage 3 shot kills isnt fun, I dont care how much you use cover, you're going to get poptarded by high damage alpha strikes. Something has to change.

No, it's not. Then the next thing that is the best and everyone uses it will be complained about. See ultrafastbacks with small lasers, see jenner of death, see LRMageddon, see the 3L, see the streakcat, see the splatcat, now see poptarts. It's impossible to have balance with the classes and weapons for TDM. The balance is in the game mode, which has capture points, forcing people to play defense, move about and look, and scout. Absent players doing that and just looking to play TDM something will always be the best and complained about. It's people always playing TDM that is causing the balance issues.

[xRaeder]

The TL:DL version of this is that people want stupid TDM like Counterstrike w/o realizing that it limits the game to a brawl.

Weapon nerf/balancing issues as we've seen over the last eight months happen because of two factors. Short games (which means your Alpha strike is more important than staying power in terms of heat or armor), small matches in both player numbers and map size w/o real objectives (which equals less tactics leading directly to brawls).

This is why MW:LL is a much better game. The only thing MWO has over MW:LL is an "offline" customization feature and better graphics. In terms of gameplay MW:LL beats it in all forms. Zero G maps, 20x20km maps, far more mechs, aerospace, tanks, and even infantry to a limited extent. It is what this game should have been.

I've always said that PGI should copy BF3 scale and player counts and let people select TDM for special tourney rewards, so your TDM wouldn't go away.

I think it very important to point out that Conquest with respawns was the most popular game mode in MW4 and they would be here as well. They would also fit better with Community Warfare.

Edited by xRaeder, 30 April 2013 - 02:13 PM.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

Neverfar, on 30 April 2013 - 02:07 PM, said:

I don't like the PPC or poptart hell either. But there's a very good chance you or someone just like you had the same problem with LRM spam before, or SRM splatcats.

See the relation? If "bring most damage to fight, win" only has the variable of "hit them further out if possible", there wont be much we can call variety in this game.

The problem is that PGI doesnt balance things out gradually. It always has to be a radical change like SRMs going from 2.5 damage to 1.5 damage, and then PPC heat going from insanely high to very manageable, allowing people to boat them.

Maybe if they would just make constant, gradual changes to their weaponry we wouldnt be having these rampant cheesebuilds everywhere, everygame, all the time.

Again. It's allegedly a beta, I would assume that we would be able to test things and have them pay attention to our feedback for tweaks.

Edited by AntiCitizenJuan, 30 April 2013 - 02:18 PM.

[Roadbeer]

AntiCitizenJuan, on 30 April 2013 - 02:17 PM, said:

The problem is that PGI doesnt balance things out gradually. It always has to be a radical change like SRMs going from 2.5 damage to 1.5 damage, and then PPC heat going from insanely high to very manageable, allowing people to boat them.

Maybe if they would just make constant, gradual changes to their weaponry we wouldnt be having these rampant cheesebuilds everywhere, everygame, all the time.

Again. It's allegedly a beta, I would assume that we would be able to test things and have them pay attention to our feedback for tweaks.

All of which flies directly in the face of your drastic "limit hardpoint whatever" suggestion.

[ElLocoMarko]

I can tell you that matches like this aren't fun at all for 12 of the 16 players. When 75% of your players had a bad experience as a direct result of an (arguably) abused game mechanic... that isn't a good thing. No one is buying MC to play matches like this.... It's bad for PGI.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

Roadbeer, on 30 April 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

All of which flies directly in the face of your drastic "limit hardpoint whatever" suggestion.

No, actually not at all. Also considering the fact that you didnt even think about how that system would work. If I had to guess why I would think you just boat a 45-60 damage alpha poptard and you like making easy kills with "l33t k1llsh0tz". It doesn't affect you directly so what do you care?

Not to mention all you do is defend PGI and the current metagame without making any kind of notable contributions to any thread you post in. So.

Edited by AntiCitizenJuan, 30 April 2013 - 02:31 PM.

[Roadbeer]

AntiCitizenJuan, on 30 April 2013 - 02:29 PM, said:

No, actually not at all. Also considering the fact that you didnt even think about how that system would work. If I had to guess why I would think you just boat a 45-60 damage alpha poptard and you like making easy kills with "l33t k1llsh0tz". It doesn't affect you directly so what do you care?

Not to mention all you do is defend PGI and the current metagame without making any kind of notable contributions to any thread you post in. So.

Actually, I'm currently playing a 733 with 2 LRM 20, 2 ERLL and 2 streaks, but nice assumption there sparky. Just because I don't agree with your hair-brained idea, or the "Remove DHS" guy, doesn't mean that I'm for the current meta. I just put more thought into it and look at the system and corresponding systems in a holistic manner, not just with the crushing power of the nerfhammer

Also, I contributed to this thread, early on, it's your one off "Oh, this will fix everything, and the sky will be bluer too" answer without any hard data to back it up, followed by an completely unrelated QQ about wild swings in the Buff/Nerf hammer (something I agree is a problem, I just don't feel the need to rewrite it in every thread I visit)." That lacks contribution.

Finally, there is a difference between defending PGI and preaching truth to stupid... which is the motto of the PLJ. Weird that I get just as many likes when I was blasting them for 3PV and CW Monetization as I get for mocking you.

Edited by Roadbeer, 30 April 2013 - 03:02 PM.

[Tatula]

Well, if there is actually a TDM mode, then the people who wants to play TDM has a place to go and wouldn't be complaining about the current assault capping mechanics.

[TruePoindexter]

ElLocoMarko, on 30 April 2013 - 02:28 PM, said:

I can tell you that matches like this aren't fun at all for 12 of the 16 players. When 75% of your players had a bad experience as a direct result of an (arguably) abused game mechanic... that isn't a good thing. No one is buying MC to play matches like this.... It's bad for PGI.

It's players fault for playing that way. Imagine a game of capture the flag where no one defends the flag - it's going to be a quick and boring game.

[Roadbeer]

ElLocoMarko, on 30 April 2013 - 02:28 PM, said:

I can tell you that matches like this aren't fun at all for 12 of the 16 players. When 75% of your players had a bad experience as a direct result of an (arguably) abused game mechanic... that isn't a good thing. No one is buying MC to play matches like this.... It's bad for PGI.

A light lance is an abused game mechanic?

Here, let me give my cookie cutters to PGI and they can rework all the mechs to fix that problem for you.