275 replies to this topic

[silentD11]

Roland, on 01 May 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:

Heh, the fact that you think that's "the entire map" illustrates exactly how little of the map you actually use.

Go check out the actual map some time, and be amazed that there are actually HUGE chunks of it that you have literally never even seen before.

In a previous thread, I posted a link to the heat maps.. Go check out alpine's. Over 50% of the map essentially sees ZERO traffic, and that heat map is even counting conquest, so you see some traffic going down to theta and kappa.. traffic that never occurs in any assault game.

Dude, you don't need to take my word for it. Go look at it yourself some time.

You're wrong, as usual.

Part of properly playing assault is to scout the map entirely. Time all routes to and from what area in various speed mechs, and practice running them in reverse as well. I've done this in sync'd 8v8 with friends. Real assault players that cap always use more of the map than TDM players. The best part of TDM, requires no map knowledge at all.

[silentD11]

Roland, on 01 May 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:

Heh, the fact that you think that's "the entire map" illustrates exactly how little of the map you actually use.

Go check out the actual map some time, and be amazed that there are actually HUGE chunks of it that you have literally never even seen before.

In a previous thread, I posted a link to the heat maps.. Go check out alpine's. Over 50% of the map essentially sees ZERO traffic, and that heat map is even counting conquest, so you see some traffic going down to theta and kappa.. traffic that never occurs in any assault game.

Dude, you don't need to take my word for it. Go look at it yourself some time.

You're wrong, as usual.

Part of properly playing assault is to scout the map entirely. Time all routes to and from what area in various speed mechs, and practice running them in reverse as well. I've done this in sync'd 8v8 with friends. Real assault players that cap always use more of the map than TDM players. The best part of TDM, requires no map knowledge at all.

[Roland]

Quote

You argued out your point well enough (finally, in my opinion). I still have one major problem with it: all that nice stuff you're nostalgic about in previous incarnations isn't here yet. Some of it might never make it. Yet you're still pushing for a TDM mode.

What exactly isn't here yet?
MWO already has everything that MW4 had, only with a more limited map selection.. but Alpine is already a decent "MW4-esque" map, capable of hosting interesting battles.

Seriously, you don't really need anything more. In a no-respawn environment, TDM will generally result in fairly drawn out fights, because rushing at the enemy will just get you killed, and then you don't get to play any more.

It's the no-respawn aspect that many folks miss in their assessment of TDM.. they imagine a game like COD, where you just respawn over and over, and you just rush the center to try and get kills as fast as possible... Indeed, even in MW4, this is what the respawn games were like.

But when you combine a no-respawn game, with a TDM ruleset, you get interesting things. It doesn't need a lot of complexity in terms of rules to foster complex combat... Really, all you need is some mechanism to deal with griefers (although, interestingly enough, we really only encountered that situation ONCE in all of our years playing MW4 in leagues... not sure why it didn't come up. Might be because the folks in the leagues actually knew each other on some level, so you didn't want to be a ****.)

Quote

And with the current weapon balance (or lack thereof), in this situation, outside some charming (but ultimately ineffective compared to bringing yet another boat) maneuvers done by the lights, there really isn't much a light contributes except having less armor, less weapons, and being somewhat harder to hit. Backshots are great and all, but that's a very thin string to hang on.

It is strange that, as a light pilot, you so easily underrate the utility of speed.

Being able to get eyes and guns anywhere on the field with very little short notice, is a useful thing in mechwarrior. High mobility allows you to dictate, to some degree, how an engagement will take place. And, again, in a team environment, scouts are invaluable.. not for capping a base, but for providing information on OPFOR movements.

Quote

So, I hope you like this rejection of your idea a little better: TDM isn't good for the game we have now.

I think it's perfectly fine for the game we have now. But at the same time, I wouldn't force it upon you. If you want to play the current game, you are more than welcome to. I have no desire to force you to play a game you don't want to play.

I merely ask that you extend the same courtesy. Given that adding a TDM game mode essentially costs nothing in terms of development time, given its simplicity, there is very little reason why folks who want to play such a game should not be allowed to.

silentD11, on 01 May 2013 - 08:18 PM, said:

You're wrong, as usual.

Part of properly playing assault is to scout the map entirely. Time all routes to and from what area in various speed mechs, and practice running them in reverse as well. I've done this in sync'd 8v8 with friends. Real assault players that cap always use more of the map than TDM players. The best part of TDM, requires no map knowledge at all.

No, you are mistaken, and the heat maps clearly illustrate it.

Again, go check out the heat maps yourself. You'll see that on alpine there are huge sections of the map which are totally untouched by anyone, because they do not provide any utility if your only destination is the other cap point.

Again, you don't need to take my word for it.. you can look yourself.

[Keifomofutu]

Roland, on 01 May 2013 - 08:28 PM, said:

It is strange that, as a light pilot, you so easily underrate the utility of speed.

He starts half his posts complaining about assaults and announcing his God-given right to go stand in the red square. He also has this idea that most assaults run the tiniest engine possible. Many assaults actually seem to run a large engine if possible. More maneuverability, more ability to get around the map, and more room for DHS.

[Roland]

Neverfar, on 01 May 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

I want to clarify my position on no-cap, no-objective, kill-em-all "deathmatch" style play:

I want Solaris arenas to eventually be in this game. Not yet. Definitely not yet. Not with the current way the game plays. Eventually, but with how it is now, it'd have uglier "balance" than the stunlock carnivals in World of Warcraft.

No, see, I'm not interested in solaris arenas. Or rather, that's not all I'm interested in.

An arena is generally just a slug fest. Again, there's no real maneuvering involved, because you start within sight of your enemy.

I want a game where I am free to maneuver anywhere on the map I want, without being tethered to a single location on the map... and I want this in BIG maps.

Honestly dude.. there are thousands of us who played for, literally, years in MW4 in the NR planetary leagues... that type of game is FUN. And, believe it or not, light scouts have huge utility in that kind of game... no good team ever ran without some type of scout contingent.

[HOUSE STEINER REPRESENTING]

HOUSE STEINER APPRECIATES THESE LIGHTS. IT MAKES IT EASIER FOR HIS BRAWLER ATLAS TO GET INTO RANGE AND HAVE GOOD FIGHTS. FOR THAT I REPRESENT TO YOU.

[Glythe]

Gevurah, on 01 May 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

Yeah. Enjoy your micro-XP gain and 35,000 Cbills.

Fastest way to max out a light xp wise is still 4 man cap squad. It's a dirty thing to do but there it is....

If you play this game any length of time the money just stops mattering. You want to max the xp and move back to the mech you enjoy playing.

[Spades Kincaid]

The most amusing part of this entire thread was the reference to ellipses way back there. And then watching you for the most part carry on with far more pretentiousness and tone of superiority than an ellipse ever dreamed of having...

If ellipses had dreams...
Or were pretentious...

And not just a form of punctuation without distinction of self-importance.

You should take my advice and strongly consider refraining from commentary on them in the future. Lest you seem pretentious. Why? Because I've proven myself in this post to be at least three times as important as some non ellipse using person such as yourself.

Honestly, you should really tone down the smugness. And I say that because until now I was lying about everything and because it's transmuting what I said into fact. Not because I want to call emphasis to the sincerity of that sentiment because you might doubt it.


On-topic; Distraction, delay and baiting are all very much a part of the scout role. Capping in the manner and purpose described, or to 'save' a win is something I consider my job when I pilot a light.


Sorry, carry on!

[Asmudius Heng]

Agree with Roland as a long time MW4 player.

However in PUGs it will be abused. I would just like it for 8 vs 8 matches at least where the level of teamwork required to make TDM such an amazing experience will happen.

In random games though I would prefer not to have it and just have better objective game modes.

Sorry i this is getting off topic OP.

In PUG games the rewards dictate the behaviour. People follow the path of least resistance and aim towards whatever is most rewarding. Right now assault is rewarding people who just wanna slug it out, and those who care about winning via capping. I have no issue with either, but why are there not more objectives and rewards to encourage certain behaviour?

Firstly cbill and xp bonuses that are better for doing teamwork things. IT can be tiny and people will do it just for that, or will feel better about themself if they get a bonus out of nowhere and realise they were doing teamworks!

TDM you have to create your own incentives. It is a much better game for full teams on comms vs another full team. A real test of manoeuvre warfare that only a certain type of player gets into I have found.

for pugs - see my previous post about making more incentives for people to play differently ... and back to light mechs and capping. It would give lights and fast meds a massive amount of extra stuff to do as they have man more objectives to fight over, cap, or optionally let be capped if yo cannot win. Multiple objectives will guide the behaviour of PUGs who lack the communication and incentive to do anything but follow the path of least resistance.

The devs have the power to influence the behaviour of the players by how they reward them.

Too long?
TDM for 8vs 8 (or 12 vs 12)
Multi-objective adjustment for assault to get people to control the battlefield not just kill or cap one point.
Incentives are the devs chief tools for changing behaviours

[Ialti]

Topic? After all that I'm not even sure there is a topic.

In any case, I will sometimes cap mid-game in a light. Most of the time I find better utility in putting myself in teamfight, taking a little of the heat off my slower teammates and ambushing the clunky assault class mechs out there, if I can get them alone.

[MrZakalwe]

Interesting topic for a couple of reasons; Firstly there are actually some pretty good points in this thread about lights, map balance and other possible shapes for team deathmatch rather than 'formless brawl' (thanks for these, guys!) and secondly because some of the posters arguing in this thread sound incredibly far up their own arses when trying to sound clever (I mean 'using their nostrils twice' sort of far up their own arses) and they should probably stop.

It started as a small argument but at this point both sides look like d**kheads.

[blinkin]

MrZakalwe, on 02 May 2013 - 12:31 AM, said:

Interesting topic for a couple of reasons; Firstly there are actually some pretty good points in this thread about lights, map balance and other possible shapes for team deathmatch rather than 'formless brawl' (thanks for these, guys!) and secondly because some of the posters arguing in this thread sound incredibly far up their own arses when trying to sound clever (I mean 'using their nostrils twice' sort of far up their own arses) and they should probably stop.

It started as a small argument but at this point both sides look like d**kheads.

tis the natural life cycle of any thread.

[MrZakalwe]

blinkin, on 02 May 2013 - 12:40 AM, said:

tis the natural life cycle of any thread.

Yeah but what's with all the dot hatred?

One dot good, three dots bad?

Why is one pretentious and the other acceptable? They are both perfectly normal bits of punctuation... (see what I did there?)

[blinkin]

MrZakalwe, on 02 May 2013 - 01:09 AM, said:

Yeah but what's with all the dot hatred?

One dot good, three dots bad?

Why is one pretentious and the other acceptable? They are both perfectly normal bits of punctuation... (see what I did there?)

i use it on occasion too, but it often tends to be over used by some of the posters who are very far up themselves. the hatred of that particular punctuation does have a source.

i know of a few morons i have seen who fill half of their posts with ellipses, and seem to expect them to take the place of actual arguments.

and i admit when i use them it tends to be in cases where i think condescension is waranted.

Edited by blinkin, 02 May 2013 - 01:20 AM.

[MrZakalwe]

blinkin, on 02 May 2013 - 01:18 AM, said:

i use it on occasion too, but it often tends to be over used by some of the posters who are very far up themselves. the hatred of that particular punctuation does have a source.

i know of a few morons i have seen who fill half of their posts with ellipses, and seem to expect them to take the place of actual arguments.

and i admit when i use them it tends to be in cases where i think condescension is waranted.

At least they are using punctuation! Visit the DOTA2 forums and they often struggle to form words let alone punctuate them.

Though back in DOTA2 they were less likely to condemn anybody who disagreed with them as a "mouth-breathing neck-beard" whatever the hell that means.

[Sam Slade]

I salute you for putting a win xp gain for everyone ahead of a 'roll the dice' pwesonal score.

That and the whole 'being tactical' thing that many seem unsure of...

[Livewyr]

Ngamok, on 01 May 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

I am in favor of base sitting the entire team.

There is a middle ground:
it involves an offense, and a defense, rather than the Giant death blob going around and simply trying to annihilate the enemy with overwhelming firepower.

Why are we stuck in the deathblob rut? Because the majority have that mentality....rather than seeing the base capture mechanic as a consideration in the team's plan for victory, they see it is the CHEAP or EASY button only to be used if the 100% offense has failed.

You can't convince someone to go defense because most people don't see immediate results with it, therefore it is boring.
Even those of us who wanted to do defense (when we still actually played) couldn't do it because after we fended off the occasional light mech, we get hit by the enemy deathblob offense that our deathblob offense missed or failed to divert..

So unfortunately: due to the lack of depth in the player base, Base capper is always going to be seen as "that guy" and there is nothing PGI can do about that.

[Darwins Dog]

So pretty much what OP said. It's a great counter to a team full of slow PPC boats (i.e. the flavor of the month right now). Sure it's a smaller gain than an actual fight, but sometimes (from my perspective) it's the way that's more likely to win.

[Xenosphobatic]

I think I dropped with you yesterday Neverfar. You were a bro.

Keep cappin dude.

[Roland]

Quote

Hmm. Lots of terrain. You sort of roam in it. Die one by one if the other group is clustered together. Or wait, you all stay together too, and in that cluster roam around the same map. The side that catches the other out in the open while they themselves are in cover/poptart position, wins!

While not possible to present a treatise on the depth of options available to a team in mechwarrior, I'll point out a very simplistic explanation of a fairly simple tactic which would consistently defeat the even more simplistic tactics you describe here.

You hold the majority of your force together, and move as a unit. Those mechs which are slower and less mobile, but carry the majority of your lance's firepower. Then you send out scout units to locate and pin the enemy. Once located, you then maneuver your main force to engage from an advantageous position.

So, in this case, the better choice is neither to scatter to the winds (obviously) nor is it to simply move as a single unit (since that effectively eliminates any mobility advantages of your lighter mechs).

Again, it comes down to the fact that you are underestimating what is actually possible in a TDM game type.

Quote

If it required next to zero coding, maybe. But this is a small studio, and gamers constantly, constnatly, understate and underestimate how much would go into adding the stuff they want. Your little suggestion would be a sideways derailment that could cost a month or more of developer time, with the pacing they currently set.

I develop software myself, and there is no way it could possibly cost a month of development time to add in a TDM game type, given that it is essentially just a subset of the rules in the existing assault game type. Hell, simply removing the cap zones would achieve it.