179 replies to this topic

[hammerreborn]

Atheus, on 07 May 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

No, it's not difficult, but a prematurely capped out match takes about 5 minutes from the time you hit launch. I would say about 1 in 10 matches are prematurely capped out (more or less depending on your ELO). Valuing one's own time is not self-absorption, it's self-respect. The more times a game disappoints like that, the faster people will lose interest.

And just think, in those 5 minutes you could have found and killed the cap rusher. But instead you spend all your time here complaining about it instead!

You sure do value your time.

/Sitting in someone's base while typing this

Edited by hammerreborn, 07 May 2013 - 12:28 PM.

[Hurthammer]

Atheus, on 07 May 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

No, it's not difficult, but a prematurely capped out match takes about 5 minutes from the time you hit launch. I would say about 1 in 10 matches are prematurely capped out (more or less depending on your ELO). Valuing one's own time is not self-absorption, it's self-respect. The more times a game disappoints like that, the faster people will lose interest.

This game is a hobbie for me. There is nothing substantial or physical that comes from playing this game. If ~5 min is a large chunk of your free time, there may be some things that need to be reevaluated. I would also venture to say that over-valuing ones time is self absorbed. It's a game, hit launch and get over it. Maybe find an 8 man and not worry about pugs ruining your version of fun? From my own experience in this game, the qq fest that ensues after a fast cap is usually laiden with such colorful language I find it highly dubios that those complaining in game are above 12-13 y/o and are largely ignored by me and mine.

[Atheus]

hammerreborn, on 07 May 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

/Sitting in someone's base while typing this

You're so tactical you can tab out and read the forums while you play, huh? Fun.

[Hurthammer]

Atheus, on 07 May 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

No, it's not difficult, but a prematurely capped out match takes about 5 minutes from the time you hit launch. I would say about 1 in 10 matches are prematurely capped out (more or less depending on your ELO). Valuing one's own time is not self-absorption, it's self-respect. The more times a game disappoints like that, the faster people will lose interest.

Also, in lieu of fighting with the player base over what's a more correct way of playing the current assault game mode, maybe put that energy in to lobbying PGI and Co. for game modes more to your liking? Look man, capping is a valid victory condition. That's the way it is for now until we get more game modes. It does nobody any good to tell them their fun is wrong and yours is right. We will never change eachother's minds...

[Atheus]

Hurthammer, on 07 May 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

Also, in lieu of fighting with the player base over what's a more correct way of playing the current assault game mode, maybe put that energy in to lobbying PGI and Co. for game modes more to your liking? Look man, capping is a valid victory condition. That's the way it is for now until we get more game modes. It does nobody any good to tell them their fun is wrong and yours is right. We will never change eachother's minds...

This is me lobbying for a different game mode. The thing is, PGI is hesitant to create more game modes because fragmentation of the player base is problematic when your player base isn't big enough to support it. My position is if they can't support another game mode, then recycle the Assault mode, leaving for the capracers the more appropriate conquest mode.

My guess, is, though, if they added a third mode that resembles TDM, Assault mode would become the red-headed step-child of MWO, and Assault gameplay would change drastically.

Edited by Atheus, 07 May 2013 - 01:09 PM.

[Keifomofutu]

Atheus, on 07 May 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

You're so tactical you can tab out and read the forums while you play, huh? Fun.

OH SNAP!

I do like how the cap rushers keep spouting the "stop liking what I don't like" line even though they're the ones who have two game modes dedicated to capping and people who don't want to cap get none. So really every time hammer spouts that line the irony is palpable.

Edited by Keifomofutu, 07 May 2013 - 01:29 PM.

[hammerreborn]

Keifomofutu, on 07 May 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:

OH SNAP!

I do like how the cap rushers keep spouting the "stop liking what I don't like" line even though they're the ones who have two game modes dedicated to capping and people who don't want to cap get none. So really every time hammer spouts that line the irony is palpable.

Pretty sure when a game ends 80% of the time in TDM....you have your kill everything game mode. Don't be stupid, I know it might be hard, but really try.

Atheus, on 07 May 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

You're so tactical you can tab out and read the forums while you play, huh? Fun.

Ya, it is. If you aren't going to return to base I have all the free time in the world to do whatever I want. Talk to my wife, talk to friends, play iphone games. And all the time I'm winning each game. I'm just that good, and people like you are just that awful.

[Hurthammer]

Atheus, on 07 May 2013 - 01:06 PM, said:

This is me lobbying for a different game mode. The thing is, PGI is hesitant to create more game modes because fragmentation of the player base is problematic when your player base isn't big enough to support it. My position is if they can't support another game mode, then recycle the Assault mode, leaving for the capracers the more appropriate conquest mode.

My guess, is, though, if they added a third mode that resembles TDM, Assault mode would become the red-headed step-child of MWO, and Assault gameplay would change drastically.

As the game sits right now, I do assault mode almost exclusively. A TDM mode has it's appeal to me, however, personally, I enjoy the idea of having a base to defend on occasion. It throws a monkey wrench in to the same old meat grinder style of play. Some have kicked around the idea of a single map-centered king of the hill syle mode as well. That sounds like a heck of a good time to me. I honestly welcome more game modes. I don't feel it would harm the game at large as folks will always have their favorite mode and will gravitate to it by default. Also, at this point, it's mostly speculation as to how the CW will go down and how it will be implimented as far as game modes. I love this game so far and look forward to every patch and what comes with it, good and bad.

[Zerberus]

Caviel, on 07 May 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

Just because people don't like to pilot certain mechs or only want to play a certain way doesn't mean everyone else should be forced to comply with it. In other words:

Nerf paper, scissors are fine. -Rock

You just summed up 95% of all balance and game mode discussions in 10 words or less. Where do I send my first born as a sacrifice?

Atheus, on 07 May 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

Well for now, it's not, so I'll just keep doing what I enjoy. I can only hope by the time CW comes around there's a game mode that I can enjoy thoroughly. If you want to talk in circles some more, feel free. Maybe you can explain how to defend the base some more, or how I can stop losing if I stop valuing having fun so much and prioritize winning. Or, OR, OR, maybe you can just accept that PGI isn't accommodating all their players interests with their 2 "capture the base" game modes.

With all due respect, expecting the outcome campaigns of planetary CONQUEST, where ASSAULTing and capturing specific objectives is the whole point of the campaign (as is the case in, well, ANY war ever faught by humans) to be decided by Team Deathmatches on random asteroids is somewhat delusional....

Or is that the way we fight wars today, we just drop 24 people into an arena and let them have at it, and whoever has last man standing wins?

I`m not sure, but last time I checked, the outcome of the Royal Rumble didn`t topple any governments

You may get TDM or similar, but I very highly doubt that matches with no strategic element whatsoever will be rewarded as if they had accomplised somethign someone might care about. To be honest, it just might **** off a few thousand people who see exactly that disconnect....

________

The fact of the matter is that the game modes as they stand today have ONE objective, and 2 ways to accomplish it, just like CS, and are actually very comparable in that respect (The whole discussion is an exercise in DejaVu to be honest).

Your objective is: Capture the enemy base / plant the bomb and let it blow

OR: Collect 750 resources / rescue the hostages.

And just like in CS, both objectives can beachieved either outright, or ALTERNATIVELY by eliminating anyone that could stop you. you either plant the bomb and the others dont def, or you kill them all and blow up the weapons dump afterwards. Same with hostages, you either rescue them out from under the nose of a team of n00bs, or you kill the other team and walk out with the hostages afterwards. Your objective, the PRIMARY objective (which is why it`s listed FIRST), is still unchanged.

The ONLY difference is that in MWO both teams have both goals, offensive AND defensive. plant an bomb and make sure the other team doesn`t plant theirs, so to speak.

And just like in CS beta .9 all the way through to Condition Zero, CSS, and GO, you have one half of the players that understand this (IMO) extremely basic of concepts and win most of their matches by virtue of superior tactics, ranging from better scouting and outflanking to intentional diversions to simply being patient and letting the oppponent make the first mistake instead of running headlong into a Firing Squad or known sniper hideout.

And you have the other half that either don`t understand it or dont care, but DO care enough to constantly whine on teh forums (or back then ICQ) about losing 9/10 matches because the enemy simply rescues the hostages, plants the bomb, caps the base, gets the resources. Simply becasue they can`t be arsed to do anything about it and/ or are too stubborn /narrow-minded /stupid to understand or accept that the fault for never seeing the enemy team is entirely theirs. No tactics, rudimentary communication if any, big guns and often no real idea how to use them effectively, no patience..... and all of that directly = no chance

Maybe you should simply accept the fact that people like me have been soloing 16 man teams of non-thinking campers and tactical n00bs for over 15 years and will continue to do so, just because we can.

And the best part is the adrenaline rush becasue we know it`s not becasue we`re that good, it`s becasue you`re sucking that hard and could (theoretically) stop at any time and become seriously dangerous.

MWO has been billed as a Thinking Man`s Shooter. It does not surprise me at all that people who`s capability of self reflection seem to be lacking would not feel comfortable here. I recommend Quake Live! Honestly. I have no interest in your misery, but all efforts to help you get out of it are bouncing off you like MG fire on an atlas, and all the whining about others being to blame for one`s own shortcomings does nothing but mark you for ridicule by others, further increasing your disappointment.

Edited by Zerberus, 07 May 2013 - 06:17 PM.

[Atheus]

Zerberus, on 07 May 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

a lot of stuff

I'll be completely honest - I didn't read more than your first few paragraphs, because by then you had already passed my nonsense threshold. If you're trying to relate this to real world territorial conflict, what does standing in a pressure-sensitive box have to do with controlling a planet or its resources? Eliminating the enemy presence in the whole region seems much more relevant.

Edit: also:

Caviel, on 07 May 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

Just because people don't like to pilot certain mechs or only want to play a certain way doesn't mean everyone else should be forced to comply with it.

You didn't notice this quote actually supports having a non-capture-oriented game mode more than it supports the status quo (only 2 game modes that are practically identical)?

Edited by Atheus, 07 May 2013 - 10:38 PM.

[Marj]

Zerberus, on 07 May 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

With all due respect, expecting the outcome campaigns of planetary CONQUEST, where ASSAULTing and capturing specific objectives is the whole point of the campaign (as is the case in, well, ANY war ever faught by humans) to be decided by Team Deathmatches on random asteroids is somewhat delusional....

So patrols don't run into each other? Besides, if your enemy is within shooting range of the objective they might just decide to destroy it if they can't capture it. If you're fighting that close to the objective you've already lost.

Zerberus, on 07 May 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

And just like in CS, both objectives can beachieved either outright, or ALTERNATIVELY by eliminating anyone that could stop you. you either plant the bomb and the others dont def, or you kill them all and blow up the weapons dump afterwards. Same with hostages, you either rescue them out from under the nose of a team of n00bs, or you kill the other team and walk out with the hostages afterwards. Your objective, the PRIMARY objective (which is why it`s listed FIRST), is still unchanged.

And some people find capping incredibly boring and have stopped playing as a result. They're not settling for assault or conquest (I'm one of the ones that has kept playing). I don't think a new mode would split the player base much for this reason. If PGI wants to attract more customers they have to provide a game mode those people will enjoy. The customers have spoken but no new mode has been produced. That's a problem. There's plenty of alternatives to MWO.

Zerberus, on 07 May 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

And you have the other half that either don`t understand it or dont care, but DO care enough to constantly whine on teh forums (or back then ICQ) about losing 9/10 matches because the enemy simply rescues the hostages, plants the bomb, caps the base, gets the resources. Simply becasue they can`t be arsed to do anything about it and/ or are too stubborn /narrow-minded /stupid to understand or accept that the fault for never seeing the enemy team is entirely theirs. No tactics, rudimentary communication if any, big guns and often no real idea how to use them effectively, no patience..... and all of that directly = no chance

Or they just don't enjoy the game you want to force them to play. They see potential for something they would enjoy more. So they complain. Or they quit. How many have left MWO out of boredom?

Zerberus, on 07 May 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

MWO has been billed as a Thinking Man`s Shooter. It does not surprise me at all that people who`s capability of self reflection seem to be lacking would not feel comfortable here. I recommend Quake Live! Honestly. I have no interest in your misery, but all efforts to help you get out of it are bouncing off you like MG fire on an atlas, and all the whining about others being to blame for one`s own shortcomings does nothing but mark you for ridicule by others, further increasing your disappointment.

You know what would make this a thinking man's shooter? TDM. BUT THEN ALL THE NOOBZ WOULD JUST CHARGE IN ASSAULTS DUUURRRR. Or lights would have the time to wear down assaults from range with erppc's instead of being shrugged off while the assaults move for the cap. Mediums would be able to flank and draw attention while heavies/assaults move in for the kill from behind. Scouting would matter. Ambushes could be set and the enemy team might take the bait instead of ignoring it and capping. Heavy harassers would be a serious threat as they popped from cover to cover, never appearing in the same place twice instead of being forced to stand in a box. The entire map could be used instead of being forced to stand between the enemy and your base EVERY DAMNED TIME. Well that or both teams rush right past each other to cap. Fun. Or are you sugesting that having bases doesn't force the same strategy to be used every single game?

[Galenit]

Atheus, on 07 May 2013 - 05:58 AM, said:

Right, but what would Sun Tzu say if it were just a game, doing what's necessary to win the match results in having less fun and RTB is individually less profitable? I'll tell you. He'd probably just say, "**** 'em, just do whatever is more fun."

You mean something like GO?
Its a game to learn about tactics, like chess, most of art of war helps you to win i both games.
The art of war fit not only war, it fits a lot of games, live and business too.

Quote

3.2 Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles
is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists
in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.

[Atheus]

Galenit, on 08 May 2013 - 02:53 AM, said:

You mean something like GO?
Its a game to learn about tactics, like chess, most of art of war helps you to win i both games.
The art of war fit not only war, it fits a lot of games, live and business too.

Yes, and breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting is pretty clever, if you are actually trying to avoid fighting. If FIGHTING is the whole reason you play in the first place, it's not so clever.

[Galenit]

Atheus, on 08 May 2013 - 02:55 AM, said:

Yes, and breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting is pretty clever, if you are actually trying to avoid fighting. If FIGHTING is the whole reason you play in the first place, it's not so clever.

I was sad that i had to remove narc (does nothing) from my raven (pre ecm!), i was sad again as i had to remove tag (no lrms anymore). I would be glad if i could play it nearly without weapons, just support, but i dont think that narc would ever become something worth in this game ...

Edited by Galenit, 08 May 2013 - 03:19 AM.

[Zerberus]

Marj, on 07 May 2013 - 11:33 PM, said:

Or they just don't enjoy the game you want to force them to play. They see potential for something they would enjoy more. So they complain. Or they quit. How many have left MWO out of boredom?

R
O
F
L

When was the last time I started a whine thread about how other people play? That`s right, NEVER. Because, I don`t give a flaming **** how someone else plays, I do my own thing and do whatever is necessary to WIN, for my TEAM. Yes, some people consider winning fun, a novel concept, I know.

Yet lo and behold, it`s the whole reason for threads like this, which rationalize down to "I can`t win becasue others won`t do what I want, so please make them." You just don`t see it that way because your agenda and tears have blinded you to reality.

The incessant whining about how other people don`t rush into the middle blindly for a mindless slugfest on every map is boring, non-constructive, and mostly does nothing but serve to cast the entire community as a group of strongly opinionated, reality-detached, entitlement whores that can`t stomach losing fair and square.

Nobody is forcing you to play the game at all, much less in any particular playstyle. That`s your own pair of mental blinders at work, nothing more. You are not forced to stand in your base every round, just as you are not forced to rush theta and get shot. Who says that YOU can`t be the one to rush the tunnel and tear the enemy up from behind? Oh, HE did? does he have a guin to your ead? No? The **** him and do what you want.

With all due respect, exactly this difference in thought process is what separates the thinking player from the one acting stupid.

By the same token neither I nor anybody else can force anybody else to adhere to a particular playstyle. To believe so is to admit insanity and /or idiocy. Ironically, I AM legally insane, but harbor no such illusions. So what`s your excuse?

The difference between us is that while you and others are actually trying to FORCE a global change with your incessant whining, myself and others are attempting to explain to you that there`s more to a family dinner than just YOUR ******* steak. But you for some unfathomable reason feel entitled to an arena game mode in what is to be a more strategic overall concept, and you want RIGHT ******* NOW because you feel that you`re important. I and others respectfully disagree, you are pixels on a screen, no more, no less. We just understand that we are, too.

The bottom line is that you guys are directly telling people to do what you want, not realizing it, and then calling them out on trying to make them force you to play how they want when they try to present alternatives.

Yeah, that easily qualifies as dumb enough for me to leave this thread.... maybe I should... but your tears are just so delicious

Edited by Zerberus, 08 May 2013 - 04:25 AM.

[Atheus]

Zerberus, on 08 May 2013 - 04:12 AM, said:

(a bunch of nonsense that's already been stated and responded to a few dozen times)

So to summarize, you like the game how it is, and people who don't should just shut up or leave.

This is all the response I can muster. Thanks for stopping by.

[Zerberus]

Atheus, on 08 May 2013 - 04:25 AM, said:

So to summarize, you like the game how it is, and people who don't should just shut up or leave.

This is all the response I can muster. Thanks for stopping by.

I never said that and you know it. Thank you for proving my assessments of you as spot on, sometimes trash is easy to smell but hard to describe.

Edited by Zerberus, 08 May 2013 - 04:27 AM.

[Marj]

Zerberus, on 08 May 2013 - 04:12 AM, said:

stuff

You basically made my point for me. Adding another game mode that satisfies those with complaints would fix the problem. Everyone gets to play how they want without stepping on each other's toes. Why are you arguing against it?

[Joseph Mallan]

But why should another game mode be added?

Assault victory conditions:
CAPTURE THE BASE
or
Destroy the enemy force

See that? Two ways to win the match!

Now if the enemy has someone on your base and you want a fight, what should you do? Come on the forums and whine or turn your Mech around and try to stop the Cap? If you want to play a strategic game you have to make choices! If you want mindless smashing, well go find the guys who are taking your stuff. Betty is telling you where they are after all. No hunting involved, they are standing there WAITING FOR YOU TO COME & SAY HI!!!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 08 May 2013 - 05:04 AM.

[Zerberus]

Marj, on 08 May 2013 - 04:47 AM, said:

You basically made my point for me. Adding another game mode that satisfies those with complaints would fix the problem. Everyone gets to play how they want without stepping on each other's toes. Why are you arguing against it?

Again, putting words in my mouth and weakening your own credibility.

I have never argued AGAINST TDM, or any other game mode. In any thread, of any forum., of any game, ever.

I am arguing against the people complaining 24/7 instead of acting as rational, intelligent human beings, which would either :

A. Accept that it`s not here, the game is currently no fun, and either take a break or leave completely.

or

B. Adapt and overcome for the time being until it is implemented.


But instead, we reroll the age old "Planting the bomb is dumb /rescuing histages is dumb" CS discussion that was idiotic 15 years ago and is idiotic today. 15-20 times a week.

Some of our members biggest mistake (and I include myself here) is probably attempting to be a voice of reason in this endless sea of qq and often ruining our own perception of the game and it`s community in the progress. But our efforts are rewarded by knowing that without us to balance out the whiners this game would have devolved into Rock-Em Sock-Em robots online weeks after closed Beta. In other words, by having a game that is actually still playable and fun to play. Yeah, it has problems, but we have patience because we ALSO understand that the alternative would be that none of us would be here and the game would be released w/o any player input sometime in 2014-2015. I often wish PGI would have taken taht route and saved themselves the cancer this once helpful and levelheaded community is slowly becoming.

This community will destroy MWO long before the Devs do, and tbh many of you are actively trying but don`t realize it because your vision ends at the tip of your gun barrels and all arguments from others are immediately invalid in your minds.

Edited by Zerberus, 08 May 2013 - 05:12 AM.