68 replies to this topic

[Gaan Cathal]

RG Notch, on 10 May 2013 - 05:50 AM, said:

The funny part is if people didn't have an issue with the current cap mechanic there would be no need for a post such as this. It's very existence and the need for some people to constantly defend the current mechanic is clear evidence that the player base, not the forum base has issues with it. As usual a vocal minority forgets the minority part.

A vocal minority who whine that there's one whole achillies heel to their dull-as-pigshit volley-exchanging-at-800m snore-fest of skill-based^[1] gameplay?


[1] Skill, in this context, is the ability to lead-fire the largest, slowest targets in any vaguely modern FPS from fairly short ranges with no bullet drop.

[Keifomofutu]

Gaan Cathal, on 10 May 2013 - 06:45 PM, said:

A vocal minority who whine that there's one whole achillies heel to their dull-as-pigshit volley-exchanging-at-800m snore-fest of skill-based^[1] gameplay?


[1] Skill, in this context, is the ability to lead-fire the largest, slowest targets in any vaguely modern FPS from fairly short ranges with no bullet drop.

Because-everyone-who-thinks-capping-needs-looked-at-is-a-poptart/stalker/babykicker™

[Gaan Cathal]

Keifomofutu, on 10 May 2013 - 06:47 PM, said:

Because-everyone-who-thinks-capping-needs-looked-at-is-a-poptart/stalker/babykicker™

Since everyone-who-thinks-capping-is-valid-gameplay-is-a-killjoy/goon/babykicker™ .... yes.

[MCXL]

zraven7, on 10 May 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

I personally am in favor of automated base defenses, and think the required capture time should scale with map size. It would encourage more teamwork when planning a capture.

So, what you really meant to say is that the mechanics behind capping could use some improvements.

[JohnathanSwift]

keith, on 10 May 2013 - 05:58 PM, said:

base cap is fine, it just has to be modified some, as in since CB.

Nice to see You're still a joke keith.

[Duncan Fisher]

I love the base capture mechanic, it's the most satisfying way to win ^__^

[skullman86]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 May 2013 - 05:02 AM, said:

Capturing the base is the primary objective of assault. To many people forget that. Cap or crush both win the objective.

Except one results in a significantly less enjoyable experience for the rest of the people in the game. I'm all for capping when the chips are down, but bypassing the other team to cap without even firing a shot is not worth queuing up. We aren't fighting over territory right now, so playing solely to win doesn't make any sense.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Dear lord.

The game modes suck.

They don't have true objectives.

It's like a bunch of placeholders for a real game.

If you are really happy with what we have now, you have the lowest expectations for a game I've ever seen.

[sokitumi]

Sorry but as it's been for a year now, it's basic programming, stand in the square. There's no AI defenses, there's no destructible environments, there's no difference between sides. Assault was lame enough to start with but then we go for multi-cap format... zz more of the same.

So to say, hey caps are a'ok, but then append it with -> it would be great if *(insert basic game mechanics, or a modicum of imagination / scripting competence here)*

PGI is prioritizing many things that should come AFTER beta (in order to profit now) instead of core issues. And you OP are saying ... "cool, keep up the good work 'team'"

[Nicholas Carlyle]

sokitumi, on 11 May 2013 - 07:12 AM, said:

Sorry but as it's been for a year now, it's basic programming, stand in the square. There's no AI defenses, there's no destructible environments, there's no difference between sides. Assault was lame enough to start with but then we go for multi-cap format... zz more of the same.

So to say, hey caps are a'ok, but then append it with -> it would be great if *(insert basic game mechanics, or a modicum of imagination / scripting competence here)*

PGI is prioritizing many things that should come AFTER beta (in order to profit now) instead of core issues. And you OP are saying ... "cool, keep up the good work 'team'"

Yup.

[topgun505]

I have no problems with capping. I have run into all-assault teams quite a few times and those are SCREAMING to be capped.

You dont want to be capped? Dont run with all slow units.

[Keifomofutu]

topgun505, on 11 May 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:

I have no problems with capping. I have run into all-assault teams quite a few times and those are SCREAMING to be capped.

You dont want to be capped? Dont run with all slow units.

Because we choose our teammates in a pub game? Contain your goldvision we don't all run a 4 man.(thanks vassago!).

[zraven7]

Cmon guys, there are already plenty of argument threads. Lets try to keep this one civil.

[RG Notch]

zraven7, on 11 May 2013 - 11:38 AM, said:

Cmon guys, there are already plenty of argument threads. Lets try to keep this one civil.

Maybe stop repeatedly posting on such a topic that causes arguments, and don't make the topic title flame bait? It's like I said if cap racing and the poor cap mechanics weren't an issue with many people this topic wouldn't be needed and it wouldn't constantly turn into arguments. Obviously some people are not fine with the base capping mechanics and want them to be altered. I'm sure if someone posted as biased a topic against capping you'd be one of the first in there to argue.
PGI some us aren't fine with the cap mechanics as currently implemented as evidenced by the need for threads such as this and the back and forth they generate.

[Lostdragon]

There is nothing wrong with base capping... when it is the objective of one team to defend and one to attack. Things like this should never happen though, this illustrates the problem with assault mode and base capping better than any words ever could:



No damage done, nothing but lights running to each other's bases. My team talked about doing a cap scare but then right after we got to their base their lights started capping ours. We were slightly ahead so in order to win we just had to stay in there and cap, knowing there would not be a shot fired. Games should not end like that, this is what makes capping not fun and why people have a problem with it.

[Roland]

Gaan Cathal, on 10 May 2013 - 06:45 PM, said:

A vocal minority who whine that there's one whole achillies heel to their dull-as-pigshit volley-exchanging-at-800m snore-fest of skill-based^[1] gameplay?

The current cap mechanic is a major contributor towards the current firing line that many assault games turn into.
Since your base is vulnerable to attack, you are limited in your ability to flank the enemy. Thus, both teams are forced to keep most of their force between the center of the map and their base.

Which leads to the simplistic gameplay that you describe.

[I am]

Roland, on 11 May 2013 - 12:51 PM, said:

The current cap mechanic is a major contributor towards the current firing line that many assault games turn into.
Since your base is vulnerable to attack, you are limited in your ability to flank the enemy. Thus, both teams are forced to keep most of their force between the center of the map and their base.

Which leads to the simplistic gameplay that you describe.

No Rollie Pollie, its the other way around. When you load a slug speed asslt up with all long range precision weapons and try to camp and control the map, forcing a snipe-fest, the answer is to flank your force and take your undefended base. Your play style, perpetuates the other, not the other way around. If we said the sky was blue, you'd argue it's not.

No biggie anyways, bought my cap mod, and my trollmando, since I keep telling myself I have too much E-honour to run a Raven.

Edited by I am, 11 May 2013 - 01:30 PM.

[Roland]

I am, on 11 May 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

No Rollie Pollie, its the other way around.

No, it's exactly as I described it.

Quote

When you load a slug speed asslt up with all long range precision weapons and try to camp and control the map, forcing a snipe-fest, the answer is to flank your force and take your undefended base.

Which necessitates keeping the main force between the center of the map and the base, as I described, such that it can go back to the base and defend it.

The only reason you are even able to flank and try to cap their base, is because the rest of your team is duking it out with the enemy in the center of the map.

When BOTH teams attempt to flank, then you get a result like what Lostdragon posted. A pointless cap run.

Quote

Your play style, perpetuates the other, not the other way around.

I don't think you have any idea what "my play style" entails.

[Accursed Richards]

The only thing about capping I'd change is that it can't be done until 4+ mechs (out of both teams) are dead. So you have to at least try to fight and it eliminates the "whoops, walked past each other, got to cap race" matches which nobody likes, but it's still an option if you're getting beaten but the enemy has no lights left, or if you don't want to hunt down that last guy.

[Asmudius Heng]

Roland, on 11 May 2013 - 01:40 PM, said:

No, it's exactly as I described it.


Which necessitates keeping the main force between the center of the map and the base, as I described, such that it can go back to the base and defend it.

The only reason you are even able to flank and try to cap their base, is because the rest of your team is duking it out with the enemy in the center of the map.

When BOTH teams attempt to flank, then you get a result like what Lostdragon posted. A pointless cap run.



I don't think you have any idea what "my play style" entails.

I even made a video once describing the limitations of assault and how it forces groups to mill close to base or force a rush. Even with that and images some people cannot grasp the fact that the assault gametype is a very static gametype. Not bad nor good, just static because you are anchored to defence or a mad rush to assault as focus fire is so important if you split your forces you will simply die.

I deleted he file accidentally i wonder if i need o do it again ... arguing on the internet though, you know what they say ...