37 replies to this topic

[Appogee]

Of all the current frustrations of playing MWO, trying to play Conquest with PUGs must surely be the most teeth-grinding.

How many games do you play where you drop with a team which simply heads off to ''kill the other robots'', same as if they were playing Assault?

So you run around like crazy in a Jenner or Spider or Cicada, trying to cap resource points. You capture a couple, then discover that half your team is already dead, and the enemy lights are taking back all your capture points, which have been left completely undefended.

Then it's you solo - or if you're lucky, with one other team mate who knows how to play - against twice as many enemy Mechs. And it doesn't matter how many points you capture, you'll never cap enough points or survive long enough to win the game.

The worst part comes when - inevitably - you lose the game. You look at the scoreboard and find the highest scorers on your team are those who played the match like it was Assault...!

Please people, if you just want to ''go shoot stompy robots'' then play Assault mode. And please PGI, fix the scoring in Conquest so those who are capping at least get a bit more credit and incentive for the effort of playing the game as intended.

Conquest is great fun when a team actually plays it the way it's intended. But how often does that happen? One in ten if you're lucky.

[von Pilsner]

Often the best battles are in conquest mode (as you usually don't get speed capped and lose in the first 4 minutes of the match like happens in assault mode), it's how the devs designed the game.

[Gevurah]

From a tactical standpoint, I always encourage my unit to go after the fight in conquest because invariably a large portion of the enemy force has gone off in pursuit of caps. After a significant reduction (often with us 300 points behind at the start) in enemy force, we then spread out, take, and hold.

A great example of this is frozen city where invariably 2-3 enemy mechs will rush theta. If you concentrate the bulk of your force at midfield in a strong, concerted push, you can usually wipe out their heavy firepower with overwhelming force. 8v5 is hardly a contest in most cases.

Moreover, I'm aware most pubbies will just lemming after the group, so generally I try to get in front to 'herd' them where I want them to go when we're doing 4 man drops. This often times is done in the above fashion of smashing the enemy's main force then mopping up.

So bear in mind not everyone is rushing off haphazardly

[Appogee]

von Pilsner, on 19 June 2013 - 11:21 AM, said:

Often the best battles are in conquest mode (as you usually don't get speed capped and lose in the first 4 minutes of the match like happens in assault mode), it's how the devs designed the game.

Just finished another game which went exactly as per the OP. Even though they were playing it as if it was an Assault match, the brain dead herp derpers couldn't even kill two of the enemy team.

I guess I should just go play Assault and give up on Conquest until the devs put some more thought and/or incentive into making the game mode work as intended.

This could be a great game if someone gave it enough care and attention.

[Appogee]

Gevurah, on 19 June 2013 - 11:27 AM, said:

So bear in mind not everyone is rushing off haphazardly

I acknowledge and respect that some teams use those tactics deliberately. When I see it happen, it's beautiful.

But it's rarer than an LPL on a Spider.

[von Pilsner]

Appogee, on 19 June 2013 - 11:32 AM, said:

This could be a great game if someone gave it enough care and attention.

I could not agree more...

[Bilbo]

Assault isn't Team Death Match either, but Conquest and Assault do share a victory condition (Destroy all opposing mechs).

[Sephlock]

Maybe if the c-bill rewards for capping were a bit higher ;P?

[Appogee]

Sephlock, on 19 June 2013 - 11:42 AM, said:

Maybe if the c-bill rewards for capping were a bit higher ;P?

And the rewards for damage halved

[Sephlock]

Appogee, on 19 June 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

And the rewards for damage halved

Please, no. Because knowing PGI, they will implement that and nothing else.

[Gaan Cathal]

Conquest tends to provide better fights than Assault in my experience, since firstly it forces movement and secondly it encourages spreading out and using lights properly rather than just rolling around in a big blob of death. Most Assault matches constitute not much more than walking down whatever lane you pick until you bump into the enemy and then seeing who wins the damage race. Conquest has a lot more manouvere and skirmishing in my experience.

[KitK]

Agree with OP, it is disheartening when that happens; and it happens frequently enough.
Agree that capping and holding needs more incentive over direct assault, if for no other reason so that the light pilot(s) doing all the grunt work for the capture points doesn't get the reward shaft.

However, I would say that the issue in the OP is more acute from my team going 0-7 in kills.than it is from the mode design or the team's choice of which objective to pursue. I was the solo Commando on many a drop during the 10/10 challenge. I could get the cap job done (sometimes up 4-1), but not when the rest of the team got spanked. It really didn't matter if they were capping, defending or assaulting. It didn't even totally matter if they were successful. But they've had to hold off the enemy for a while and take a few down. Otherwise, failure is imminent, no matter how great of a job the fast crew does capping.

[Sable]

Gaan Cathal, on 19 June 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

Conquest tends to provide better fights than Assault in my experience, since firstly it forces movement and secondly it encourages spreading out and using lights properly rather than just rolling around in a big blob of death. Most Assault matches constitute not much more than walking down whatever lane you pick until you bump into the enemy and then seeing who wins the damage race. Conquest has a lot more manouvere and skirmishing in my experience.

Gotta say this guy has my vote. I was about to say the same thing. I only play conquest and its because the battlefield is a lot more dynamic. When people were complaining about jump snipers i couldn't relate all that well because in conquest you can't just stay in one place for very long and still be effective. I've been in games like what the OP said and it is annoying to know its only a matter of time before you die. But i've also been in games where it has been nail bitingly close in kills and capture points right up until the end.

[p00k]

sorry OP you have it backwards.

the way to win conquest is to curbstomp the bulk of the enemy team while people like OP leave their team to go cap points. then once you have a 3-4 kill advantage you can recapture the points at your leisure and stomp out the stragglers one by one.

i always facepalm when my team has people who run off to caps and promptly get stomped by 8 enemy mechs in a blob, or the 3-4 people that realize how to win at conquest get stomped by 8 enemy mechs in a blob, then watch as my remaining teammates get run down one by one.

that's why i play predominantly assault. because there, people at least recognize that you generally win by out-murdering the other team. conquest more often than not the losing team is the one with people who try to play like OP believes conquest should be played.

Appogee, on 19 June 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

So you run around like crazy in a Jenner or Spider or Cicada, trying to cap resource points. You capture a couple, then discover that half your team is already dead, and the enemy lights are taking back all your capture points, which have been left completely undefended.

Then it's you solo - or if you're lucky, with one other team mate who knows how to play - against twice as many enemy Mechs. And it doesn't matter how many points you capture, you'll never cap enough points or survive long enough to win the game.

The worst part comes when - inevitably - you lose the game. You look at the scoreboard and find the highest scorers on your team are those who played the match like it was Assault...!

they were doing it right. YOU'RE the sandbag that sabotaged your team by being useless instead of contributing to the fight. the 50-100 resource point advantage you get by doing 0 damage and soaking 0 damage for your team and disrupting enemy focus fire isn't worth it.

Appogee, on 19 June 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

Please people, if you just want to ''go shoot stompy robots'' then play Assault mode. And please PGI, fix the scoring in Conquest so those who are capping at least get a bit more credit and incentive for the effort of playing the game as intended.

if "go shoot stompy robots" didn't apply to conquest mode, killing all enemy mechs wouldn't be a victory condition. conquest would automatically switch everyone's weapons to paintball rounds. Capping points in conquest is like capping base in assault. it is an alternative victory condition.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

No incentive to cap. Especially on the larger maps where if you are capping you may see no combat and thus get almost no reward.

The game modes are stupid.

[Hammerhai]

Yes and no. I have often won by outcapping the enemy at the start, and just as many times the stompers got to the point where they could choke off the cap points.

Especially if you are on Teamspeak as a pre, by all means focus fire first.

I realise I capitalise to some extent on the guys being blind to the fact that they are being outcapped, and just going for the stomp. With just a bit of situational awareness, that can be prevented. But that is not my problem, is it? As for me, I like having to constantly evaluate the shifting tactical demands of the situation in Conquest. Also bear in mind I personally am not a very good shot, and a Jenner as a damage soaker is just a laughable concept. Ever drive lights, Pook? You "soak" damage by distracting, at best, in a light.

Know yourself.
Know your situation.
Know the enemy.
Then you can contribute effectively.

[Tekadept]

You can waste 10 mins running around playing touch the cap, or you can go for a decisive win in 5 minutes or so destroying all the enemy who have divided so they are easy to conquer.. The tooltips state either is a valid winning tactic for this game. so yeah why not.

[Sug]

Appogee, on 19 June 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

Conquest is great fun when a team actually plays it the way it's intended. But how often does that happen? One in ten if you're lucky.

That one game is usually so good it keeps me playing and gives me hope for the future of MWO.

[Homeless Bill]

Until they give people like me a real Team Deathmatch, you can expect me to ruin all of your objective games by trying to kill stuff. Both modes right now are half-objective, half-TDM, and no one is happy. I'm sick of back-capping and the light run-around, and you're sick of idiots like me turning your match of tactics into Bum Fights.

Give us Team Deathmatch, increase objective-based rewards in Conquest and Assault, and let both crowds play the game they want to play.

[Hauser]

There are two objectives in every game mode. You can use the threat of completing one to achieve the other.

If a team digs in a refuses to move. Capture 3/5 points and wait for them to come instead. If a team is all over the place, crush them one by one. Only when both teams realize this, the fight becomes interesting. People will focus on taking and holding a point just to keep the majority.