22 replies to this topic

[Gierling]

Its very simple we have two win conditions, one of which is locational.

You can perform the "Kill everyone" win condition anywhere, but capping (and defending from caps) requires you to be at a base. Since you start at your base it is more prudent to stay there.

I foresee a future where the community internalizes this knowledge and whole teams stick to thier bases tightly, attempting to kill any breakaway cappers and net a player advantage before leaving the base.

It may seem alarmist but if you examine the win conditions rationally the best play is always to hang back at your base until you have cemented a clear advantage.

This will grind gameplay to a halt once the general skill level gets high enough.

We need to eliminate Capping in Assault, the frustrations it introduces are more prevelant then the frustrations it seeks to avoid.

[Wired]

It didnt ruin assault for the first 12 months it was in, it is not going to ruin assault for the next 6 months. Even when there was an actual incentive to cap, it did not ruin the game.


People misconstrue the removal of several features based on what they personally believe, but at the end of the day changes were NOT made because "capping wasnt fun so it is no longer rewarded". Changes where made because people would AFK for a free ride. That is all.

Edited by Wired, 30 July 2013 - 07:16 AM.

[James The Fox Dixon]

I recall someone making a similar post back in closed beta and they were laughed at since it didn't ruin assault.

[Waking One]

Assault is **** and it's been **** for a while so *shrug*

[FatBabyThompkins]

The only current problem I see is when both teams "go right" in River City. By the time they've made any progress, the lights have already hit the opposing base causing a knee jerk reaction to out cap the other side. This is more of a by the time lights can safely get on cap, the assault mechs are already deep in enemy territory and cannot respond. Then everyone starts jumping on cap hoping to out cap the others. No one wants to jump off for fear of losing that one extra mech. Game Theory indeed.

Otherwise, nah, I haven't seen it too much. Usually used for shock and disruption than actual wins without engagements. It is a good balancing act if one team is dominant large mechs vs a mixed team to take one light to cap forcing the large mech team to split and hopefully evening the odds on the brawl. I have seen several teams just outright ignore the cap (Game Theory again!) to stay on target, wipe the now degraded team (no matter how you look at it, it's 8 vs 7 at best) and hope to make it back before the end of the cap. I'm sure they'll add the team deathmatch you really want, but expect some games to take even longer searching for that rogue Spider. Hell, we had a Cicada run off in conquest in the desert against a 4-man team of 732 cheese last night. They were clamoring for us to give him up, but we all straight up said bring the cheese, suffer the long wait to cap.

[Gierling]

James The Fox Dixon, on 30 July 2013 - 07:16 AM, said:

I recall someone making a similar post back in closed beta and they were laughed at since it didn't ruin assault.

Its a collective action problem, you won't notice the wayward team sticking back at the base but eventually a tipping point will be reached as the community gains exposure to it. Then nearly everyone will have to do it to stay competitive. The losing team will be determined by which team is least disciplined (and therefore has people split off and wander over to the other side of the map).

Its very much like Seismic, at first it had a very mild effect as few people were running it. However once people saw it in action adoption picked up prodigiously.

This is an issue because the capping mechanic is non dynamic, and low risk. The entire premise of assault needs to be retooled (preferably with an actual base with defenses, taht the teams start away from).

[James The Fox Dixon]

Gierling, on 30 July 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

Its a collective action problem, you won't notice the wayward team sticking back at the base but eventually a tipping point will be reached as the community gains exposure to it. Then nearly everyone will have to do it to stay competitive. The losing team will be determined by which team is least disciplined (and therefore has people split off and wander over to the other side of the map).

Its very much like Seismic, at first it had a very mild effect as few people were running it. However once people saw it in action adoption picked up prodigiously.

This is an issue because the capping mechanic is non dynamic, and low risk. The entire premise of assault needs to be retooled (preferably with an actual base with defenses, taht the teams start away from).

Again, you have been proven wrong. You want to remove a good portion of the tactics available to lights and fast mediums just so you can team deathmatch in your cheese build heavy and assault mechs. Sorry, but in Battletech there isn't team deathmatch, but there are objectives that one has to complete.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 30 July 2013 - 07:35 AM.

[Gulinborsti]

This topic is hardly a balancing issue.

There is already another thread in the "Maps & Modes" forum, let's keep it there:

http://mwomercs.com/...uning-the-game/

Edited by Gulinborsti, 30 July 2013 - 07:35 AM.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

I don't normally complain about base caps, it is just part of the game, if someone is real concerned defend your base.

But last night our Merc Co decided to play some 8-mans, we only do this once or twice a week because finding matches is a pain. But last ngiht, after waiting 5 minutes to get a match, we charged the centered the map, while the other team flanked us and base capped us.

I hope they enjoyed the win, and I hope they had to wait twice as long to find another match, as our team decided to break after taht waste of time.

[Purlana]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 30 July 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

But last night our Merc Co decided to play some 8-mans, we only do this once or twice a week because finding matches is a pain. But last ngiht, after waiting 5 minutes to get a match, we charged the centered the map, while the other team flanked us and base capped us.

Isn't that why we have scouts...?

[Ph30nix]

easy solution to base cappers in assault, Stop having your team with nothing but assault mechs

[Gierling]

James The Fox Dixon, on 30 July 2013 - 07:34 AM, said:

Again, you have been proven wrong. You want to remove a good portion of the tactics available to lights and fast mediums just so you can team deathmatch in your cheese build heavy and assault mechs. Sorry, but in Battletech there isn't team deathmatch, but there are objectives that one has to complete.

First off, to say that capping is required to justify lights is ludicrous.

A Light is just as capable as an assault at killing, it just uses manueverability to do it. A capable light can shred an assault without ever presenting any opportunity to be shot itself. I regularly see commandos get 4-5 kills and rack up 5-600 damage.

It is absurd to say that Lights won't have a place without capping.

Second off, to say that capping heads off cheese builds is similarly ludicrous. You can make cheese capping builds. 139km/h Trebuchet with capture accelerator GG right there, get two guys in one of those in a premade and you can grind out wins without ever seeing the enemy (or equip streaks and MLAS and crush whatever lights come back to stop you).

Third off, While Deathmatch (or even Search and destroy) would be a cool game mode (and one Lights would excel at) I didn't actually call for it. Just to remove capping as teh goal in assault.

Frankly I think Assault would work best if there was an actual base with actual health and actual defenses. Start off each team equadistant from both bases So the tactical choices are a lot more cogent and the action is a lot more accessible. You can decide to defend or attack from the get go.

[Tombstoner]

Gierling, on 30 July 2013 - 07:11 AM, said:

Its very simple we have two win conditions, one of which is locational.

You can perform the "Kill everyone" win condition anywhere, but capping (and defending from caps) requires you to be at a base. Since you start at your base it is more prudent to stay there.

I foresee a future where the community internalizes this knowledge and whole teams stick to thier bases tightly, attempting to kill any breakaway cappers and net a player advantage before leaving the base.

It may seem alarmist but if you examine the win conditions rationally the best play is always to hang back at your base until you have cemented a clear advantage.

This will grind gameplay to a halt once the general skill level gets high enough.

We need to eliminate Capping in Assault, the frustrations it introduces are more prevelant then the frustrations it seeks to avoid.

No it doesn't grind game play to a halt. this is where the fun really beings as skill level hits a threshold.
i'm sick of people rushing out to die. i want to defend first and kill the idiots who rush. then move forward picking off targets that are out in the open( bad) or caught alone (bad). when i go up against a team that plays this the fun level is 10x what it normally is.

[Gierling]

Ph30nix, on 30 July 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

easy solution to base cappers in assault, Stop having your team with nothing but assault mechs

This is exactly what I'm talking about. If you look at it from a pure efficiency standpoint capping encourages assault heavy teams.

Eventually you will just see games where all assault teams stand at thier base. Thier lack of mobility is negated.

You have enough teams do that and eventually the game will devolve into assault heavy squads sitting at base for the majority of the match.

WITH THE CURRENT CAPPING MECHANICS THE SMART PLAY IS TO SIT AT YOUR BASE, WHICH ACTUALLY INCENTIVIZES BRINGING ASSAULTS AND HEAVIES.

I capped that because that is the point I'm trying to make, its not a problem yet, but sooner or later people will figure out "Hey why am I leaving the base, I can fight here too".

[James The Fox Dixon]

Gierling, on 30 July 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

First off, to say that capping is required to justify lights is ludicrous.

A Light is just as capable as an assault at killing, it just uses manueverability to do it. A capable light can shred an assault without ever presenting any opportunity to be shot itself. I regularly see commandos get 4-5 kills and rack up 5-600 damage.

It is absurd to say that Lights won't have a place without capping.

Second off, to say that capping heads off cheese builds is similarly ludicrous. You can make cheese capping builds. 139km/h Trebuchet with capture accelerator GG right there, get two guys in one of those in a premade and you can grind out wins without ever seeing the enemy (or equip streaks and MLAS and crush whatever lights come back to stop you).

Third off, While Deathmatch (or even Search and destroy) would be a cool game mode (and one Lights would excel at) I didn't actually call for it. Just to remove capping as teh goal in assault.

Frankly I think Assault would work best if there was an actual base with actual health and actual defenses. Start off each team equadistant from both bases So the tactical choices are a lot more cogent and the action is a lot more accessible. You can decide to defend or attack from the get go.

Try 8 man matches then get back to me. There is no use for lights in assault in the 8 man. It's all heavy and assault sniper meta builds that sit at their base and wait for their enemies to come.

[Gierling]

James The Fox Dixon, on 30 July 2013 - 08:10 AM, said:

Try 8 man matches then get back to me. There is no use for lights in assault in the 8 man. It's all heavy and assault sniper meta builds that sit at their base and wait for their enemies to come.

I do believe that is what I'm pointing out will be the eventual result, 8 mans just picked it up sooner.

The whole point I'm getting at is that assault as it is composed right now really encourages you to sit on the base (Which you spawn at) and kill anyone who comes to it. Anything else is actually a bad play. The mode needs a tuning pass and capping as we know it needs to go.

Best idea is to give the base health and defenses (so mech builds come into play assaulting it) and start both teams equadistant to both bases.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Gierling, on 30 July 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

I do believe that is what I'm pointing out will be the eventual result, 8 mans just picked it up sooner.

The whole point I'm getting at is that assault as it is composed right now really encourages you to sit on the base (Which you spawn at) and kill anyone who comes to it. Anything else is actually a bad play. The mode needs a tuning pass and capping as we know it needs to go.

Best idea is to give the base health and defenses (so mech builds come into play assaulting it) and start both teams equadistant to both bases.

It's happening even in PUG and 4 mans. I get it you don't want light or medium mechs and have Assault Warrior online.

[Gierling]

James The Fox Dixon, on 30 July 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

It's happening even in PUG and 4 mans. I get it you don't want light or medium mechs and have Assault Warrior online.

James you don't seem to be getting what I'm trying to express here.

The capping mechanic + Starting the teams in the base basically removes lights mobility as a factor.

You know where the lights are going to go, so it makes sense to just stand there. The fact that you start there makes it even easier.

This is the future of Assault because the mechanic basically makes it the best way to win.

Why are you assuming I'm FOR "assault warrior" when I'm complaining about things that are pushing the game in that direction?

Edited by Gierling, 30 July 2013 - 08:34 AM.

[Sporklift]

Gierling, on 30 July 2013 - 08:33 AM, said:

James you don't seem to be getting what I'm trying to express here.

The capping mechanic + Starting the teams in the base basically removes lights mobility as a factor.

You know where the lights are going to go, so it makes sense to just stand there. The fact that you start there makes it even easier.

This is the future of Assault because the mechanic basically makes it the best way to win.

Why are you assuming I'm FOR "assault warrior" when I'm complaining about things that are pushing the game in that direction?

Strangely I don't think this will happen because it will be boring as hell (alot like fishing while sober), even more boring than PPCwarrior online or whatever the loud people are calling it. Better just run with something that can react to a base cap, you know, like having tactical flexiblity at 75kph over massive slowbot mode at 54kph.

Seriously, its been in the game since alpha and you rarely find the other team at their own base unless they are a trolling 8 man of shutdown DDCs.

[Keifomofutu]

James The Fox Dixon, on 30 July 2013 - 07:34 AM, said:

Again, you have been proven wrong. You want to remove a good portion of the tactics available to lights and fast mediums just so you can team deathmatch in your cheese build heavy and assault mechs. Sorry, but in Battletech there isn't team deathmatch, but there are objectives that one has to complete.

Battletech is very frequently a simple matter of a certain number of mechs on opposite sides of a board. Team with mechs alive at the end the longest wins.