69 replies to this topic

[AlexEss]

Not that i am against the idea, but if you have 12 people on your team, put one or two on rapid response duty... Preferably a light and a medium. That way anything but abase rush can be dealt with.

But as i said i am not aginst the idea of a new mode. Deathmatch is after all a staple of the shooter genre.

[Lupin]

Last Man standing"/Solaris (Single players no groups). Good for new players and older ones.

[Domenoth]

Lupin, on 26 September 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

Last Man standing"/Solaris (Single players no groups). Good for new players and older ones.

This I could support. Make the arenas small enough that you can't hide for 10+ minutes and I think we are good to go.

[Wolfways]

Mechwarrior0311, on 26 September 2013 - 06:38 AM, said:

Some just sit here and troll the forums. Check their post counts to see who they are.

And exactly, why is it even a debate lol. I never understand people sometimes.

I was painting a mental image as to why a lot of us want a new mode without a base cap. It was just to add some color to the thread and make it a little more entertaining.

Consider how many people will reply to your OP without reading the rest of the thread. You just basically said "remove the bases" and people will respond to that.
You should edit your OP to include your ideas on what should change to give people a better idea of what you mean.

[101011]

Mechwarrior0311, on 26 September 2013 - 03:17 AM, said:

There is all kinds of ways to deal with that.

After a certain time limit goes up it could start a new timer that forces the last guy on the losing team to fight, do damage, or else be killed and lose the match instantly. Ive seen that in other games and it works well... it will flash like "You must engage the enemy" with a countdown timer and he has to go find and fight or else lose.

Or there could be a player vote to end the match or continue after a certain time limit. If its the last two lights fighting, and they dont engage each other, it ends in a draw when the timer goes up.

It wouldnt be a problem to deal with that aspect really.




Watch this video to get an idea of how enormous this map is.
http://www.youtube.c...d&v=kW2PgEvBh2Y

Thanks for the link, all I had done previously was glance at the overhead view as I read a different topic. I suppose it's okay, though those alleyways that are wider than the buildings look really bad.

[Killhunger]

Domenoth is on the right track with limiting the range.

What you could do is as the battle is raging start sectioning off the map for artillery.

Slowly the map would get smaller and smaller heading towards the 15min mark. Eventually you would have a single grid for who is left till either last man wins, or time runs out. All other grids would be getting shelled constantly forcing them together.

No more cap. And they could somewhat randomize the grids that get shelled with a little bit of warning. I'd rather they just work from ther outer map to the center map for simplicity but they have options.

This mode in a large city skyscraper map might be fun. ((I might post this separately in a more clear post.))

*Edit*
Done - http://mwomercs.com/...lt-no-base-cap/

- Kill

Edited by Killhunger, 26 September 2013 - 02:35 PM.

[Mechwarrior0311]

I think we can all agree that more game modes is a good thing. Also the majority of people would rather win by fighting, not by capping..

[seija]

/sign

[Mechwarrior0311]

Domenoth, on 26 September 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

This is a great idea. I think we're on to something. We should expand on this.

I didnt read all of your confusion.... the timer only goes off after it detects a lack of balance between the teams. They are able to do stuff like that... one light damaged and 3 people on the other team.. after a while the timer starts ticking and flashing "You must engage the enemy!" I have seen this in other games and it worked just fine.

If its 4 spiders with ECM, well yeah it can be dealt with and they will be found.

There is a hundred different ways to deal with a troll or group of trolls trying to drag out a match forever. At 30 minutes there could be a vote to continue... or the game could just end it based on who is left compared to the other team.

Or it could do this, or it could do that. You know if I got paid to sit down and think of all these solutions I am pretty sure I could come up with a lot of great solutions.

Team Deathmatch works in a lot of games. It really does!.


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

OH and I just remembered something else another game did for this type of stuff. What if after a certain time limit, the game detects whats left, and then makes everyone visible with big arrows over their heads? How does THAT sound! I knew there were ways already thought up for this, I just had to remember. 28 years of gaming, lots of knowledge in my attic that needs dusting off every now and then



++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Wolfways, on 26 September 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:

Consider how many people will reply to your OP without reading the rest of the thread. You just basically said "remove the bases" and people will respond to that.
You should edit your OP to include your ideas on what should change to give people a better idea of what you mean.

I don't need to do anything like that at all, my thread explains everything in great detail. If someone doesn't understand what is being proposed here, then maybe they aren't that great at reading and comprehension

Edited by Mechwarrior0311, 26 September 2013 - 03:00 PM.

[Domenoth]

Mechwarrior0311, on 26 September 2013 - 02:45 PM, said:

I didnt read all of your confusion.... the timer only goes off after it detects a lack of balance between the teams.

Okay, lack of "balance" is the trigger. Please define imbalance in a way that a computer can understand. Something simple like by remaining tonnage. So, let's pretend:

• The map is Alpine.
  
• One team drops with 3 Commandos, 2 Cicadas, 2 Kintaros, 3 Dragons, and 2 Awesomes.
  
• The other with 2 jenners, 3 Jaegers, 3 Cataphracts, and 4 Highlanders.

There is a huge tonnage imbalance right from the start. Should the timer kick in and award the victory to the second team before any shots are fired? What would we see in this game mode if all that mattered was tonnage? How many DD-C's would be on the field per match? My bet is between 18 and 24 every game. That sounds beyond boring.

Now, demonstrating how difficult it would be to base it on anything but tonnage, who's winning on Tourmaline? Three undamaged Hunchback 4P's with all medium pulse lasers? Or one Cicada 3C with an ER PPC missing an arm? The Cicada can take pot shots until all the HBK's are dead. By taking the pot shots, he's not even going to allow the engage timer to trigger. Should the game just declare the outnumbered and damaged Cicada the winner? Should the Hunchbacks be declared the winners because they have tons of firepower and all their armor? Or should the Hunchbacks just give up and get sniped at for the next 5-10 minutes? Who is still having fun in this scenario?

Mechwarrior0311, on 26 September 2013 - 02:45 PM, said:

I have seen this in other games and it worked just fine.

Could you provide a little more information. In the games that it worked for, what was the difference in speed between the fastest and the slowest units? And was it possible to remove a leg and cut the speed of the afflicted unit in half or more?

Mechwarrior0311, on 26 September 2013 - 02:45 PM, said:

OH and I just remembered something else another game did for this type of stuff. What if after a certain time limit, the game detects whats left, and then makes everyone visible with big arrows over their heads?

This isn't a bad idea. However, just because you know where the enemy is, doesn't mean you can catch him. A legged Atlas (full armor above the waist and on the remaining leg) vs a Commando 2D that is out of ammo (just a medium laser). So is it a draw? Is the Atlas the winner because he has firepower? Is the Commando the winner because he can circle around, hide behind cover, and take one shot every 20 seconds at max range? They both have arrows over their head so problem solved, right? I'm not convinced.

However, if the objective is a point on the map, since it is impossible to become completely immobile, the Atlas can eventually get there. He has a clear and attainable objective. He doesn't have to suffer through 10 minutes of watching an arrow bob around the map completely out of his reach. Once he does arrive at his objective the match will eventually end no matter what the Commando does.

[Philatrocius]

Well, the opportunity to fight without capping should certainly exist.
_opportunity_
Whoever would want to fight with cap enabled should be able to do so.
It is certainly an interesting balancing mechanism in some games. Clearly not all of them though.

@difficulty: that doesnt count. everything is difficult. until you do it, that is.

[Domenoth]

Philatrocius, on 26 September 2013 - 05:07 PM, said:

Well, the opportunity to fight without capping should certainly exist.
_opportunity_
Whoever would want to fight with cap enabled should be able to do so.
It is certainly an interesting balancing mechanism in some games. Clearly not all of them though.

As I mentioned a few posts ago. I'm all for a Solaris type match. That could be accomplished without capping.

@_opportunity_ I think more people want to play with capping and don't realize it just due to the lack of truly viable alternatives. Kinda like that ******* gravity. I want to fly dammit. When will science completely remove gravity from my life. it prevents me from playing the way I want to.

I understand the desire to play without capping. But I also believe capping serves a purpose more often than it gets abused. I have no actual data to base that on. But I haven't seen any data to make me change my mind either.

Another point. I don't know of a single team-death-match game that doesn't have a timer and respawns until that timer runs out (or a kill limit is reached--i.e. reverse timer--or both). Anyone know of one? How popular was it?

Philatrocius, on 26 September 2013 - 05:07 PM, said:

@difficulty: that doesnt count. everything is difficult. until you do it, that is.

While I don't fully disagree. I believe this to be an over simplification. Draining a lake is difficult. Inflating a raft and paddling to the other side is difficult. Given a choice, which would you choose to implement?

[Mechwarrior0311]

Domenoth, on 26 September 2013 - 04:14 PM, said:

Okay, lack of "balance" is the trigger. Please define imbalance in a way that a computer can understand. Something simple like by remaining tonnage. So, let's pretend:

• The map is Alpine.
  
• One team drops with 3 Commandos, 2 Cicadas, 2 Kintaros, 3 Dragons, and 2 Awesomes.
  
• The other with 2 jenners, 3 Jaegers, 3 Cataphracts, and 4 Highlanders.

There is a huge tonnage imbalance right from the start. Should the timer kick in and award the victory to the second team before any shots are fired? What would we see in this game mode if all that mattered was tonnage? How many DD-C's would be on the field per match? My bet is between 18 and 24 every game. That sounds beyond boring.




Now, demonstrating how difficult it would be to base it on anything but tonnage, who's winning on Tourmaline? Three undamaged Hunchback 4P's with all medium pulse lasers? Or one Cicada 3C with an ER PPC missing an arm? The Cicada can take pot shots until all the HBK's are dead. By taking the pot shots, he's not even going to allow the engage timer to trigger. Should the game just declare the outnumbered and damaged Cicada the winner? Should the Hunchbacks be declared the winners because they have tons of firepower and all their armor? Or should the Hunchbacks just give up and get sniped at for the next 5-10 minutes? Who is still having fun in this scenario?




Could you provide a little more information. In the games that it worked for, what was the difference in speed between the fastest and the slowest units? And was it possible to remove a leg and cut the speed of the afflicted unit in half or more?



This isn't a bad idea. However, just because you know where the enemy is, doesn't mean you can catch him. A legged Atlas (full armor above the waist and on the remaining leg) vs a Commando 2D that is out of ammo (just a medium laser). So is it a draw? Is the Atlas the winner because he has firepower? Is the Commando the winner because he can circle around, hide behind cover, and take one shot every 20 seconds at max range? They both have arrows over their head so problem solved, right? I'm not convinced.

However, if the objective is a point on the map, since it is impossible to become completely immobile, the Atlas can eventually get there. He has a clear and attainable objective. He doesn't have to suffer through 10 minutes of watching an arrow bob around the map completely out of his reach. Once he does arrive at his objective the match will eventually end no matter what the Commando does.

I will find the games I am talking about, but it is late and I must be getting to bed, I have been up for a really long time. But I will research and find the games that have these mechanics just for you


PS ok imagine, Team Deathmatch. Both sides have to kill each other to win. The timer is set at 30 minutes. (this can be altered in the select screen on UI 2.0)

At the end of 30 minutes the AI determines who won by damage, kills and so on.

If the game drags out, the AI makes everyone visible on the map.

If the game drags out even longer... and its just two players left, the game ends and its a draw.

If its 1 player vs 2 players or more... the game ends and the side with the most players gets a win.

This isn't permanent and is subject to change.. but I think that you are over thinking something that really isn't that hard to deal with.

I don't think it will even be an issue... people will just start bringing more Gauss rifles and advanced zoom to snipe the troll from a distance, I mean they can see him on their map anywhere he goes.

****************************************************************************************************************************************

Domenoth, on 26 September 2013 - 05:50 PM, said:

As I mentioned a few posts ago. I'm all for a Solaris type match. That could be accomplished without capping.

@_opportunity_ I think more people want to play with capping and don't realize it just due to the lack of truly viable alternatives. Kinda like that ******* gravity. I want to fly dammit. When will science completely remove gravity from my life. it prevents me from playing the way I want to.

I understand the desire to play without capping. But I also believe capping serves a purpose more often than it gets abused. I have no actual data to base that on. But I haven't seen any data to make me change my mind either.

Another point. I don't know of a single team-death-match game that doesn't have a timer and respawns until that timer runs out (or a kill limit is reached--i.e. reverse timer--or both). Anyone know of one? How popular was it?



While I don't fully disagree. I believe this to be an over simplification. Draining a lake is difficult. Inflating a raft and paddling to the other side is difficult. Given a choice, which would you choose to implement?

Call of Duty World at War... had Hardcore Search and Destroy mode.

Every player only gets one life. One team has to sneak to the objective and place a bomb.

The other team has to hide and kill the other team as it tries to do this.

When the timer is up the game is over. No respawns, just a timer. Once you die, you spectate. Simple as that. I used to love playing that back when it was a new game.

If they place the bomb the game is over, the bomb is placed and then a 10 second timer goes in which it can be disarmed, but if the 10 seconds end it explodes and its GG for the bomb placing team.

Otherwise you can win my killing everyone on the other team, or when the timer is up it judges who did the best and gives them the win, or assigns a draw.

Edited by Mechwarrior0311, 26 September 2013 - 06:20 PM.

[Wolfways]

Mechwarrior0311, on 26 September 2013 - 02:45 PM, said:

I don't need to do anything like that at all, my thread explains everything in great detail. If someone doesn't understand what is being proposed here, then maybe they aren't that great at reading and comprehension

Nice attitude...
I guess the people liking my first post in the thread aren't great at reading and comprehension.

Edited by Wolfways, 26 September 2013 - 09:21 PM.

[Rymir]

Like other people and threads have stated, http://mwomercs.com/...ng-of-the-hill/ for example,

King of the Hill

Single controllable cap point that changes locations, FORCING engagements and firefights while also preventing the "last spider running around the map" issue.

The nice thing about it is that it would make balanced teams more viable since a lighter, faster team can react to hill changes quicker while slower and heavier teams can hold said positions more effectively.


Maybe use an Assault/Defend style of mission similar to what Halo has done, but maybe use an NPC convoy.

For example, the wonderful HQ truck I remember from Mechcommander, or MFBs from Mechwarrior 3. They may or may not be indestructible, but they would pick say maybe one of three random preset paths. Team A defends convoy as it moves, Team B attempts to destroy the defenders/distract them away from convoy, then captures. Then, changeover so the teams reverse roles.

I think someone else has mentioned something along this line here, http://mwomercs.com/...41-supply-raid/

[Morhadel]

The ability to cap is so no matter how out gunned, out tonned, or out-matched you still have a chance of winning.
If your team looses to a base cap, WITH how long those take now, then its your teams fault that you lost, grow up, stop whining.

[Marj]

Morhadel, on 26 September 2013 - 10:06 PM, said:

The ability to cap is so no matter how out gunned, out tonned, or out-matched you still have a chance of winning.
If your team looses to a base cap, WITH how long those take now, then its your teams fault that you lost, grow up, stop whining.

I wish more people understood this. See, the game has nothing to do with skill in combat. You're only supposed to leave the cap if you're in a light. Everyone else is supposed to stand on the cap for the entire match. Any attempt to engage the enemy will pull you too far from your base, so don't do it no matter how fun it might be or how boring base defence is. That way if a light comes to cap it will see you and leave. You don't get to actually shoot at it, just force it to stay away from your cap. The win is decided by which teams' lights were able to kill more of the opposing lights.

The 'thinking man's shooter' was a conspiracy developed by the goons. You're not actually supposed to do stuff like flank enemies, set up hammer + anvil manoeuvres, use ambushes, use brawlers to draw enemies out into the open where LRM's can hit them, or any other tactics. Assault revolves solely around the two bases and that's it, the rest of the maps are just cosmetic fluff to be ignored.

[Sandpit]

Years ago I suggested a Solaris mode. Players could play in tournaments for big cash. You could even play it for pink slips so to speak. If you get cored you lose that mech (which decreases chances for abuse and doubles to eliminate resources from the game and this slow down players from owning every mech possible and such). You could also allow other players to bet on the matches giving the economy another currency sink and have the house take a cut of all wagers as an escrow fee. You could also even allow mc wagers giving another way and reason for players to spend and buy mc. Even charge an mc fee to enter tournaments and such. There's tons of things you could do with this game mode if they would just do it. They've already talked about the ability to gift mechs and such to other players so it shouldn't be a far step beyond that mechanic to adjust it to things like this

[-Natural Selection-]

A single cap that unlocks with one mech alive on a team, or 5 mins left in match. (5 mins keeps a couple lights from running around or more than one shutting down.) Hell, make a 2nd mode with current assault with cap unlocking at 5 mins would due.

Edited by Dozier, 27 September 2013 - 12:00 AM.

[Corvus Antaka]

this type of thread never gets old.

the minute we take cap away, it becomes "chase the last spider for 10 minutes"

then, elite spiders will wittle down full atlai lances from 1200m

and the atlai pilots will scream "spiders are OP"

and "WE DEMAND CAPS RETURN"