32 replies to this topic

[Quikshotmofo]

I'm not a big fan of base rushing on Assault mode, especially on big maps, so I was wondering what people thought about the suggestion of a 3-4 kill requirement before you can base cap. A kill count that won't impede the early game advantage of killing a few lights scouting, but low enough for the team to be able to change strategy mid game when the other team has the momentum. At worst we'd have teams camping each others base waiting for one team to make a move but still might be better then having your base rushed with no action.

I've also noticed that having to cap a base while being attacked can be a recipe for disaster anyways, as there is usually little cover at the base and little room to move making mechs easy to pick off. So having one team camp a base hoping to get an easy 4 kills and start capping might not work out most of the time.

Any thoughts? Maybe a good question for Ask the Devs?

[anonymous161]

I say get rid of base capping altogether, it's pretty boring.

[Sakuroshin]

I think assault mode should be completely changed into some sort of attack/defend mode. Its hard for me to get into the idea that both teams drop onto this planet at the same time, and their goal is to mash mechs together until only 1 team lives.

[Farix]

Assault is based on Capture the Flag. Learn to play the mode for what it is, not as a Team Death Match.

[ShortBusBully]

Base capping has its place on Assualt maps. I am with the 99% that think its boring if a couple lights sprint toward at the beginning of the match. However, I think what should happen is if your team has 10 or more then it would like XX minutes to cap, then lower time or speed up capping speed to half the time if you team has 5 or less. If you are the sole survivor then it speeds up even more. This would pretty much eliminate the quick caps by a couple lights a few minutes into the match. But if you are the sole survivor and trying to win it for the team, you have a chance, although slim. Just a thought.

[TB Freelancer]

I'll just quote something someone else put far better than I could....

Quote

If anyone is seriously still having problems with capping, they need to figure out why they are playing this game, because it is obviously above their mental ability. Either they aren't bothering to stop a cap in progress, or they have let so many enemies get past them that they deserve to lose. The elimination of defense as a serious consideration has so dumbed down the game as to make any complaint about this kind of victory proof of an inability to have a valid opinion on the subject.

Case closed.

EDIT: I've said it in dozens of these threads. 9 times out of 10 base caps are entirely preventable, most of the time even very easily predictable.

Why the main force that's only 300m away from the base couldn't be bothered to look back when the base is being capped and push to the middle of the map is beyond me, but I see it happen time and again.

IMHO, if the loosing team earned 1/4 rewards, that might fix things. The only thing that seems to motivate people is Cbills or the lack thereof.

Edited by TB Freelancer, 29 September 2013 - 07:50 PM.

[Audlyn]

Darth Bane001, on 29 September 2013 - 05:39 PM, said:

I say get rid of base capping altogether, it's pretty boring.

I would agree with this
If they had it set where there would be some...say...2 assault mechs, 3 heavy mechs, 5 medium mechs, and 2 light mechs per drop.
I hate to say it, but when it is dropped with some 6 assault mechs, and only 1-2 light mechs per round, there's no real option a light can do but cap in order to be of some greater value (I'd say they can scout, but why bother, no cbills or experience in it).

[Lykaon]

With a 3-4 kill count on the boards it's likely that team has already won due to the domino effect.

Frequently the only viable strategy for a team down 3-4 mechs is to cap.

So if it's just to difficult to pay attention to two objectives I just don't know what to tell you.

[PEEFsmash]

How about this, don't vacate your own base. You have 12 people, use them.

/thread

[The Boz]

TB Freelancer, on 29 September 2013 - 07:45 PM, said:

I'll just quote something someone else put far better than I could....

EDIT: I've said it in dozens of these threads. 9 times out of 10 base caps are entirely preventable, most of the time even very easily predictable.

Why the main force that's only 300m away from the base couldn't be bothered to look back when the base is being capped and push to the middle of the map is beyond me, but I see it happen time and again.

IMHO, if the loosing team earned 1/4 rewards, that might fix things. The only thing that seems to motivate people is Cbills or the lack thereof.

I would agree with this, I really would, except...
I mainly pilot an Atlas these days. If I reach the murder ridge from the north spawn on Alpine Peaks and two enemy lights pop into base, I literally can not go back in time before they finish capping. On some maps, I am 100% dependent on my team not screwing me over. No amount of "rtb", "time to defend" or similar chat comments ever work.
Losing in such a way that my mech doesn't take damage, fire a shot, and literally can't even do anything about the loss is infuriating.
So while your argument does work in a full or even partial premade, or in a TT/RTS type of environment, it completely becomes a crapshoot with 12v12 randoms.

Edited by The Boz, 29 September 2013 - 09:35 PM.

[Nryrony]

I hate both game modes. I really do, and I see no point in them too.

We need something else, how about a simple attack/defend the base(1 not 2)?

[Grym]

Nryrony, on 29 September 2013 - 09:42 PM, said:

I hate both game modes. I really do, and I see no point in them too.

We need something else, how about a simple attack/defend the base(1 not 2)?

Its in development. However, there are alot of things in development.

This issue has been beat into the ground. The reality is that they are too busy working on other things.

A safe bet would be that we wont see any change in rewards or modes until CW is implemented. And then we will probably see a revamp of the rewards system.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

How about you and your team work together to find out where the enemy mechs are and intercept a base cap attempt and drive off or kill the cappers? Yes it sucks when you're PUGing and your team is full of morons who refuse to scout but that doesn't mean you should change the basic mechanics of the game mode.

[Weztside]

Some people don't give a damn about winning in a video game. All they care about is enjoying themselves. When a person like that sits down to play a game that almost exclusively involves lots of giant robots shooting each other they expect to actually get to shoot other giant robots. Instead, they either get to march their giant mech across the battlefield and stare at the inside of their cockpit until a meter says the game is over or they get into a FUN battle only to have it brought to an end by someone sitting on their base staring at the inside of their cockpit. Obviously, this doesn't happen every game nor does everyone have the same idea of whats fun about MWO, but is it really that difficult to understand people who don't like capping?

[Joseph Mallan]

I keep repeating this. If you are capped you need to look in the mirror to complain to who is responsible. Alistair Winter has put together numbers on how often things happen in game. Caps happen 15% of the time! 15%! Stop complaining and try to stop the cap.

[Bilbo]

Since the increase in the time it takes to cap, I cannot believe these threads keep popping up. It is impossible to lose this way unless you ignore it completely, in which case you really do deserve the loss.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Bilbo, on 30 September 2013 - 06:06 AM, said:

Since the increase in the time it takes to cap, I cannot believe these threads keep popping up. It is impossible to lose this way unless you ignore it completely, in which case you really do deserve the loss.

If the enemy team manages to cap with zero kills, and my team earns any number of kills...

...I get more XP, , and fun for the time spent in that match, despite the game telling me I lost. So, if I came out on top in the , xp earned, and entertainment department in blowing up big stompy robots while they stared at each other in an arbitrary red square, who really won the match?


I'd argue that the game mode itself it a flawed pos that should be removed in place of either TDM or a static base defend/assault mode, with actual base walls and turrets. But hey, what do I know. Regardless if I won or lost, I came to enjoy myself. For me, that is earning , and blowing up a few mechs. If that means ignoring the cap entirely, then so be it. What do I really care if I "lost"?

Edited by mwhighlander, 30 September 2013 - 06:19 AM.

[Shadey99]

From my weekend testing (That I need to finish the stats for), when a 'cap rush' was done it was done en masse by the enemy team. Usually no more than 4 or 5 people would return to deal with a base cap. They first encounter a couple lights... Then suddenly the rest of the enemy team arrives and chews up the half a team that did the RTB. The last handful of mechs is then hunted down or the cap finished. It's only when the other team fails to respond to the cap attempt that things degenerate and both teams rush to cap.

[Bilbo]

mwhighlander, on 30 September 2013 - 06:17 AM, said:

If the enemy team manages to cap with zero kills, and my team earns any number of kills...

...I get more XP, , and fun for the time spent in that match, despite the game telling me I lost. So, if I came out on top in the , xp earned, and entertainment department in blowing up big stompy robots while they stared at each other in an arbitrary red square, who really won the match?


I'd argue that the game mode itself it a flawed pos that should be removed in place of either TDM or a static base defend/assault mode, with actual base walls and turrets. But hey, what do I know. Regardless if I won or lost, I came to enjoy myself. For me, that is earning , and blowing up a few mechs. If that means ignoring the cap entirely, then so be it. What do I really care if I "lost"?

The times that I've done it recently, I have to say I thoroughly enjoyed reading the chat as I sat there. Since I have no real need for XP or c-bills, an actual win is a win for me.

[arghmace]

Quikshotmofo, on 29 September 2013 - 05:33 PM, said:

what people thought about the suggestion of a 3-4 kill requirement before you can base cap.

It doesn't make sense. What's the realistic reason for this? Many times when PGI has done something, people have complained about it being unintuitive and band aid. So could we please not ask them for such "improvements"?