39 replies to this topic

[Wil McCullough]

3 possible ways:

1. make the objective an object that has to be destroyed and has a significant amount of life.
2. make the team-wide benefits for capping reasonable, like 30k cbills and 30xp or whatever, instead of zero like now. so at least 12 players walk away with something
3. only make capping available if there is a difference in a team is up or down by at least 2 mechs.

[Jon Gotham]

Points 1 and 2 fully agree with.
Point 1 could actually be fun, and maybe a good reason to equip arty/air strikes.


*edit*

What about having one team defend the base and the other team attack it? Might need a few map tweaks in the name of fairness.....
Defending team gets rewards for each enemy killed in the defence and/or time defended..
Attacking team gets rewards based on enemy killed and damage inflicted to the base etc

Edited by kamiko kross, 09 November 2013 - 09:26 AM.

[AV 4 T 4 R]

If you want to adjust Cap I think the following could be better:

1. Until you have more then 50% of the lance alive, you cannot be capped more then 50%
2. When your lance has been defeated and you have less then 50% of mechs, then you are allowed to be capped full and loose the game
3. You could allow a timeset, for example you cannot be capped within first 3 minutes.


In this way you dont "base swap", but CAP is a strategic element can can join after a first phase of battleing between the two lances.

[Red squirrel]

I could imagine that capping gets replaced by the task to destroy certain buildings in the enemy base.
Would suit the Assault type of game IMHO.

[Wil McCullough]

kamiko kross, on 09 November 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

What about having one team defend the base and the other team attack it? Might need a few map tweaks in the name of fairness..... Defending team gets rewards for each enemy killed in the defence and/or time defended.. Attacking team gets rewards based on enemy killed and damage inflicted to the base etc

yes i like this as well.

i don't think map tweaks are necessary though.

just ensure that, just like elo, players will eventually play an even number of both attack and defend matches on the same map in the long run.

regarding my point of making an objective an object that has to be destroyed, there is a problem. as it stands right now, if you're out of ammo, or been zombied, at least you can still contribute to the match by trying to cap.

by changing the objective to destroying a base, zombied or ammo-less players can't do anything other than being a monty-python black knight and kicking people or something.

[Troutmonkey]

Zerberus, on 08 November 2013 - 03:06 AM, said:

Seriously, enough with the "change assault /stop capping" chuffa... The asault blob already got their way once, in the process completely ******* up conquest for single lights in the process, and to this day not one of them has even attempted to rtb to defend, just continued the assault blob circle jerk.

Assault mode needed the change, and still needs further tweaking, but I have no idea why they increased the cap time on conquest so much. That should definately go back to how it was before. Whats the point of being a fast light if you have to sit on a conquest cap point for over a minute?

[Troutmonkey]

Farix, on 07 November 2013 - 04:45 PM, said:

I'm not going to vote in the poll as it suggest that I am completely for all the suggestions in thier entirety or I am completely against it. However, things aren't always that black or white.


I'm all for changing the capture rate. I don't think that having more mechs on a capture point should increase the capture rate by any significant margin. My personal preference would simply have a x1 rate and apply any bonus for a single capture accelerators present. That team of 4 lights with capture accelerators won't be as big of a problem as before.


Somewhat support this, though I would suggest that the capture bar doesn't reset until 10 seconds after the enemy mech leaves. The exact time can be adjusted depending on need or map. But there there are any friendly mechs in the base zone, it automatically goes up with a "base savior" bonus.


Not sure if I can agree with that, in part, if you are capping, you should still be able to defend your position. But I do think that any enemy mech fired upon within the base zone should receive a bonus for base defense.


Cannot support this. It's the chief way of saving the base and to counteract #3 above. See also my comment in #1 for the "base savior" bonus.


Increased? There should be a reward in the first place.

You make some very good suggestions, much better than the many people who cry "it's fine" when obviously so many people think it could be better. I would love for some simple attack/defend modes where they just remove one base at random and give better rewards for capping. The only problem with this kind of mode is that it would render most of the map useless most of the time.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Good lord its another one

[Jon Gotham]

Wil McCullough, on 09 November 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:

yes i like this as well.

i don't think map tweaks are necessary though.

just ensure that, just like elo, players will eventually play an even number of both attack and defend matches on the same map in the long run.

regarding my point of making an objective an object that has to be destroyed, there is a problem. as it stands right now, if you're out of ammo, or been zombied, at least you can still contribute to the match by trying to cap.

by changing the objective to destroying a base, zombied or ammo-less players can't do anything other than being a monty-python black knight and kicking people or something.

Fair point about the ammo, I suggested it purely through a discussion we were having on TS about it. Perhaps there could be another way to destroy it?
Maybe have the option to place an artillery beacon on a cap zone every 10 matches or so? So if you do end up ammoless or zombied-you can still hurt the base. The 10 match prohibition would discourage peeps from wasting it and to save it for those scenarios.
The idea of desctructable base is so that even if people do "cap" they still do damage and therefore earn cbills, hopefully lessening the "no reward" issue?
The "base" could be a mech made to look like a building with a large "HP" pool as I believe crysis engine doesn't do destructable terrain?
Or it could be a harsh way of teaching people ammo discipline:)
The other solution as people have suggested is to have the cap reset when someone shoots a capper-though....there should be someway for the capper to defend their position

[Sean von Steinike]

How about, "Don't be a {Dezgra}, pay attention to game victory conditions"?

[Durant Carlyle]

Primary victory condition in both of the game modes is CAPTURING BASES.

Secondary victory condition in both of the game modes is DESTROY OTHER TEAM.

Yet only 19% of matches end in cap. That's right, 81% of matches end with the destruction of one team.

What is it that needs fixing?

Edited by Durant Carlyle, 16 November 2013 - 11:16 PM.

[Wolf Clearwater]

Durant Carlyle, on 16 November 2013 - 11:15 PM, said:

Primary victory condition in both of the game modes is CAPTURING BASES.

Secondary victory condition in both of the game modes is DESTROY OTHER TEAM.

Yet only 19% of matches end in cap. That's right, 81% of matches end with the destruction of one team.

What is it that needs fixing?

What is wrong is that despite the order they are listed in, the only real benefits for playing the match are for destroying the other team. Therefore, by winning by cap without fighting, you get close to nothing in the way for rewards, and if you are not one of the cappers - you get nothing at all. So the reality is the real objective is to destroy the enemy team, followed by capture the base as a last resort if you cannot destroy the enemy. The mode that rewards you for capturing bases is Conquest. The description and order for Assault objectives should be changed. There are multiple topics for that elsewhere.

[Fabe]

Durant Carlyle, on 16 November 2013 - 11:15 PM, said:

Primary victory condition in both of the game modes is CAPTURING BASES.

Secondary victory condition in both of the game modes is DESTROY OTHER TEAM.

Yet only 19% of matches end in cap. That's right, 81% of matches end with the destruction of one team.

What is it that needs fixing?

Or maybe the objectives are simply listed alphabetically and since C comes before D 'capture enemy base' is listed before 'Destroy all enemies' . As far as I'm concerned there are no primary or secondary objectives in assault mode and its up to the team to decide what objective they want to try for.

Which in pug matches might be the real problem. There is no teamwork or coordination so you ended up with some players trying to win by capping while other try to win by wiping out the other team. This allows a more organized team to beat them as they all run off to do their own thing.

[Flying Judgement]

more mech standing in cap place dose not increase cap speed

a bit more cap points

so the other team have enough time to counter the capturing process

i think most of the problem is solve

1 more: capping isnt possible as long as your team killed 4 more mech than the enemy and the enemy team have 3 or more mechs left or capping is really slow under these circumstances

[New Day]

Troutmonkey, on 06 November 2013 - 03:55 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2929205

Only 4 DPS but depending on the number and tracking... Maybe make it home onto damaged components.
Oh, you're legged and going to cap

Edited by NamesAreStupid, 19 November 2013 - 09:16 AM.

[Mercules]

The "fix" is to train bad players. Bad players allow base caps to happen.

[WarHippy]

Troutmonkey, on 07 November 2013 - 04:26 AM, said:

That's almost the point. Capping is meant as a way to end games where you would otherwise have to chase a light for minutes

Capping is the primary goal of assault, it is not some last ditch thing you do to end the game so you don't have to chase a light around. So, no your ideas are absurdly terrible. Capping is and always should be an option in assault, and trying to make it nearly impossible is just absurd.

[Timuroslav]

This benefits Poptarting, a bit too much. I like the idea of the cap point regenerating if ignored. The Diminishing cap returns is an interesting idea, but I can also see it being impossible to cap with poptarts constantly slugging capping. That would make capturing the point impossible. Let's be realistic for a second. If you have someone's oil rig hostage, you probable don't want to risk it's explosion.
So the proposed idea kinda turns into Find waldo after the Main brawl.

A) Blowing your own Oil Rig up,
you sacrifice your resource extractor and the enemy still has a resource extractor, isn't that an Enemy victory?

B ) Anger the Enemy who has your Oil Rig hostage which you need to create Whatever.

C)It dumbs-down Mechwarrior. here's how
by allowing a single poptarter to save the game. Poptart Spiders with ER PPCs could stall the game &
Seeing as it is easier to fight, and STALL the Game people will be less likely to pay attention to the friendly Chat box, because to them it's officially Team Death Match.

See it as a hostage situation. The police lose if the bandits kill the hostage or escape with the money & Hostage.Yes, it promotes fighting, but it also prolongs tedious let's find-the-spider combat.

Now for the stuff I like:

Who in their Right mind in this Universe would leave a Giant Resource Extractor unguarded?
No one with money in the bank.

(Better Idea) Cheap base Defence turrets would definitely make this game mode more interesting. While the Base is being pelted an Alert could go off. This alone would make Assault mode more unique than Conquest.

(Good Idea) Base regeneration is also a Great idea. The Base is probable under constant radio contact with other planetary forces. It makes sense as long as there is no Infantry or helicopters in the game to assimilate the base that it Would Recover Radio contact with Allied Forces.

Unless of course it is destroyed completely by an opposing team.

Edited by Timuroslav, 19 November 2013 - 12:42 PM.

[Helsbane]

You're taking something that's so simple and trying to make it the most complex aspect of the game. Have you considered a career with PGI?

Don't want to get capped? Defend. Simple as that. Doesn't need a pile of conditions, modifiers, resets, etc. Just requires someone to come and run them off. But, that's hard when they're all out looking for mechs to shoot, which is ironic, because that's how you prevent a base cap. You know, shooting mechs? The ones Betty is telling you about? On your base?

TDM is coming for all the folks that can't defend an immobile structure, and I'm gonna call this one now. The first time you chase a light around Terra Therma for eight minutes till match end, you'll wish there was a cap you could stand on.

[Sandpit]

The "fix" is to stop complaining about this mode, wait for DM and while playing this mode don't stomp off with reckless abandon with no plan to slow down a cap while a main force RTBs to help out