46 replies to this topic

[Sky Hawk]

It seems, not many Player likes, when the last enemy Player Hide/Shut-down, specially when more time remained from the match. Since Skirmish has no 'Cap-End' like the other two Mode, I proposal make this:

<All Chat>
...

- 'Player Name1'! You are the last of your Team! We offer a temporal ceasefire and invite you for a '1 vs.1' Fight, at 'C4' (Mapcoordinate). You can choose your opponent free.

- I agreed. I choose 'Player Name2'!

- Understand, fight begin at 500m distance. If you hit any other Players, you are free-prey! Good luck!

-Thanks! I'm on the way...
...


I think it would be more faster then 'just-hide' and we have more fun...

[Rushin Roulette]

Another solution would be for players to start using lights and mediums themselves insted of going "hupedurp, Ill go into this easy mode with an Assault". The last hiding mech will have a chance, because he is not running into a big Assaultblob and the other team is fast enough to actually search the map for the last mech.

P. S. dont forget to include BAP in your builds as this shows shut down mechs close to your position and can cancle out ECM.

[Roland]

This is really not a problem at all. It doesn't actually happen.

There is far less "hunt down the last light mech" in skirmish mode than there is in Conquest, since there isn't actually any incentive for the light mech to hide in Skirmish mode.

[Corbon Zackery]

There is no solution there is nothing he can do because there is a pack of idiots who couldn't handle assault running around trying to kill him.

The fact that you couldn't find him shows how smart the pilot is. How dumb your roaming high alpha wolfpacks are.

Survivors should get bonus money for making you walk around the map for 15 minutes like idiots because there's no objective other than mass slaughter. At some point in your travels you will wonder why there's no base to cap to end you misery. Then you realize your in Skirmish mode.

Edited by Corbon Zackery, 18 December 2013 - 06:42 AM.

[Scratx]

I'm laughing because it's totally why we had bases to cap in the first gameplay mode to begin with.

Why the hell did people beg and beg and BEG for this {Scrap} anyway? I hope PGI at least cuts match length down to 10 minutes. If you can't get the enemy team blown to bits in 10 minutes, you're both camping too much anyway.

[Roland]

Scratx, on 18 December 2013 - 07:24 AM, said:

Why the hell did people beg and beg and BEG for this {Scrap} anyway

Because the games are infinitely more interesting when you are able to use the entire map to your advantage.
The only people who think that the red square added tactical depth to the game are folks who don't actually understand how to maneuver around the field.

[Voivode]

Or just reduce the timer. Most kills is a victory condition so cut three minutes of match time.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sky Hawk, on 18 December 2013 - 05:49 AM, said:

It seems, not many Player likes, when the last enemy Player Hide/Shut-down, specially when more time remained from the match. Since Skirmish has no 'Cap-End' like the other two Mode, I proposal make this:

<All Chat>
...

- 'Player Name1'! You are the last of your Team! We offer a temporal ceasefire and invite you for a '1 vs.1' Fight, at 'C4' (Mapcoordinate). You can choose your opponent free.

- I agreed. I choose 'Player Name2'!

- Understand, fight begin at 500m distance. If you hit any other Players, you are free-prey! Good luck!

-Thanks! I'm on the way...
...


I think it would be more faster then 'just-hide' and we have more fun...

You are a Clanner I will guess.

[Sandpit]

*giggles*

[Chip Danger]

Roland, on 18 December 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

Because the games are infinitely more interesting when you are able to use the entire map to your advantage.
The only people who think that the red square added tactical depth to the game are folks who don't actually understand how to maneuver around the field.

The only people who think that the red square didn't add tactical depth are the ones that never fig out how to split an enemy team with it.

[Voivode]

Rizzwind, on 18 December 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:

The only people who think that the red square didn't add tactical depth are the ones that never fig out how to split an enemy team with it.

I think each game mode has its merits. I'm glad they added skirmish since it really lets you move into the enemies territory without worrying about your own backfield. It allows different tactics than conquest and assault.

Edited by Voivode, 18 December 2013 - 07:57 AM.

[Zyllos]

Roland, on 18 December 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

Because the games are infinitely more interesting when you are able to use the entire map to your advantage.
The only people who think that the red square added tactical depth to the game are folks who don't actually understand how to maneuver around the field.

I think this is more of an issue that the capture points are centered as a clearly marked square around a capture point.

Instead, there should be zone's of influence that is shaped strategically around a capture node, an inner and outer capture zone.

The inner capture zone would be roughly triple the size of the current capture zones. This will quickly capture the point at a high rate.

The outer capture zone would be extremely large, like 500 to 750m away from the capture point. This zone will slowly capture the point at a slow rate.

Basically, the inner zone will capture roughly 133% faster than the outer zone, but if an enemy is in the outer zone while your team is in the inner zone, the capture speed will be only 33% of the base capture speed. Both sides in the inner zone will cancel each other out.

What this does is allow players to maneuver and hide in the outer zone while still maintaining defense of a capture point. If the enemy pushes beyond the outer zone to the inner zone, they will begin capturing the point.

The zones should be in a non-uniform polygon. The outer zone will have defensible boundaries to outside influence and against the inner zone. What I mean by this is that the capture polygon will extend out past terrain that helps assaulting/defending the point.

For conquest, I think 1 of the 5 capture points should be weighted in higher capture value, most likely being the center most point. If you have it captured, it's worth 2 capture points of the others.

These changes would add a lot of depth to these style of modes. The major issues is that the capture zones themselves are so small and have no variation that any tactical depth is basically rendered down to "kill mechs then capture" instead of allowing mechs to maneuver while still being able to capture points.

[NRP]

Heh, this already happened to me on Terrible Therma last night. We killed everyone except a Jenner, and we had about 5 minutes remaining in our Skirmish match.

It seems to be a new way for light mechs to troll. If people were upset about the 60 second Ready button issue, I predict there will be much rage over wasting 5 minutes of peoples' time.

[Sandpit]

NRP, on 18 December 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

Heh, this already happened to me on Terrible Therma last night. We killed everyone except a Jenner, and we had about 5 minutes remaining in our Skirmish match.

It seems to be a new way for light mechs to troll. If people were upset about the 60 second Ready button issue, I predict there will be much rage over wasting 5 minutes of peoples' time.

Oh I predicted this as soon as this mode was announced. Hence my earlier post in this thread. I'm going to giggle every single time i see a rage thread about skirmish mode

The only time this can be mitigated would be 12v12. Have a gentleman's agreement between the groups.

[Mcchuggernaut]

All you idiots barking about how skirmish mode is terribad because of the last mech hiding seem to be forgetting that people do that in assault and conquest mode all the time too. Hell, I did it once in an Atlas with no weapons left and actually lived. It still takes long enough to cap or get maximum resources that you can still be in for a long wait, and the only way to solve this is to add a feature that offers the last 2 mechs a chance to surrender. People are going to take it because the people that are hiding have no hope and are trying to preserve their K/D ratio.

[Roland]

Rizzwind, on 18 December 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:

The only people who think that the red square didn't add tactical depth are the ones that never fig out how to split an enemy team with it.

You understand that wasn't actual tactical depth, right?
I mean, you're just illustrating my point... Your perception of depth is a joke compared to what is possible when you aren't tethered to a little red square.

[Steel Will]

The solution is a sudden death timer when you're up by a certain number of mechs or there are only a few mechs left and if x amount of time goes by without a kill it ends the match. I can't believe they made this mode and didn't implement anything like this unless their intent is just longer matches/slower cbill generation.

[Roland]

Make videos of folks doing it if you think its a problem. I have yet to see anyone do it, because it doesn't benefit them at all to run away and hide. Make a video of it happening, when YOU aren't the one doing it. I'm eager to see your examples.

Also, given there aren't any cap points, the folks who are playing skirmish (including those in light mechs) are actually interested in fighting and engaging.. the scouts are actually scouting. Which means that they aren't just avoiding all contact the whole game. A light mech who is actually engaging would have to actuall disengage if he were going to try and hide.

This is in contrast to other game types like conquest, where a light mech may have spent the entire game avoiding all contact with anyone, and then shut down and hid while waiting to win on cap points (and this happened ALL THE TIME in conquest).

Ultimately, you aren't forced to play skirmish. Play the other games.

But the vast majority of folks playing skirmish seem to be enjoying it greatly, since it enables the types of tactical maneuvering that defines mechwarrior, and that we used back in Mechwarrior 4 league play.

[Deathlike]

Roland, on 18 December 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:

But the vast majority of folks playing skirmish seem to be enjoying it greatly, since it enables the types of tactical maneuvering that defines mechwarrior, and that we used back in Mechwarrior 4 league play.

The strict difference between MW4 and MWO is the lack of spawn in MWO. Spawning allowed Team Destruction to be fine in league play. Limited lives was not a concern (or not as much).

Just remember, you asked for it, and you got what you asked for. Not realizing what the "side issues" were is not the problem of the mode, but the people who asked for it.

You can't always force people to come to you in Skirmish.

In Assault, you can force them to come in many different ways.

Edited by Deathlike, 18 December 2013 - 09:54 AM.

[Sodapop]

Deathlike, on 18 December 2013 - 09:53 AM, said:

The strict difference between MW4 and MWO is the lack of spawn in MWO. Spawning allowed Team Destruction to be fine in league play. Limited lives was not a concern (or not as much).

Just remember, you asked for it, and you got what you asked for. Not realizing what the "side issues" were is not the problem of the mode, but the people who asked for it.

You can't always force people to come to you in Skirmish.

In Assault, you can force them to come in many different ways.

You mean respawning? If so, this is not really true, bud. NBT planetary league in MW4, for example, used No Respawn in all their games. Everyone enjoyed there enjoyed it and it was a whole lot of fun.