97 replies to this topic

[3rdworld]

SuperUser013, on 28 January 2014 - 03:04 PM, said:

Respawn will not work in this game, this is not Call of Duty.

However, if you want respawn then Call of Duty is just right for you.

[Nehkrosis]

wow this thread got large!
lol i did mean "dropship mode", instead of respawn.

The last thing i want is this game to become CoD, but i do recall reading we were possibly getting some sort of WarThunder-style hangar system, with a few of your mech's ready to go.

and 'course less armour would mean the battles would'nt be massively time consuming.

[Tombstoner]

A limited for of re spawn wouldn't be objectionable to me. I consider it a form of reinforcements. as it is every match has a 1200 tonnage limit. i think if i enter the game with an 80 tone mech why cant i reenter with a 20 ton when i die. or two 50 ton mechs.
having the option of 2 or more mehcs would make mediums more viable. you could drop as 2x 40's and one 20.

I dont think PGI would want this simply from a rewards point of view. too much money would be flowing to players.

[Joseph Mallan]

3rdworld, on 28 January 2014 - 11:55 AM, said:

What is the difference between that and now, other than a ridiculous amount of searching in between?

Once I am dead in a match, the team has to carry on without me... attrition is a primary means to win battle.

3rdworld, on 28 January 2014 - 05:25 PM, said:

LOL...
Well served sir!

[Nicholas Carlyle]

It's more of a question of the mechanics of respawn.

There are basically 3 viewpoints I'm seeing.

1] No respawn period.

2] Respawn, but with the caveat that it has to be wrapped in a mechanic that makes sense for Mechwarrior/Battletech (Dropship Mode)

3] Respawn, anywhere, anytime, unlimited style (Hawken)

I think option 3 would drive away way more people than it would keep.

[Navy Sixes]

If We Get Multiple Respawns...

The game will suck like Hawken. If it is universal and not a separate play mode (with a separate set of stats for the clowns in the arcade) I don't know that I"ll be around much longer after it's implemented.

[3rdworld]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 29 January 2014 - 07:39 AM, said:

I think option 3 would drive away way more people than it would keep.

Kinda like 3PV? Wakka wakka

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Tycho von Gagern, on 29 January 2014 - 07:41 AM, said:

If We Get Multiple Respawns...

The game will suck like Hawken. If it is universal and not a separate play mode (with a separate set of stats for the clowns in the arcade) I don't know that I"ll be around much longer after it's implemented.

Let me ask this...

So lets say we have assault mode.

You queue up with up to 4 mechs with a maximum tonnage of 280 tons (Obviously just an example). When your first mech dies, the next one "drops in" at one of the 3 normal drop zones that you'd start the match at.

Then you rejoin.

Would that bother you? I think it fits within the current assault mode, and could make the game more dynamic.

It actually makes each life more important, because you know you can't just steamroll a team down, they will get guys back. So you need to preserve yourself.

3rdworld, on 29 January 2014 - 07:50 AM, said:

Kinda like 3PV? Wakka wakka

Have you not noticed the mass exodus of people to Star Citizen? Kaos, Kong, Goons...a LOT of the higher end groups that spend tons of money and keeps a game like this running left.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 29 January 2014 - 07:53 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 29 January 2014 - 07:52 AM, said:

Let me ask this...

So lets say we have assault mode.

You queue up with up to 4 mechs with a maximum tonnage of 280 tons (Obviously just an example). When your first mech dies, the next one "drops in" at one of the 3 normal drop zones that you'd start the match at.

Then you rejoin.

Would that bother you? I think it fits within the current assault mode, and could make the game more dynamic.

It actually makes each life more important, because you know you can't just steamroll a team down, they will get guys back. So you need to preserve yourself.



Have you not noticed the mass exodus of people to Star Citizen? Kaos, Kong, Goons...a LOT of the higher end groups that spend tons of money and keeps a game like this running left.

I haven't read *SQUAWK* in a match in months!

[3rdworld]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 29 January 2014 - 07:52 AM, said:

Let me ask this...

So lets say we have assault mode.

You queue up with up to 4 mechs with a maximum tonnage of 280 tons (Obviously just an example). When you first mech dies, the next one "drops in" at one of the 3 normal drop zones that you'd start the match at.

Then you rejoin.

Would that bother you? I think it fits within the current assault mode, and could make the game more dynamic.

It actually makes each life more important, because you know you can't just steamroll a team down, they will get guys back. So you need to preserve yourself.



Have you not noticed the mass exodus of people to Star Citizen? Kaos, Kong, Goons...a LOT of the higher end groups that spend tons of money and keeps a game like this running left.

So what if your queued up 5 mechs. Or 10? Or what if each player had the same number of lives as mechs that fit in a union class dropship? Saying no to respawns but yes to a respawn called "dropship" mode, is splitting hairs.

The 3PV wasn't really meant to be about if people would leave. Just that is the exact same argument people made about 3PV, and PGI did it anyways.

[Koniving]

Nehkrosis, on 28 January 2014 - 10:08 AM, said:

Do you think they (PGI) will cut our armour in half again?

I would LOVE that.

Nope. They won't do that unless they rebalance the weapons for multiple shots to do rated damage and thresholds to 30. The only way it'd work without turning this into a Call of Duty.

Also, we won't get respawns. We'll get multiple ~different~ mechs or a marathon of matches.

[Ustarish]

Nehkrosis, on 28 January 2014 - 10:08 AM, said:

Do you think they (PGI) will cut our armour in half again?

I would LOVE that.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

3rdworld, on 29 January 2014 - 07:55 AM, said:

So what if your queued up 5 mechs. Or 10? Or what if each player had the same number of lives as mechs that fit in a union class dropship? Saying no to respawns but yes to a respawn called "dropship" mode, is splitting hairs.

The 3PV wasn't really meant to be about if people would leave. Just that is the exact same argument people made about 3PV, and PGI did it anyways.

You are totally missing the point.

Mechwarrior fans are a completely different beast than your normal FPS fans. The whole original point of this game was to be a smart-man's shooter/sim with role warfare.

We didn't get that, and the game has been leaking players every since.

You cannot just throw a respawn mechanic at this player base and expect them to accept it and keep on playing.

You have to wrap it in a package that is palatable.

You don't get it man, I understand that, it's like talking to my 6 year old as to why she can't play her dance game. She can't understand anyone else's point of view and is just stuck on her own.

That's you in a nut shell.

[NRP]

Deathlike, on 28 January 2014 - 01:39 PM, said:

I'm not adverse to respawns, but there are multiple ways of going about it:

1) CS style respawning - Every mech on the opposing team dies, the next mech in your "quick 4 mech selection" is selected and everyone drop again with their next mech in the queue (shuffling spawn/drop locations optional, probably a good idea to add).

Nothing ultimately changes. It's simple, and it's not complicated (the quick-4 mech idea is applied to the next points, just in case it wasn't clear).

2) MW3 style respawning - When you die, you spawn insanely far from the action, with an ETA to reach someone in the mass between :30 to :60 seconds. Your punishment in a bigger mech by not staying long enough is to "walk" back to the main action. That assumes PGI is capable of dynamic spawn locations (good luck with that) or at least some sort of spawn location generation (PGI designates multiple random spots to spawn in, each ideally 1-2km close to the action).

That isn't optimal, but it's better than "respawning where you died".

3) MW4 style respawning. When you die, you respawn at one of the spawn points that your team usually spawns from. One of the major problems with this is the notion of spawn killing - that is, having opponents deal damage to you before you can appropriately respond due to respawning. You can kind of expand the spawn drop locations, but given that there's a relatively localized area of where you spawn, it's still easy to "camp" those spawning locations.

This isn't optimal either, but an option.

I'm sure there are better solutions, but those are based on older games, which copying the mechanics from isn't too complicated to do (unless, you are PGI).

Edit: One other thing, the quick-4 mech idea would have to be in a tonnage limit situation, since selecting 4 assaults would probably not be optimal for tonnage balance considerations - but also negates newbies from this system unless they start with a 50-65 tonner setup.

I think the Dropship mode that PGI has mentioned is the best idea for a respawn system. You have a limited number of lives, but only one per mech. It will require some strategic planning on the player's part, rather than just mindlessly rushing into battle again after respawning.

[3rdworld]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 29 January 2014 - 08:01 AM, said:

You are totally missing the point.

Mechwarrior fans are a completely different beast than your normal FPS fans. The whole original point of this game was to be a smart-man's shooter/sim with role warfare.

We didn't get that, and the game has been leaking players every since.

You cannot just throw a respawn mechanic at this player base and expect them to accept it and keep on playing.

You have to wrap it in a package that is palatable.

You don't get it man, I understand that, it's like talking to my 6 year old as to why she can't play her dance game. She can't understand anyone else's point of view and is just stuck on her own.

That's you in a nut shell.

Okay bro. I am too thick to understand you can accept respawn called Dropship, but not called respawn.

I just prefer to call a spade a spade. Dropship / respawn same exact thing. If it makes you feel better call it reinforcements, I don't care what you call it. But it is a respawn mechanic. I guess the people on this board are so uptight about their "Lore" that you need to give things fancy names.

And you're point of view isn't even much different than mine. You just don't accept the truth that you are pro-respawn.

Edited by 3rdworld, 29 January 2014 - 08:08 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

3rdworld, on 29 January 2014 - 08:06 AM, said:

Okay bro. I am too thick to understand you can accept respawn called Dropship, but not called respawn.

I just prefer to call a spade a spade. Dropship / respawn same exact thing.

And you're point of view isn't even much different than mine. You just don't accept the truth that you are pro-respawn.

The devil is in the details though, and that's what you are having a problem understanding.

Lets say you have 100,000 players.

If you introduce just straight up respawn like in Hawken, you are going to probably lose somewhere in the realm of 30% of them.

If you introduce a Dropship Respawn mechanic, not only might you not lose players, you might gain them back.

It doesn't matter whether I'm pro-respawn or against respawn.

All that matters is how you present it to the player-base.

This is where PGI fails consistantly and why we have big explosions on the boards.

[3rdworld]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 29 January 2014 - 08:08 AM, said:

The devil is in the details though, and that's what you are having a problem understanding.

Lets say you have 100,000 players.

If you introduce just straight up respawn like in Hawken, you are going to probably lose somewhere in the realm of 30% of them.

If you introduce a Dropship Respawn mechanic, not only might you not lose players, you might gain them back.

It doesn't matter whether I'm pro-respawn or against respawn.

All that matters is how you present it to the player-base.

This is where PGI fails consistantly and why we have big explosions on the boards.

okay. So when we are having a discussion about Pro or against respawn. You are butt-pained that I don't give it some name?

If it is implemented I couldn't care less what you call it. I am not arguing for calling it respawn, I am arguing for the inclusion of a respawn mechanic.

But ya, I am a child for not calling it "Dropship Reinforcement Intra-Battle Deployment".

[Joseph Mallan]

I wanna know If I could sell my dropship so I could buy more Mechs. 60 Million C-bills for a Leopard will buy some great Mechs!

[Nicholas Carlyle]

3rdworld, on 29 January 2014 - 08:15 AM, said:

okay. So when we are having a discussion about Pro or against respawn. You are butt-pained that I don't give it some name?

If it is implemented I couldn't care less what you call it. I am not arguing for calling it respawn, I am arguing for the inclusion of a respawn mechanic.

But ya, I am a child for not calling it "Dropship Reinforcement Intra-Battle Deployment".

You are stuck on a part of the discussion we've all moved passed about 3 hours ago.

That's the problem.

Most of us agree that a respawn mechanic is fine. It's just a matter of how it's put in.

Now we are discussing how to make it work such that it doesn't **** off players (becuase MW:O can't stand to lose more players), and what PGI is actually capable of doing.

I'm sorry we moved passed you without letting you know, I'll try my best to let you know when we've moved onto a new subject.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 29 January 2014 - 08:28 AM.

[Khobai]

Respawns can be done tastefully. Here's an example:

Each team gets 4000 reinforcement tickets. These tickets bleed at a rate of 1 per second. And the first team to reach 0 reinforcement tickets loses.

Each team gets a dropship at their base. When you die your team loses X reinforcement tickets where X is equal to your tonnage and after several seconds you respawn at your dropship. Dropships would be armed with a decent amount of defensive weapons to discourage spawn camping.

Scattered throughout the map would be five capture points. Each point you control would bleed 1 reinforcement ticket from the enemy team per second. So if you controlled 3 of the 5 points, the enemy team would bleed 4 tickets per second (which would end the game in about 15 minutes, or faster if you killed a bunch of enemy mechs)

Lastly, both dropships would be destructible (but only after a certain condition is met), and destroying an enemy dropship would cost them half their remaining reinforcement tickets as well as remove their ability to respawn. So losing your dropship would be extremely bad but not an automatic loss.

This gamemode basically combines base assault with conquest and adds respawns into the mix.

Edited by Khobai, 29 January 2014 - 08:47 AM.