14 replies to this topic

[Slepnir]

So I have been thinking as to why I have not been playing conquest and the simple answer is that the cap points really are not implemented right. they take far to long to cap and give way to many points per cap. I think the concept works if done like It has been in the battlefield series of games. the cap is fast, but the points you score is very slow even with all the points capped. forcing people to actually be moving to hold or switch caps instead of ignoring them.

[Deathlike]

You might not be too far off. The biggest problem is the cap length... as it hasn't been changed since the 12v12 change/addition. It literally is a punishing wait. In 8v8, it went slightly too fast by comparison...

So... go figure.

[Zerberus]

This is the single thing that makes me hate the assault blob the most.

They completely screwed over light and medium mechs in all existing game modes with their whining (which led to increased cap times), then still never cared about the points, and therefore continued whining until they got skirmish.

Which left us with a properly functioning TDM mode for said whining blob, and 2 modes that (at least for lights and mediums) are still completely borked and have been for almost 6 months.

I love running lights, and own all but ravens.... but it has become very rare to see me in a light outside of a dedicated spotter role or as part of a 4 man wolfpack. Regardless of what some may want to believe, that is not coincidental...

Cap timers need to be halved now that all the whiners are finally in their TDM sandbox. Period.

Edited by Zerberus, 02 February 2014 - 08:19 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

Slepnir, on 02 February 2014 - 06:56 PM, said:

So I have been thinking as to why I have not been playing conquest and the simple answer is that the cap points really are not implemented right. they take far to long to cap and give way to many points per cap. I think the concept works if done like It has been in the battlefield series of games. the cap is fast, but the points you score is very slow even with all the points capped. forcing people to actually be moving to hold or switch caps instead of ignoring them.

I was about to support this, but the problem I see is that a slow points gain would not mean anyone defends - they would just go for the kill condition.

It works in Battlefield due to respawns but this is a No respawns game at the moment.

If the capping was quick and the points gain was also fast it would be amusing to see how that changed the game though because you might not get time to move for the kill condition so defence might be your best option.

The problem is even the best team playing fatlas would get extremely bored if no one actually attacked his defense point ...

[DEN_Ninja]

I was hoping that Conquest would be a lot more dynamic and varied on the map.

Alpine Peaks should have more than Five total cap points. The largeness of the map and a decent spread of cap points would encourage less blobs and more reliance on a projected force across the map. More points means more opportunities for faster mediums and lights to cap. You and your assault blob can hold those two points but you need more force projection on the 3+ other points to win. Right now the original caps are ignored while the brawl occurs in the center where three are clustered nearby each other.

Instead about having a stupid resource score I'd rather it be a game of zone control. Capturing points is accumulated toward a goal, Your ability to stack up as giant death blob matters much less when there's a goal of capturing 6 zones out of like 11 on Alpine Peaks.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

It would really stratify the roles of mechs.

Lights make the best scouts but not necessarily the best point capture mech because of the need to be able to hold it.

Mediums then fulfill the general role, some faster movers along with larger fire power. Having the best ability of quickly capturing points and holding them.

Heavies are the heavy firepower capable of assaulting points and taking them.

Assaults are point defenders because of their slow speed but vast firepower they can bring.

Brawling would be more common because there are more points to fight over because win is achieved by getting the six.

However long range assaulting would still be viable because people will get entrenched to keep their points.

Edited by Tichorius Davion, 05 February 2014 - 07:35 AM.

[Sug]

Take out the All Mechs Destroyed win condition.

[DEN_Ninja]

Sug, on 05 February 2014 - 08:03 AM, said:

Take out the All Mechs Destroyed win condition.

No point. People would roll regardless because it is easier to blob and destroy the main forces then cap.

The fundamental problem is that there is no incentive to fight evenly with 3 independent lances. No reason to spread a force relatively thin or promote crazy strategies.

Edited by Tichorius Davion, 05 February 2014 - 08:18 AM.

[Sug]

Then just remove Conquest.

[Asmudius Heng]

Tichorius Davion, on 05 February 2014 - 07:31 AM, said:

stuff

I agree that larger maps would benefit from more cap points.

Alpine could hold seven points IMO, Tourmaline could also do seven as could crimson straight.

Not sure if any of the other maps are big enough to have more than 5 though.

[DEN_Ninja]

Asmudius Heng, on 05 February 2014 - 03:01 PM, said:

I agree that larger maps would benefit from more cap points.

Alpine could hold seven points IMO, Tourmaline could also do seven as could crimson straight.

Not sure if any of the other maps are big enough to have more than 5 though.

I'd advocate that the smaller maps have just two. Imagine that. Instead of being able to hunker down and cap 3 points and win you have to assault the other team and take their cap mean while you need to protect yours. Sure often times you would have people just do the mid point brawl but that happens anyways.

Or have Three Cap Points but spread them in a line and have the separate lances drop the same distance away from each one.

Frozen City would most definitely benefit from only have three. Take away the one in the ditch and the one that is at the intersection of the city and leave the one on the lower path. That way people will be charging for 'Theta' but would leave their cap open. Lights and mediums could exploit careless blob teams by taking their original cap.

[Asmudius Heng]

Tichorius Davion, on 05 February 2014 - 06:08 PM, said:

I'd advocate that the smaller maps have just two. Imagine that. Instead of being able to hunker down and cap 3 points and win you have to assault the other team and take their cap mean while you need to protect yours. Sure often times you would have people just do the mid point brawl but that happens anyways.

Or have Three Cap Points but spread them in a line and have the separate lances drop the same distance away from each one.

Frozen City would most definitely benefit from only have three. Take away the one in the ditch and the one that is at the intersection of the city and leave the one on the lower path. That way people will be charging for 'Theta' but would leave their cap open. Lights and mediums could exploit careless blob teams by taking their original cap.

needs to be an uneven number to force people to take at leats two for increased capacity for winning via cap.

If it is just two and one team gets an advantage then then just hold one and win so end up camping and thats not dynamic.

I actually think 5 is ok for all the others personally they are all big enough to hand that much IMO and encourage moving to many points to secure victory by points while not making it too much of a merry go round

[fandre]

I suggest to make the cap points mobile, following some kind of predefined/alternating route (+ some kind of "random starting points") and making them visible at map with LOS only. So lances or lights/mediums can seek out and it becomes crucial to spread forces ... at least on the larger maps.

I also like the idea to reduce cap time but increaing the time for getting points from the caps.

Edited by fandre, 06 February 2014 - 03:23 AM.

[Deathlike]

Sug, on 05 February 2014 - 01:55 PM, said:

Then just remove Conquest.

I chuckled and died a little inside.

The latter didn't happen though.

[GRiPSViGiL]

I totally agree Slep.

Conquest is a tricky game mode though since we do not have respawn. The cap timers do need to be much faster. I would prefer the longer style of conquest game we get in a game like BF but not having respawn really doesn't do the mode justice in MWO. I would love a drop ship mode that played conquest where you can bring 4 mechs of each class or something.

[Goose]

There were a couple of Bad Idea implemented, attempting to pacify the guys whom all now play only Skirmish.

But UI 2.0 is here, and Teh Devs have free time for stuff like this.