74 replies to this topic

[Jetfire]

I am all for turret health, range and damage tuning but they are absolutely necessary in assault mode. Capping should require a light team or a medium backup to a light to have a chance at success. The rewards should also be higher to encourage assault over straight melee. The base should feel critical and desirable to protect and steal, but not an easy task.

[SGT Unther]

Personally I like the turrets, but with bugs I've encountered I don't like them. I've been in matches where I am unable to target the turrets for missiles.

But yes I agree assault should have turrets, I think it really helps make assault feel different from skirmish and the bases feel like bases.

Do I think they need to re-balance the turrets? I really think so. Do they need look at how many there are? Per base and per map? I think so.

As for removed from the game? My answer is no.

[Draconis Nagasawa]

MungFuSensei, on 07 February 2014 - 10:10 AM, said:

I agree that it is nice to see teamwork encouraged when capping, but to put turrets up because people are too dumb to defend their base is not the answer. That doesn't encourage capping, which sorely needs encouragement. As it stands, there is no incentive to cap, except purely to win. There is no real reward for doing so. All the turrets do is punish players for playing assault as assault instead of skirmish.

I hate the defending base excuse during PUG play. Heres why:

Their are two different play modes for Assault, Pug (1-4) and 12 man drops. In PUG matches, most fighting is un-coordinated, most players want to get into the fight to get the CBills. No player in his right mind (if he is smart) would defend the base singley handedly. This is actually detrimental to the entire team, if a single player is not in the main fight the entire fight is lopsided and will usually result in a loss that team. When referring to 12 Mans, this may be a viable tactic depending on the tactics used by the company commander. But than again, I have never seen a team defend a base during 12 man assaults, considering that most tatics are deathballs.

[MungFuSensei]

Ransack, on 07 February 2014 - 10:12 AM, said:

Here is a common tactic right now. ECM light runs around map avoiding combat and hides for a little bit. Once everyone is far enough from the base, it jumps on base. Some heavy or assault comes back because the lights on their team are heading to the other cap. ECM light see heavy/assualt coming. runs away breaking LoS. Heavy/Assault loses target. Thinking that light has fled it turns to return to battle. Once chicken little light see heavy/Assault far enough away, it jumps back on base

What is fun about that above scenario? Nothing. Its a waste of time.

Base capping was enough of a problem that the time to cap was raised and now turrets have been added. Should the turrets be addressed maybe even nerfed? absolutely. Should they be removed? absolutely not.

Someone used a valid strategy to win. By capping. You didn't enjoy it, because they capped. Maybe you should just play skirmish. Capping was a problem early on because it was incredibly easy and there was almost no time to respond. Once the cap time was raised, there has been plenty of time for the enemy to respond to the cap. That people didn't do so was because they weren't paying attention. Then people cry "no fun, lame" because they were outwitted, obviously forgetting what game type they were playing.

If instead, we increased the rewards for capping, players would focus on achieving that goal, and since it would become a focus, it would also need to be defended more vigorously by players. Thus, the need for a cohesive team effort to achieve a cap would arise, WITHOUT the need for turrets. Incentive to cap is what is needed, not further obstacles.

[MungFuSensei]

SGT Unther, on 07 February 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

Personally I like the turrets, but with bugs I've encountered I don't like them. I've been in matches where I am unable to target the turrets for missiles.

But yes I agree assault should have turrets, I think it really helps make assault feel different from skirmish and the bases feel like bases.

Do I think they need to re-balance the turrets? I really think so. Do they need look at how many there are? Per base and per map? I think so.

As for removed from the game? My answer is no.

I do not think turrets need to be removed from the game entirely. Just assault mode. There originally was a plan to introduce them in a game mode where one side is attacker, and the other side is defender. I would very much like to see that.

[Lokisonn]

I think we all have to remember that this is a trial period for turrets. We ought to go at this and provide feedback with a mind for the various possible future senarios in this game. They could very well remove one team's base in the near future and turn it into defense/assault.

Having said that, I think defensive turrets add to the flavour of assault. Now, probably a team of 1 light and 1 fast medium are need to take the base as opposed to solo capping. Its nice to have the feel of attacking a base, probably give mediums another role too, one sorely needed judging from complaints of mediums. A nice tweak I think would be to increase the cap speed if all turrets are taken out. I feel that capturing should be faster if "nobody's" home. We can think of turrets having little people inside as opposed to full automation.

As for the health and fire power of turrets, maybe more time is needed to allow for players to change their strategies and gauge the effect.

Edited by Lokisonn, 07 February 2014 - 11:01 AM.

[Leconte]

I agree with the OP a bit. I pilot mostly lights, capping/tagging/scouting. As a few have posted, capping just doesnt reward the players in any way worth doing. which is bad since there are so many games lately with 400+ tonnage differences between teams. Had two last night alone, one had 8 atlas 2 stalks and a highlander, me being the only non-assault on the team. (was a conquest game) and another where we had 8 lights and 1 assault later that night. (assault). we got train wrecked on the assault map. nobody capped due to the only reward being 50(?) xp and a few cbills, where as dying in combat gives atleast a few thousand.

Problem being, its now harder to cap, with no increase in the already non-existant reward for doing so. why bother?

Turrents arent the problem, they can add quite a bit of strategy to the assault mode. there just currently is no reason to attempt a cap other than stat padding and getting rolled 10-2 and trying to ninja out a win.

Edit: I spell gud.

Edited by Leconte, 07 February 2014 - 11:08 AM.

[Ironwithin]

Leconte, on 07 February 2014 - 11:04 AM, said:

...
Problem being, its now harder to cap, with no increase in the already non-existant reward for doing so. why bother?

Turrents arent the problem, they can add quite a bit of strategy to the assault mode. there just currently is no reason to attempt a cap other than stat padding and getting rolled 10-2 and trying to ninja out a win.
...

This is definately true, as the OP already mentioned. A real reward for capping is sorely needed, now more than ever as you have to put real effort into it. 50(or was it 75?) xp and 2k CBills is just ridiculous...

Edited by Ironwithin, 07 February 2014 - 11:33 AM.

[Draconis Nagasawa]

Ironwithin, on 07 February 2014 - 11:25 AM, said:

This is definately true, as the OP already mentioned. A real reward for capping is sorely needed, now more than ever as you have to put real effort into it. 50(or was it 75?) xp and 2k CBills is just ridiculous...

The primary reason why the devs doesnt have a greater reward for capping the base is because they dont want players to go straight to the cap to rewarded Cbills and totaly negate fighting. All capping the base does is provide secondary win conditions.

[Pataine]

Give 250 exp and 10k in c-bills for capping. Make it like killing a Mech. Give players that actually do something besides pew pewing to get a reward. Same needs to be done on Conquest. Not that much but maybe 50 exp and 1000 c-bills per cap point you capture. Give players a reason to play lights. Also, change the cap times on smaller maps to be quicker. There is no reason small maps cap points have the same speed of larger ones. This does nothing but turn Conquest onto Assault. Furthermore how about an advanced cap mod. Like 25% faster for 6 million c-bills?

[Leconte]

Crusadiar, on 07 February 2014 - 12:46 PM, said:

The primary reason why the devs doesnt have a greater reward for capping the base is because they dont want players to go straight to the cap to rewarded Cbills and totaly negate fighting. All capping the base does is provide secondary win conditions.

Wut? they made capping not worth doing, to make it so you would battle, in a game mode designed for capping.....wtf

[Ironwithin]

Crusadiar, on 07 February 2014 - 12:46 PM, said:

The primary reason why the devs doesnt have a greater reward for capping the base is because they dont want players to go straight to the cap to rewarded Cbills and totaly negate fighting. All capping the base does is provide secondary win conditions.

The OP is actually right in pointing out that capping(like it or not) is, infact, the primary victory condition for assault, hence the name (as in "assault on enemy base"). Yes, it playes out differently in almost all matches, but that is not the intended course.

We now have another game-mode where killing all opposition is the primary victory condition, wich is called skirmish.

I especially like turrets because they bring that aspect more to the front. You are supposed to get the enemy's base, it just has to be HARDER than just sending one light 'mech and call it a day.

Edited by Ironwithin, 07 February 2014 - 12:54 PM.

[MungFuSensei]

Crusadiar, on 07 February 2014 - 12:46 PM, said:

The primary reason why the devs doesnt have a greater reward for capping the base is because they dont want players to go straight to the cap to rewarded Cbills and totaly negate fighting. All capping the base does is provide secondary win conditions.

Then why have capping at all? Capping is the PRIMARY win condition, it is just ignored by the players, and thus ignored by the devs.

Ironwithin, on 07 February 2014 - 12:53 PM, said:

I especially like turrets because they bring that aspect more to the front. You are supposed to get the enemy's base, it just has to be HARDER than just sending one light 'mech and call it a day.

By making caps more desirable, you will make it a more frequent occurrence. More frequent occurrence means more people will decide to defend. More defenders, harder cap. No need for turrets.

[Ironwithin]

MungFuSensei, on 07 February 2014 - 01:08 PM, said:

By making caps more desirable, you will make it a more frequent occurrence. More frequent occurrence means more people will decide to defend. More defenders, harder cap. No need for turrets.

But with turrets already there you don't HAVE to defend, you can still go for the deathball-of-doom strategy or whatever else strikes your fancy to wipe out the other team.

Making capping harder makes it a high risk-high reward tactic. Right now it's a low-risk low-reward cheese-fest.
That being said, I didn't understand why they increased the cap-times, that just makes capping more ANNOYING, not harder...you just stand there longer.

[Draconis Nagasawa]

Leconte, on 07 February 2014 - 12:53 PM, said:

Wut? they made capping not worth doing, to make it so you would battle, in a game mode designed for capping.....wtf

In RL, when you assault a base, you cant win a fight by negating the requirement to fight. You have to kill or route the defenders. Now, just because the defenders doesnt "sit on the base" doesnt mean they "are not defending". As Ransack has said previously their are other tactics available to distract the enemy, to break up their fighting force which creates a lopsided fight. I do not promote rewarding more Cbills for caps because all you get is friendly and enemy lances missing each other creating "cap warrior online" which most of you I am sure has trolled about previously. When the devs add more options to reward cbillls (scouting, recon, etc.) I will then change my opinion.

[Leconte]

Crusadiar, on 07 February 2014 - 01:16 PM, said:

In RL, when you assault a base, you cant win a fight by negating the requirement to fight. You have to kill or route the defenders. Now, just because the defenders doesnt "sit on the base" doesnt mean they "are not defending". As Ransack has said previously their are other tactics available to distract the enemy, to break up their fighting force which creates a lopsided fight. I do not promote rewarding more Cbills for caps because all you get is friendly and enemy lances missing each other creating "cap warrior online" which most of you I am sure has trolled about previously. When the devs add more options to reward cbillls (scouting, recon, etc.) I will then change my opinion.

In RL, you don't leave a high value location completely undefended to go chase an enemy you don't know the location of. secondly, once capping is the primary goal in assault, it'll be worth defending. its basically undefended now because 95% of games go deathmatch style. when its something of high value to win with cap, people will defend, and will attack bases. You may get lances "missing" each other as they run out, but bases won't be undefended. If capping is worth a damn, it will be attampted EVERYTIME, giving you a reason to defend, no?

Edited by Leconte, 07 February 2014 - 01:39 PM.

[Draconis Nagasawa]

Leconte, on 07 February 2014 - 01:34 PM, said:

In RL, you don't leave a high value location completely undefended to go chase an enemy you don't know the location of. secondly, once capping is the primary goal in assault, it'll be worth defending. its basically undefended now because 95% of games go deathmatch style. when its something of high value to win with cap, people will defend, and will attack bases. You may get lances "missing" each other as they run out, but bases won't be undefended. If capping is worth a damn, it will be attampted EVERYTIME, giving you a reason to defend, no?

You hit it right on the noggin and I agree with everything you say, just as you said you wouldnt leave high value locations undefended, but the bases in assult mode isnt high value and dont provide any benefit for either players. Until the devs take a hard look at the reward values accross the board, base capping is really not worth the time and effort when compared to kills and assists. What we really need is a assult vs defend mode, not a defend vs defend mode, that is what the assault mode really is.

[Antagonist]

Leaving enough assets at your base in Assault mode may also cause you to become horribly outnumbered if the enemy team chooses to steamroll instead to cap.

Turrets should be enough to deter one or two lights from capping, but not sufficient to repel a whole lance of them from systematically dismantling them, thus giving their team enough of a window to get some mediums or fast heavies back to their base.

[Ransack]

MungFuSensei, on 07 February 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

Someone used a valid strategy to win. By capping. You didn't enjoy it, because they capped. Maybe you should just play skirmish. Capping was a problem early on because it was incredibly easy and there was almost no time to respond. Once the cap time was raised, there has been plenty of time for the enemy to respond to the cap. That people didn't do so was because they weren't paying attention. Then people cry "no fun, lame" because they were outwitted, obviously forgetting what game type they were playing.

If instead, we increased the rewards for capping, players would focus on achieving that goal, and since it would become a focus, it would also need to be defended more vigorously by players. Thus, the need for a cohesive team effort to achieve a cap would arise, WITHOUT the need for turrets. Incentive to cap is what is needed, not further obstacles.

Never in there did I say win. What happens is that the Heavy/Assault ends up standing on the base out of the main fight. But hey keep dreaming that they are coming out.

to recap
Base capping rewards were removed to discourage quick caps
Base Cap time was increased significantly to discourage quick caps
Now turrets have been added.

All in ASSAULT Mode

See a trend?

I'm done here.

[Draconis Nagasawa]

Ransack, on 07 February 2014 - 03:49 PM, said:

Never in there did I say win. What happens is that the Heavy/Assault ends up standing on the base out of the main fight. But hey keep dreaming that they are coming out.

to recap
Base capping rewards were removed to discourage quick caps
Base Cap time was increased significantly to discourage quick caps
Now turrets have been added.

All in ASSAULT Mode

See a trend?

I'm done here.

That and the time was incresed due to the number of players when drops were switched from 8 to 12 mans.