74 replies to this topic

[Nightcrept]

I like the turrets.

I haven't had a problem with them in my spider or firestarter yet.

[Nightcrept]

But that aside the mode is base assault. Bases generally have static defenses.

[RichAC]

I totally agree with the OP.

Most of these guys want the game to be a sim/rpg. Not the arena sport it is...

The majority here are getting PGI to undermine their own game and its very sad....its no wonder the game keeps losing players....

Its unrealistic to think PGI can make the RPG they want....they don't have the resources. So out of selfishness and false sense of entitlement these "veterans" in more then one sense of the word, are going to kill this game, rather then let another community be built up around it!

IMO, if they want to put turrets on bases, in a game mode where everybody ignores the bases anyways, bases should be the ONLY way to win then. Make Capping the only way to win in conquest while we are at it too.... and respawn mechs....

Otherwise keep your lamer ass in skirmish only and stop ruining the game for everyone else.

Edited by RichAC, 08 February 2014 - 04:19 AM.

[RichAC]

Crusadiar, on 07 February 2014 - 10:30 AM, said:

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.

most people ignore the bases, eventually the fad for some shooting at them will wear off too haha.

Edited by RichAC, 08 February 2014 - 04:26 AM.

[RichAC]

Ransack, on 07 February 2014 - 07:04 AM, said:

Think of it this way, going after the opponents cap is assaulting the Dropship. It has a risk now. The problem is that some people take a little fast lights with ECM and bee line to the cap totally avoiding combat. Done in packs this is cheesy and makes for a boring experience for a lot of people.

Heck just search for Capwarrior and you will see a ton of posts about it. Conquest has no turrets, so if you want to fulfill your "special role", you have an entire mode dedicated to capping.

How often does that happen dude? Too boring to defend for you is it?

If they want to add turrets on bases it should be the only way to win then....

The fact is, nobody cares about bases before, and even the lights who did, sure as hell aren't gonna care now.

[RichAC]

Bill Lumbar, on 07 February 2014 - 09:43 AM, said:

Seeing some of the points brought up here.... Maybe it would be a good Idea to increase the rewards for pulling off a base cap very rewarding in XP and C-bills. Not only would it help with the "grind" that is so painfully obvious in this game, It would make players want to fufill the mission of taking the base as it should be in this game mode instead of just going for the kills to end the match.

Its been said over and over again. Everytime I debate someone on this, their last clinging argument, is that its to stop cbill farmers. As if PGI cannot stop people getting win rewards who quit early.. As if crashing or connection issues is not their problem and not ours....

Edited by RichAC, 08 February 2014 - 05:03 AM.

[ImperialKnight]

Turrets = TURTLE POWER!!!

Why would anyone fight away from base in a game when power balance is already so delicate.

Successful pushes on River City now is few and far in between.

Even when you have a committed 12 man push, you're still pushing into 12 mechs AND turrets.

Even on Crimson, I'd advocate just turtling near base and let the unsuspecting enemy team push in and have them fight you on your terms. With terms being your defense turrets.

[RichAC]

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.

Keep your lamer ass in skirmish is all I have to say to you...

Edited by RichAC, 08 February 2014 - 04:31 AM.

[RichAC]

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.

So whats wrong with that? It was fun for the light mech. He gave it a shot and it didn't work out.

So most people don't like running medium mechs, and now your gonna take away a reason for most light mecsh to play the game? Not everybody has great aim, so what if they only play to cap. More power to them.

And I thought the problem was too many fast cap wins. Now your saying, that People can actually go back and defend it if they want? hahah wow DING DING DING!

You sound like nothing but a sore loser who wants to ruin it for others because you resent the game mode. Take your tears over to skirmish mode and stay there.

Why try to turn everything else into skirmish mode, it makes no sense. PGI needs another focus group desperately. Even after we have skirmish mode, there is still so much whining in assault and conquest. I can't believe they still added turrets when these lamers have their own game mode now.

Its like there is still a community assault on assault, lol, Its baffling, its like you guys want this game to die. Thats why I can't be associated with certain groups anymore.

Edited by RichAC, 08 February 2014 - 04:50 AM.

[RichAC]

knightsljx, on 08 February 2014 - 04:31 AM, said:

Turrets = TURTLE POWER!!!

Why would anyone fight away from base in a game when power balance is already so delicate.

Successful pushes on River City now is few and far in between.

Even when you have a committed 12 man push, you're still pushing into 12 mechs AND turrets.

Even on Crimson, I'd advocate just turtling near base and let the unsuspecting enemy team push in and have them fight you on your terms. With terms being your defense turrets.

The fact they added turrets on River city of all maps, is just hilarious. The one map where cap wins happen the least because it is so mall that people can shoot at each other across the map, where its so easy to quickly return to base.


Alpine peaks, would make the most sense. But I still say this just turns assault into another skirmish mode, even more so like the OP said. We have skirmish mode, yet this community still wants to assault the assault game mode? why?

Why not just keep your ass in skirmish? You mean to tell me that now there are turrets on bases, your going to gravitate to them like moths to flames for some strange reason? hahaha. well....considering the type of players we're talking about...ya maybe I could see that...but it won't last.

I mean seriously, in what dimension were you living in, where people were always capping the base in river city? IS this the BS you lamers feed PGI?

Edited by RichAC, 08 February 2014 - 05:26 AM.

[RichAC]

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?

LMAO, I agree.

But hey maybe now that bases can shoot back, its worth it just to run into their fire....lol More people will try to assault bases now.
OH wait don't you know, its too easy to assault bases, they are always being assaulted.....at least thats what these guys have PGI believing....although I don't know what world they live in...

According to Ransack, they don't reward winning in assault because of fast caps by lights, yet he complains about lights trying to fast cap and getting killed lol. Maybe on alpine its more likely to easily out cap, but not if a lance is keeping an eye out to defend. Why not just play skirmish if that bothers you?

I mean eventually it all becomes a self fulfilling prophecy, when you whiners are the only people left in this community by yourselves! Better start buying 500 dollar mechs!

In RL, you don't fight if you don't have to, and you definitely don't leave your homebase undefended. RL is boring most of the time.

I always joke that imagine if you won, you'd get to split 12k of real dollars 12 ways. Screw cbills I'm pretending to play for real money. If that was really the case imagine how intense and strategical assault matches would be.

Its why i had to make a thread called, "MWO is the only game I've ever played where winning is a bad thing" If assault is boring stay in skirmish. I'm tired of hearing the complaints and whines. I play to win, and have no problems taking out half a team by myself sometimes. Its not about not being able to fight.

Even in conquest, i have to hear about how my atlas is not supposed to be capping, i stil hear "stick together and fight" and people convincing others not to cap, even in conquest mode!!

KEEP YOUR ASS IN SKIRMISH!!!!

Stop undermining the other game modes, this is why everyone sync drops and nobody plays 12 mans.
They can't stand to lose is what it boils down to.

Edited by RichAC, 08 February 2014 - 05:28 AM.

[Nightcrept]

@rich
Your definition of the game modes is not the same as others and definitely not what pgi has stated that they intend.

Assault is meant to be a place holder for the base assault cw warfare mode that is supposed to have base defenses. That's the way it was intended and the way it will most likely be.

If you're going to discuss the topic on the forums how about you show a little respect and stop calling players names for disagreeing with you.


On a side note breaking away from the group with a lone atlas is a very very very bad ideal even in conquest.

[Ironwithin]

And let's not drag reality into this, please.
We are stomping around in 12meter tall robots, shooting laZ0rs at each other and meet on extra-solar planets. This is a game and as such first priorities should be fairness and fun.
If you want real, go outside (or play arma...).

[Maverick Holix]

MungFuSensei, on 07 February 2014 - 05:19 AM, said:

Then you would do away with capping altogether? If capping is not to be a strength of lights, and that lights should focus solely on the fight, then why have capping at all? The entire point of capping was to give an edge to faster mechs, less durable and less well armed mechs. I admit it is not the only thing lights are capable of, but it is where they have the greatest advantage.

Play conquest.... problem solved gg

[Domoneky]

[rolly]

as·sault [uh-sawlt] Show IPA
noun
1.
a sudden, violent attack; onslaught: an assault on tradition.
2.
Law. an unlawful physical attack upon another; an attempt or offer to do violence to another, with or without battery, as by holding a stone or club in a threatening manner.
3.
Military . the stage of close combat in an attack.

----------------------------------
I don't see anywhere where it mentions in the definition of assault, "to cap with light mechs". Naturally if you take the third definition, it means CQB. Intending for mechs that can take CQB, or a team coordinated and of mixed weight and roles to succeed. Otherwise we'd be playing a game mode called "Recon".

By the very nature of the word and type of miltiary operation, assaults are difficult and take coordinated teamwork, not solely relying on one type of mech or flavour-build-of-the-month.

Assault = Difficult = Yeah likely has some defences? = turret? Most likely yes.

[MungFuSensei]

Maverick Holix, on 08 February 2014 - 04:41 PM, said:

Play conquest.... problem solved gg

Again, this is about the assault game type.

[rolly]

Ironwithin, on 08 February 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

And let's not drag reality into this, please.
We are stomping around in 12meter tall robots, shooting laZ0rs at each other and meet on extra-solar planets. This is a game and as such first priorities should be fairness and fun.
If you want real, go outside (or play arma...).

Well if you're going with that argument, we are playing for realism. Battletech/Mechwarrior Realism. And... you guessed it. They have turrets in BT/TT and even in MW. Heck even in MechCommander.

[MungFuSensei]

rolly, on 08 February 2014 - 04:50 PM, said:

as·sault [uh-sawlt] Show IPA
noun
1.
a sudden, violent attack; onslaught: an assault on tradition.
2.
Law. an unlawful physical attack upon another; an attempt or offer to do violence to another, with or without battery, as by holding a stone or club in a threatening manner.
3.
Military . the stage of close combat in an attack.

----------------------------------
I don't see anywhere where it mentions in the definition of assault, "to cap with light mechs". Naturally if you take the third definition, it means CQB. Intending for mechs that can take CQB, or a team coordinated and of mixed weight and roles to succeed. Otherwise we'd be playing a game mode called "Recon".

By the very nature of the word and type of miltiary operation, assaults are difficult and take coordinated teamwork, not solely relying on one type of mech or flavour-build-of-the-month.

Assault = Difficult = Yeah likely has some defences? = turret? Most likely yes.

I have already explained earlier in the thread about how increasing the incentive to cap will naturally increase the difficulty in capping. Base defenses do not add complexity, they merely make capping even more irrelevant, further diminishing the assault game type to the point that it might as well not even exist.

[Ovion]

While I haven't played the maps with turrets in my light yet, I will say this:
My locust is good at the following:
Capping, Running, Dying.

I don't know if its loadout will be good enough to take on the turrets, but I'm sure I'll find out.

Edited by Ovion, 08 February 2014 - 05:04 PM.