53 replies to this topic

[IceCase88]

I think turrets are in a good place now. It has added a new layer to the game. You can either duke it out like a skirmish or proceed directly to the base for a cap. Now that the turrets do not detect ECM it has made Assault more interesting. Unfortunately, there would be mass QQing if only one side had turrets. 12 mechs plus the turrets would be quite a bit to overcome. Maybe a new game mode where one side has something to protect (mobile HQ, communication array, artillery battery, etc.) and has a limited number of treacherous approaches to get to them with no turrets.

[Davers]

101011, on 21 April 2014 - 03:29 PM, said:

Neg. 7 turrets on each map, and each carries 2 ML's and 2 LRM/10's. That is a combined loadout of 14 ML's and 14 LRM/10's. That is 84 tons of weaponry. Not quite a medium 'Mech.

1. Not seven turrets on each map. I think the numbers are more like 4-6
2. They either have 2 medium lasers or an LRM 10, not both.

So 4 LRM10s and 4 medium lasers.

[Thunder Lips Express]

i like them...other then in river city, and because of them in river city my group no longer plays assault

[101011]

Davers, on 21 April 2014 - 03:33 PM, said:

1. Not seven turrets on each map. I think the numbers are more like 4-6
2. They either have 2 medium lasers or an LRM 10, not both.

So 4 LRM10s and 4 medium lasers.

I was not certain about the ML/LRM-10 weaponry, but I am on the numbers. River City and Crimson Strait both had five when turrets were first implemented, and then, when turrets were added to the rest, there were seven.

[EgoSlayer]

Zervziel, on 21 April 2014 - 02:47 PM, said:

I'd like to keep turrets in but have them tweaked a bit. I mean as it is, I move five feet from my starting position in River City and suddenly I'm sucking a crap ton of lrms

No Joke, River City is too small and the Turret LRM range is way too long. Lose the LRM's on River city and it wouldn't be as bad. But now River City went from the worst map ever, to the worst map ever².

[tucsonspeed6]

I've actually been outcapped before on Assault because the turrets give a false sense of security. I've taken a few on recently and they're better than they were.

It just seems odd to me that they would be included in Assault mode. The primary objective of the mode is to assault the base, and base caps were surprisingly low to PGI when they looked at the stats, so why dissuade from capping even more?

[Bishop Steiner]

101011, on 21 April 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

I was not certain about the ML/LRM-10 weaponry, but I am on the numbers. River City and Crimson Strait both had five when turrets were first implemented, and then, when turrets were added to the rest, there were seven.

so, even if there are 7, between 6-8 Medium Lasers and 3-4 LRM10s, of which seldom do more than 2 have overlapping fields of fire. It most, you might be subjected to a couple of medium lasers and 1-2 LRM10s at a time. I can't really recall the lasers having LoS overlap in too many instances.

Can't call that terribly frightening, but it is sufficient to make a person have to think, no doubt.

[White Bear 84]

Graugger, on 21 April 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

I totally agree a lance of light mechs that want to completely avoid a team and sneak around to cap the base in 10 seconds and get 0 damage leaving the rest of their team to die should have the RIGHT to walk in and cap without interruption!

Base turrets need to be removed and the cap rate doubled for CWO!

All hail the Cap-Warriors, never fire never fight, get victory C-Bills for free!

All hail the players that like to ruin everyone elses fun! Such a disappointing waste getting capped out. Might as well just pilot locusts if your not going to fight. lol.

[Gryphorim]

I think the turrets need to be separated into Laser turrets and LRM turrets. Also, having separate structures that can be destroyed, negating each of these types would add depth to assault tactics.

[Davers]

Did everyone forget it was the players who begged PGI to give them 'real' bases with walls, turrets, and an actual base to destroy? PGI's mistake was giving the players what they asked for instead of what they really wanted- things that looked like walls, turrets, and bases that had to be destroyed but didn't do anything.

Someone should tell PGI that we don't want real AI tanks, infantry, or aircraft either before it is too late!

[Roadbeer]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 April 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

so, even if there are 7, between 6-8 Medium Lasers and 3-4 LRM10s, of which seldom do more than 2 have overlapping fields of fire. It most, you might be subjected to a couple of medium lasers and 1-2 LRM10s at a time. I can't really recall the lasers having LoS overlap in too many instances.

Can't call that terribly frightening, but it is sufficient to make a person have to think, no doubt.

Plus it's made for interesting game play.

"Are we in good enough shape to root that beat up Battlemaster out of the base? Or do we wait it out?"

Much better than Rock'em Sock'em Robots.

[101011]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 April 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

so, even if there are 7, between 6-8 Medium Lasers and 3-4 LRM10s, of which seldom do more than 2 have overlapping fields of fire. It most, you might be subjected to a couple of medium lasers and 1-2 LRM10s at a time. I can't really recall the lasers having LoS overlap in too many instances.

Can't call that terribly frightening, but it is sufficient to make a person have to think, no doubt.

Except for Canyon Network, because screw those guys who actually want to play the game mode.

[Bishop Steiner]

EgoSlayer, on 21 April 2014 - 03:39 PM, said:

No Joke, River City is too small and the Turret LRM range is way too long. Lose the LRM's on River city and it wouldn't be as bad. But now River City went from the worst map ever, to the worst map ever².

I could agree with that. How about swapping the the LRMs for either dual SRM6 racks or triple SSRM racks in RC?

But I do agree with the other poster even more...... should be only one side of the other with a Base in Assault mode, (especially river city...seriously, why would you have opposing bases 1 km apart?) and it's just dumb luck of the draw who gets attack or defend. Or better yet, which ever team has the Higher Elo gets assigned the "Assault" while the Low Elo gets the Defend side.

White Bear 84, on 21 April 2014 - 03:43 PM, said:

All hail the players that like to ruin everyone elses fun! Such a disappointing waste getting capped out. Might as well just pilot locusts if your not going to fight. lol.

Or...play in Skirmish? Kinda makes Caps a moot point, eh?

[Koniving]

Khobai, on 21 April 2014 - 01:48 PM, said:

Turrets definitely need to be tweaked.

The purpose of turrets was to slow down the cap and discourage single mechs from capping.

The purpose of turrets was not to discourage capping altogether and turn base assault into skirmish.

They're easy to kill.

150 hp

They now have 100 and ECM units can sneak up to them.

The problem isn't the turrets. It is that there is No Reward For Winning By Cap.

It's a LOT of work. Easy for a player or two to get wiped out if they try it.
Everyone LOSES lots and lots of potential money by capturing.

It's a lose-lose situation, so no one wants to engage the base at all, thereby nullifying the need for an Assault gamemode.

To salvage Assault, it needs to pay more to capture and small maps need a significant reduction in the number of turrets. Give players a reason to want to capture (for instance you get paid this much for total annihilation of the enemy team. You get paid 4/3rds for destroying the base, and 5/3rds for capturing it intact). Destroying the base being simply blow the base up. Capturing it intact perhaps requiring disabling the turret power station, disabling or destroying the gates (when applicable) and then sitting in the little square for a while.

What I'm asking in general.. is for PGI to put the strategy and tactics back into the "Thinking-Person's Shooter" because right now, it's 3 choices of game mode: "Derp, deathmatch with flashy drills. Derp, deathmatch with turrets. Derp, deathmatch." And our choices aren't choices.

Edited by Koniving, 21 April 2014 - 03:52 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

101011, on 21 April 2014 - 03:44 PM, said:

Except for Canyon Network, because screw those guys who actually want to play the game mode.

I did forget CN. Probably should simply not be in the Assault Rotation, or the Bases need to be re positioned as such that they are not so overlapping.

Koniving, on 21 April 2014 - 03:46 PM, said:

They're easy to kill.

150 hp

They now have 100 and ECM units can sneak up to them.

The problem isn't the turrets. It is that there is No Reward For Winning By Cap.

It's a LOT of work. Easy for a player or two to get wiped out if they try it.
Everyone LOSES lots and lots of potential money by capturing.

It's a lose-lose situation, so no one wants to engage the base at all, thereby nullifying the need for an Assault gamemode.

To salvage Assault, it needs to pay more to capture and small maps need a significant reduction in the number of turrets.

Yeah, I generally use a Light Mech to birddog them open, then scoot outta the way, while the rest of the lance pours the fire on from LR. LRM turrets of course can respond, but LRM 10 vs LRM60 tends to lose pretty fast.

The do need to tweak the rewards, but like I said, I think they need to tweak the whole dynamic to make it a true "assault" mode.

[White Bear 84]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 April 2014 - 03:45 PM, said:

Or...play in Skirmish? Kinda makes Caps a moot point, eh?

The cool thing about assualt now is that if a team gets bashed, they can fall back and use base defenses to drain the enemy team, or at least hold out; id much rather have a Mexican stand off at a base between a bunch of badly damaged mechs than the game is over 2 minutes into the match - even conquest would be more fun because you actually have time to play the game, its not over before you even drop!

You still have mechs that attack base to distract the enemy team, different dynamic on maps as players avoid turrets and avoid being spotted etc. This is good, there are more elements in this game than skirmish and conquest and for me this makes it much more fun.

Edited by White Bear 84, 21 April 2014 - 04:04 PM.

[Mystere]

Graugger, on 21 April 2014 - 02:01 PM, said:

Ahh so let the match time-out is better because both teams sat at their bases and waited for the other team to cap rush....

Welcome to the DERPmaster 2000, the automated complaint poster that complains about complaints and solutions producing thoughtless requests ranging from the removal of game elements to the trashing of weapons systems. Now available to the super low price of 4 payments of 40,000 C-Bills!

Spoken like a true denizen of the Steering Wheel Underhive.

[Mycrus]

Assault suck amazeballs now...

started dropping exclusively in skirmish now

[Graugger]

I like how the turrets don't need to worry about overheating

[Pjwned]

East Indy, on 21 April 2014 - 01:50 PM, said:

There are only three maps in which this happens with any frequency — Forest Colony, River City and Frozen City. All three are obsolete and undersized, with almost nowhere to go beyond spawn points before players are extended or simply out in the open.

I don't see how they're obsolete because matches are still played on them frequently; it's not just 3 maps either, it happens on Crimson Strait, Alpine Peaks*, and Canyon Network as well.

*: Edited because I said Terra Therma but meant Alpine Peaks.

Quote

Caps happen; they're just not what ends a game in 2 minutes any longer. Are you trying to sneak in with a single light?

They only happen after the rest of the team is demolished, and sneaking in with a single light should be a valid tactic if only to distract the enemy instead of not being able to accomplish anything because of turrets.

Graugger, on 21 April 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

I totally agree a lance of light mechs that want to completely avoid a team and sneak around to cap the base in 10 seconds and get 0 damage leaving the rest of their team to die should have the RIGHT to walk in and cap without interruption!

Base turrets need to be removed and the cap rate doubled for CWO!

All hail the Cap-Warriors, never fire never fight, get victory C-Bills for free!

This wouldn't happen if teams properly defended their base, and if they just want a deathmatch then that's what skirmish is for.

Edited by Pjwned, 21 April 2014 - 07:37 PM.