60 replies to this topic

[Egomane]

Troutmonkey, on 14 July 2014 - 05:54 AM, said:

_{(reposted from http://mwomercs.com/...ap-on-conquest/ )}

This really isn't hard to find as it pinned right at the top of the archive:
http://mwomercs.com/...-been-archived/

[wanderer]

I'd actually have capture speed vary by weight.

Assault: A -> H/M -> L

You're trashing an armed base. Firepower = suppression, bigger is better.

Conquest: L/M -> H -> A

Raiding. Fast grabbers > slow clumsy gits.

Note this makes mediums a go-to capper, as they're faster decent cappers (hence, better than heavies since they'll arrive first) for Assault, and best-case cappers along with lights for Conquest.

I'd also like to see random "loot points" show up in Conquest. Small spots of crates in odd places. Take a few seconds (graded as above), get points added to total, but if your 'Mech is destroyed by an enemy 'Mech, you LOSE those points.

Leaving the map in Conquest would remove you from play, but not destroy the 'Mech

Voila, a light can be zipping around, looting for all it's worth while mediums are supercappers and heavy/assaults keep contested points controlled.

[GrnMonster]

I completely agree with this. The cap times on Assault are fine. The cap times on Conquest are ridiculously high.

When they first put Conquest in the game it was fun as hell, and made for a very free flowing game with caps changing hands multiple times.

I think Troutmonkey has it about right on the times. Maybe 1 minute to 'steal' a fully capped point. A brief period of the point being neutral, maybe 10-15 seconds, and then 1 minute to 'fill' the point back up if you want to fill it. If you only want to flip it to your side and then take off it would take about 70-75 seconds.

[Livewyr]

The cap times are high, to prevent a squad of 3 IS light mechs running around capping everything (and back-capping) without anyone being able to engage them.

One should bring 3+ mechs to cap with them.. (and that is where you get your battles over resources)

[Troutmonkey]

Livewyr, on 14 July 2014 - 07:22 AM, said:

The cap times are high, to prevent a squad of 3 IS light mechs running around capping everything (and back-capping) without anyone being able to engage them.

Whoa, light mechs capping, in my Conquest!?

[Bhael Fire]

Yes, cap times in Conquest are stupid long.

That's why it's much easier to just treat Conquest like Skirmish most of the time.

[Jon Gotham]

I agree with Trout. Conquest is turning into yet another roflIbringbiggestmechshurhurrr deathmatch. Go off and cap? Yeps and leave your team mates to be rolled over and wrecked because you weren't there:) Why weren't you there? Because it took you as long as a tectonic plate takes to move a mile to cap a base.

Please can we stop focusing games around damage and kills? This ain't (or rather shouldn't) CallofDutyWarrior online....

[MoonUnitBeta]

Troutmonkey, on 14 July 2014 - 07:06 AM, said:

Not a terrible idea, you've got a point. Only downside is how do you balance this and communicate it to the player.

I’m thinking PGI can simply do it by square km’s. Taking Alpine’s sq km = 3 minutes, then scale it down from there. But not on a linear half the size of Alpine = half the time to cap. The reason for that is the smaller the map is, the more clustered everyone is together. So theoretically cap times should automatically be shorter as more people will be on a cap point – but it’s not working like that.
It’s a ball buster when the majority of the team is treating Conquest as Skirmish and only one person is actively capping points.
The absolute minimum I would say is 1:45min - 2mins.
Quicker cap times should put a little more urgency on the smaller maps. Cap points on caustic / forest colony are an after-thought for me. I often think, “oh this point is being taken… I’m pretty sure we can still kill everyone before he starts gaining resources from it”

As for Assault, they can calculate it as a straight line distance from one base to another (only if they require to, of course), and adjust the times accordingly to allow for a small window of opportunity to defend the base. Currently it’s great on Alpine, but again, too slow on smaller maps and is very difficult / a waste of time to cap.

How do you communicate this? Well I don’t really think it needs to be communicated at all, really. If done correctly, I expect the cap speed to feel natural according to map size (travel distance between points), and game mode. Retaking a cap point must feel productive and fun, but still allowing for opportunities for the enemy to counter attack.

I think what Kitane said above is pretty interesting too…

Kitane, on 14 July 2014 - 06:27 AM, said:

If they made these two changes, they could keep current cap times for all I care:

1) The moment an enemy enters a controlled square, it should stop sending resources to the controlling team and instead accumulate all points on the site.
2) If there are accumulated points on the site and there is no enemy in the square, it should send resources to its current owner at double rate until all accumulated points are gone.

- The attacking team has the ability to immediately cut off down the node production.
- If the defending team manages to push the enemy from the site before it switches sides, they will get (eventually) all accumulated points back.
- If the attacking team takes control of the site, accumulated resources will be redirected to the new owner. The former owner can still try to get the control back before all accumulated resources are gone.

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 14 July 2014 - 08:49 AM.

[Roland]

kamiko kross, on 14 July 2014 - 07:41 AM, said:

I agree with Trout. Conquest is turning into yet another roflIbringbiggestmechshurhurrr deathmatch. Go off and cap? Yeps and leave your team mates to be rolled over and wrecked because you weren't there:) Why weren't you there? Because it took you as long as a tectonic plate takes to move a mile to cap a base.

Please can we stop focusing games around damage and kills? This ain't (or rather shouldn't) CallofDutyWarrior online....

The thing is, Mechwarrior has generally always been about combat.

The problem with the capping mechanic is that it severely limits mobility on a map. It's a major reason why most of the maps are so incredilby small compared to MW4 maps. On maps like Alpine, which is at least approaching the size of old MW4 maps (but still much smaller than the largest), on game types with cap points ALL foot traffic tends to be confined to a narrow band between the two caps. Because the mechanic means that if you move out of that band you open yourself to loss via cap.

However, since the Skirmish type now exists, I don't really care much about the Assault game mode.. I'm merely pointing out the problems inherent in the game type, and the capping mechanic, and how it negatively impacts movement despite some believing that it somehow favors mobile mechs. The reality is, it favors fast mechs who are playing against slow mechs piloted by dumb players. Against smart players, it actually limits the effective mobility options.

In terms of the cap being necessary to promote light/mobile mech usage, this isn't true at all.

Light and medium mechs can be extremely useful from a purely combat based perspective. While many players fail to grasp this, the key to combat in MWO is actually mobility. When one team sets up in a static location, they will almost always lose to a team who is more mobile. This is actually why many of the clan mechs are so powerful, because they can pack a ton of firepower on a highly mobile platform, allowing you to redeploy it quickly and effectively in response to the enemy's position.

Light mechs and fast mediums can be exceptionally useful by creating multiple angles of attack that a defensive force is forced to deal with. This is far more engaging, at least for me, than standing in a little red square.

[Devilsfury]

Even with Cap Accel, it stil takes 2-3 minutes. I run conquest alot in my light and it takes forever. I dont want it to take 10 seconds or anything but 2-3 is just stupid. Maybe make it 1 minute. `````````````````````````````````````````````````

[Solahma]

I have to agree for the most part. Conquest is almost never about the caps anymore. Decreasing the cap time dramatically would put more incentive to play the cap points.

In addition, I would like to see different resource goals for each map depending on their size. Smaller maps should have a lower resource goal to increase the value of cap points. For Example: Forest Colony would have a resource goal of 600, Tera Therma would have a resource goal of 800, etc. Not that those are the number i'd like to see, but it would be nice to have map dependent values for balance.

Also, it might be good to add a few more caps on each map. Instead of 5 per map, maybe bump it up to 9 or 11. Spread them out evenly and give teams more options than just "go to Epsilon then go to Theta" It would open up a lot of opportunities. This route would still involve cap-time to be lowered substantially, but it would also require an INCREASE in the maximum resource goal (to account for having more cap points)

Overall, Conquest needs a lot of attention and possibly a complete re-work. I'd guess at least 75% of my games on conquest are determined by killing eachother and not playing the objectives or even caring about them. If you send people to cap, you have less to fight off the enemy team. This almost ALWAYS results in a loss for the team that actually goes for the caps. Even if they are up in resources by the end of the game, the enemy team simply uncaps and/or finishes off the team that had split up. I wonder how it would play if the "kill the entire enemy team" part was simply removed...

Edited by Solahma, 14 July 2014 - 08:20 AM.

[Livewyr]

Troutmonkey, on 14 July 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

Whoa, light mechs capping, in my Conquest!?

They are still the premier capping class..

Now they cannot just simply do it unfettered.

[Varik Ronain]

I do not agree with reducing cap time on conquest. I like that in the group q where people use this thing called teamwork and direct communication get to square off vs another organized team and have to use tactics to claim and hold resource positions. We have had some amazing games on conquest recently because of the nature of the mode seems different now and much more suited towards a team type mode with composition of mechs, positioning of lances and such are very important as you cannot instantly cap a reso point. You have to account for the time needed to take them, this means a portion of your firepower is tied down at some point other than what you need to guard meaning the stress the enemy can apply on one of your points is much more severe. There is a greater risk/reward for pushing for that much needed 3rd reso point now.




I dont really want to hear lights complain about this as they had run of this map mode for a long time, now it allows for more variety in the mode and hopefully will get some of the lights into other map modes as well.

Edited by Varik Ronain, 14 July 2014 - 08:46 AM.

[Solahma]

Varik Ronain, on 14 July 2014 - 08:42 AM, said:

I do not agree with reducing cap time on conquest. I like that in the group q where people use this thing called teamwork and direct communication get to square off vs another organized team and have to use tactics to claim and hold resource positions. We have had some amazing games on conquest recently because of the nature of the mode seems different now and much more suited towards a team type mode with composition of mechs, positioning of lances and such are very important as you cannot instantly cap a reso point. You have to account for the time needed to take them, this means a portion of your firepower is tied down at some point other than what you need to guard meaning the stress the enemy can apply on one of your points is much more severe. There is a greater risk/reward for pushing for that much needed 3rd reso point now.

I dont really want to hear lights complain about this as they had run of this map mode for a long time, now it allows for more variety int he mode and hopefully will get some of the lights into other map modes as well.

Although you WOULD be correct in an ideal match, most games are anything but ideal on Conquest. Unless you are playing in a large group, teamwork means nothing when it comes to caps. In fact, most teamwork based games of conquest usually involve killing the enemy team. There is rarely a risk/reward factor for capping Theta. It's a stalemate cap point on most maps. Regardless of who gets it, whoever loses the most mechs first almost always loses. Teamwork would be great, but now you have an entirely SOLO queue where people either 1) don't read the blue text and 2) don't care or listen to what people have to say. Even in a group queue you will have teams that don't care what someone has to say or advise. Zero leadership. If there IS leadership, there is rarely RESPECT or TRUST for that leadership.

I almost NEVER see games like you describe. But, this is purely my experience, yours may very well be different than mine, but that doesn't make either of our opinions invalid.

What I will add as a counter-point is that the game is too long to make the caps meaningful. It gives each team more than enough time to kill all of the opposing mechs. You can take your sweet time an press any advantages you see. Having more caps that you can cap faster means that you can effectively play the caps and always be on the move. You are constantly planning your cap point route around where the enemy is. There is more incentive to split up the main force into capping lances. Maybe send a fast lance to Sigma, a heavy lance to Kappa, and an assault lance with mediums as a strike force to intercept the closes enemy cap. Because caps have such high value and add to the team's score faster, it promotes a faster pace game where teams HAVE to split up in order to win. Currently we MIGHT have a light lance pressing caps, but there is always a blob of mechs and no reason to separate unless for a flank. It feels like Skirmish with a random chance of caps influencing the game...

Edited by Solahma, 14 July 2014 - 08:59 AM.

[Jon Gotham]

The thing is, it takes so very long to do it solo-why bother? I usually just go and try to kill the enemy team. Usually more effective use of time.
I know what you are trying to say Roland, but combat even BT combat has objectives. Harass this, assault that,recon the other etc. WHY are we limited to who can bring the heaviest mech and boat the biggest alpha killhunt-in every game mode?
I see your point about lights, but when faced with equal opponents in heavier mechs......eh oh!
I do have ideas about making medium and light mechs more viable-but heavy and assaults REALLY won't like 'em:)

[Varik Ronain]

I do play with large groups and should have stated that running 10-12 man teams is what I was describing.

[Solahma]

Varik Ronain, on 14 July 2014 - 08:59 AM, said:

I do play with large groups and should have stated that running 10-12 man teams is what I was describing.

Well it makes sense for a group like that, I agree. But we have to consider that there is an entire queue with a lack of coordination, and most groups in the group queue are not 10-12 mans... in other words, the only ideal games you see are in the minority situations...

[zhajin]

Fut, on 14 July 2014 - 07:11 AM, said:

Does anybody use the Cap Accelerator Module?
It does provide a 15% to cap speed...

with the module changes coming the only time you will ever see cap accel used is in troll groups race capping with ecm spiders.

[Solahma]

zhajin, on 14 July 2014 - 09:16 AM, said:

with the module changes coming the only time you will ever see cap accel used is in troll groups race capping with ecm spiders.

agreed, unless the dramatically reduce the fall damage for lights, Shock Absorption is mandatory on all of my lights.

[jper4]

putting cap times for conquest back to where they were originally might actually bring lights back to conquest. in the majority of the games i'd play (PUG)- assault and skirmish would have more lights on both sides than conquest-which one might think would be the ideal mode for lights. the new cap times even with accelerator i think it still caps a little slower than pre-adjustment times. so since there's little point in capping people bring heavier mechs (granted some of this can be attributed to picking "any" for game mode as well) to make it skirmish 2.0. only cap wins i tend to see are on the bigger maps (alpine, tourmaline and terra due to the circular pathing in a lot of places so it takes longer to get from A to where those plodding big mechs can't get to the faster mechs or the cap points to kill/turn them before they hit 750.

the cap timer change was the reason why i started throwing LRM launchers on my lights so at least i could fling some missiles at something while waiting forever for the bar to change. keep the timer as is on assault by all means. conquest should get a bit of a speed boost even if it's not to pre-change levels so people might actually try to "conquer" (rewards increase for doing so as well- always felt conquest should reward more for capping than killing while skirmish be the most kill based rewards and assault slightly less than skirmish with a lesser base cap bonus than conquest but with added defense destruction bonus as well to make up the difference between it and the other two modes)