70 replies to this topic

[TB Freelancer]

Wintersdark, on 10 August 2014 - 02:45 PM, said:

I'm one. Respawn in any form other than the "you bring X mechs and only have those mechs" a'la dropship mode is without a doubt 100% a dealbreaker for me.

Of course, I don't enjoy any other PvP games at all, because respawn first and foremost. I hated even prior MW games with respawn.

Respawn is to make bad players feel better about themselves. Don't die, instead. And if you do, learn to not-die better next time.

Save me the arguments for why no respawn is the only way to play, I've been hearing those same tired logic for over a decade and not a single argument holds water. Its simply a different game mode. Nothing more.

All previous MW games had respawn, but they also had no respawn. They gave players the choice....

...I get why you and most guys are so dead set against even the thought of allowing respawn. Because it would be overwhelmingly popular with the pugs, casual groups and you're worried that no respawn matches would suffer for it, as it did in the previous titles when their popularity began to fade and you were forced to play bots or respawn.

Although I prefer no respawn myself for most game types, I recognize reality for what it is and know without a doubt, based on history and helping run some of the most popular servers the MW franchise ever saw, that a full respawn mode would boost this game's popularity by a good margin.

Many of the things I push for I don't even like overly much, but I recognize that they are a detriment to the health of the game and need to be addressed.

[TB Freelancer]

Viktor Drake, on 10 August 2014 - 01:33 PM, said:

No I am not suggesting respawn, not in the slightest. Once a mech gets killed, it is dead for the entire match. However, just because your mech gets destoryed, it doesn't mean your dead, in fact, your rescued and brought back to the drop ship where you are then able to jump into the cockpit of any other mech you own an return to battle.

Seriously, in any given 30 minute battle the average player would probably only go through 3-5 mechs, especially if you added the ability to repair and rearm during the battle and also made it so that dying gave the enemy team victory points toward a win. Basically people would actually retreat from battle or an objective, rather than suicide and generally try to keep their mechs alive so as to not give the enemy an easy victory however the penalty of dying wouldn't be so great that people would be camping, I mean after all, if you did happen to die, well yeah you lose some victory points but you can always jump into another mech and make those points up later.

This would definately make the game much more fluid and feel a hell of alot more realistic. Hell if done right PGI wouldn't even have to make a ton of maps. Basically they would need to design maybe 5-10 maps then make it so that the objectives and spawn points randomly spawn in different locations each and every battle. I mean it couldn't be that hard to have 5-6 objectives each have maybe 10 different and random spawn locations. That would give each map a total of what 60+ plus different, random variations that couldn't be predicted prior to the fight. Hell it would give light scouts a hell of a role having to go out and actually identify and find the objectives and direct the rest of the teams to them.

PGI just needs to to hire me as creative director. All problems would be solved hehe.

Honestly man, I don't care how its rationalized, but you seem to be taking queues from games like the Battlefield series and maybe Enemy Territory.

Yeah a ticket system would work if it were properly fleshed out, objectives however like Enemy Territory had are an extremely niche thing that just don't lead to appealing game play. Battlefield had no equal in creating a game type that felt like a battle, where you weren't forced down a path, you just naturally did what you were supposed to do because you were rewarded for it. You were also given tangible rewards for controlling certain points of the map whether it was vehicles, guns, spawn points, etc. It just made it all naturally work together.

That is what this game needs.

All that said, CW is coming, they talked about retooling the reward systems. I'd sooner see all that come to pass first before pushing for other game modes.

Edited by TB Freelancer, 10 August 2014 - 04:44 PM.

[Jeb]

I don't know about WoT as I never played it, but every game I have ever played, be it FPS or RPG online, the fastest way to kill someone is to focus fire them by multiple people... This leads to it always being better to be in a group, then to break off solo...

The only time you might see this change, is when you need to also hold spawns/resource points in a game with respawns... then you can send people to be lookouts for the enemy solo, knowing they will probably die, but they are the early warning system

If in WoT, you are in a big tank it sounds like you can take on smaller tanks solo... but what happens if you run into a few same size tanks or larger tanks? I assume they take ya out no problem...

[Henree]

maybe if there were two or more objectives and any of them captured by the enemy causes a loss.

[TB Freelancer]

Henri Schoots, on 10 August 2014 - 08:31 PM, said:

maybe if there were two or more objectives and any of them captured by the enemy causes a loss.

MWO players can't walk and chew bubblegum at the same time. All they can think is "kuh kuh kuh smath the beedles...SMATH EM!!" Assault and Conquest have conclusively proven that.

As much as I wish we had other game types, I see little point in adding any. It'll just play the same the other three game types do. With no re-spawn, no matter what PGI comes up with, bases, capture points, etc. are meaningless because smath duh beetles will win often enough and be lucrative enough that it becomes the defacto way the game type gets played and its original intent becomes completely ignored.

[Rebas Kradd]

The maps are too big and open, and the game modes too limited. There simply is no meaningful reason to split up rather than deathball. Even if you try, should the other team NOT split up, each fragment of yours is probably dead. Prisoners' dilemma.

The closest thing we have to a situation that favors lance warfare, is Conquest on Terra Therma. Due to the map's size, the limited travel paths and lines of sight, and the need to cap multiple objectives, it's actually hard to find the enemy and come together into a murderball quickly. Therefore, lances will actually try to hit cap points separately (and the resulting 4x4 battles can be pretty refreshing).

We need more of that. Whether it's accomplished by means of closed-in real estate, more involved objectives, or simply larger maps, we need more of that. The current 12v12 format is just too furball-ish and will never leave room for real info warfare or role warfare.

[TB Freelancer]

Rebas Kradd, on 11 August 2014 - 03:30 PM, said:

The maps are too big and open, and the game modes too limited. There simply is no meaningful reason to split up rather than deathball. Even if you try, should the other team NOT split up, each fragment of yours is probably dead. Prisoners' dilemma.

The closest thing we have to a situation that favors lance warfare, is Conquest on Terra Therma. Due to the map's size, the limited travel paths and lines of sight, and the need to cap multiple objectives, it's actually hard to find the enemy and come together into a murderball quickly. Therefore, lances will actually try to hit cap points separately (and the resulting 4x4 battles can be pretty refreshing).

We need more of that. Whether it's accomplished by means of closed-in real estate, more involved objectives, or simply larger maps, we need more of that. The current 12v12 format is just too furball-ish and will never leave room for real info warfare or role warfare.

Even in Terra Therma conquest, usually the team that forms up and rolls over whatever it runs into usually wins. With no re-spawn there are no 2nd chances and playing it like team death match usually wins, only teams to blisteringly stupid to neutralize all the points they've ignored ever lose, and that happens depressingly often on maps like Terra Therma, Alpine and Tourmaline, and OF ALL MAPS...

...river city.

[Capt Sternn]

Here's one difference in favor of MWO. A Locust can Hurt an Atlas. A good Locust Pilot can take down a bad Atlas Pilot. In WOT it can be a much different story. Although their matchmaker has gotten much better than it was you still have matches where the #15 player on one side can in no way hurt the #1 Player on the other, even with just a 2 teir difference. A Commando or a Locust can always Hurt the Atlas or Dire Wolf, they might not win but they can at least contribute to killing the enemy. Also in Pug matches in WOT it tends to Become camp/Sniper Fest style of Play instead of the sweeping Attacks you see in Group combat. MWO has this problem too but not nearly as bad.

[Felbombling]

Well, I'm bumping this tread after the anniversary weekend. Two things really bugged me while playing, and I realized the only reason I was still playing on Sunday was due to the 2x XP event. First, the murder ball effect was and still is in full bloom. I can think of only a handful of games all weekend that were interesting flanking battles, where multiple sides had to be guarded. The rest were all 12-2, 12-0, 12-3 rolls win or lose. Teams that split up were chopped up piecemeal, as expected. Second, I saw a couple of alarming incidents that really showed me just how flawed the game is. One that sticks out was a Dire Wolf on Caustic Valley that I was spectating. He was playing a great game and hadn't taken a scratch when, within a split second, his Left Torso was vaporized by what sounded like Autocannon or Gauss slugs. He lost the torso and about 3/4 of his weaponry. Betty was just getting started on the damage details when he lost either the other torso in the same fashion, or his Center Torso. Either or, he was dead. It all happened so fast I couldn't register if the shots came from the front or the rear [which I suspect happened], but it was the brutality and quickness of the demise of a 100-ton assault Mech that got to me. Really disappointing to see that lack of durability in a Mech game. I don't know if that really fits with what I envision these Mechs as being... really tough, durable war machines.

At any rate, the anniversary weekend probably saved me some money on the new Clan package. I doubt I will purchase any of them after what I experienced the last few days.

Really good points made in this thread as to why the murder ball reigns supreme. Thanks everyone for sharing.

[Aries37]

The problem is actually the complete opposite. Mech durability is about right but dps is too low. Killing things on your own takes way too long which is why grouping up is such an advantage.

Imagine games like Counterstrike or Call of Duty where all the guns did 1% of their normal damage. People would naturally have to ball up too because player skill is massively outweighed by having more firepower.

A game with shooting mechanics like this has no chance to be taken seriously without well designed objective-based gameplay. No-respawn team deathmatch is an utterly pointless experience.

Edited by Aries37, 22 September 2014 - 02:39 AM.

[Lucian Nostra]

The difference is that you NEED to flank heavy tanks to kill them in WoT. This comes at the massive penalty that many of the tanks in matches are there soley as fodder, having zero relevance in the match

If I had to play a light or medium in MWO and listen to

"didn't even scratch em" x100 ... the rage....