43 replies to this topic

[EgoSlayer]

Enlil09, on 12 September 2014 - 08:37 AM, said:

Ok, here's a noob question. How the heck can I choose the game mode I'm willing to play? I don't see that anywhere in the selection process.

There is a down arrow selection next to the 'Play' button that allows you to select what game modes you want to play.

[Rushmoar]

What I would like to see is the capping module changed from a 15% boost to a 50% and give the player some kind of reward for using it. Something on the line of the consumables but since its not a c-bill sink don't think it will happen. Lets face it, no one takes tha module at this time so I think it needs some help.
Cheers.

[Project_Mercy]

Changing the time on the points wouldn't have a drastic issue. As it is (and if you increased it) there's no huge point to it because if you treat it like a skirmish the match will be over before the other team wins with 3 points. Lowering it might provide some more incentive for lights to skirmish the outside points, but if you split the heavies and assaults up, you will lose. They're slow and they will die to LRM swarms. Lowering it would just try to convince more people that splitting the death ball up is going to result in a win, and it will not. You don't have ECM in every lance, you don't even have 3/3/3/3 many times. There just isn't enough balance to make holding multiple points viable. It's just too easy to wipe out the other team.

This is especially true in solo queue, which everyone on these forums seems so keen on sacrificing "for the children", and then complain why the game is dying. Maybe you could remove conquest from solo queue.

The only thing that I can think of that would make conquest actually work is to spread the points out (like in HPG) and then triple(or more) the size of the map. This would allow the faster mechs to still engage multiple points, but the slow heavies and assaults would basically be required to pick a point and say there.

Another thing would be remove killing all mechs as a win. You must win with points. It wouldn't be well liked, because it would require people to stand there doing nothing, but at least it would bring the point game back to some focus.

[Zyllos]

Wraeththix Constantine, on 12 September 2014 - 09:17 AM, said:

Changing the time on the points wouldn't have a drastic issue. As it is (and if you increased it) there's no huge point to it because if you treat it like a skirmish the match will be over before the other team wins with 3 points. Lowering it might provide some more incentive for lights to skirmish the outside points, but if you split the heavies and assaults up, you will lose. They're slow and they will die to LRM swarms. Lowering it would just try to convince more people that splitting the death ball up is going to result in a win, and it will not. You don't have ECM in every lance, you don't even have 3/3/3/3 many times. There just isn't enough balance to make holding multiple points viable. It's just too easy to wipe out the other team.

This is especially true in solo queue, which everyone on these forums seems so keen on sacrificing "for the children", and then complain why the game is dying. Maybe you could remove conquest from solo queue.

The only thing that I can think of that would make conquest actually work is to spread the points out (like in HPG) and then triple(or more) the size of the map. This would allow the faster mechs to still engage multiple points, but the slow heavies and assaults would basically be required to pick a point and say there.

Another thing would be remove killing all mechs as a win. You must win with points. It wouldn't be well liked, because it would require people to stand there doing nothing, but at least it would bring the point game back to some focus.

I think the reason why I think that splitting up ends up being a bad move is due to how you have to huddle around a tiny square.

The capture point need to involve an area, not the immediate vicinity around the objective.

[Project_Mercy]

Think of it this way. If you were in a skirmish game, and the enemy was split into a lance at 3 separate points that could not assist one another, equidistanly away from each other, how long would it take you to win that match if you death balled?

The answer I come up with "about 5 minutes"

Unless the other side had all 5 points (which is basically impossible early on) the game will not finish in 5 minutes before they're all dead, sans maybe one crafty light that goes and hides somewhere. At least with the current cap times, it takes a while for the other team to cap back what was gained by the splitting up and subsequent dying of the other team. If you sped it up, you'd have less reason to not just roam around murdering everyone and then go back and cap them if one got away.

I think conquest is a cool idea, it's just all the maps are arena sized, and it's not really conducive to something other than an arena.

[nehebkau]

Goose, on 11 September 2014 - 08:35 PM, said:

I keep getting the impression Conquest is some kind'a test, where if you buy into the stated victory conditions, you fail.

Now that we have quad-threes preventing high-speed wolf packs, on a lance each of Dashi holding three points, shouldn't cap times be reduced down to something that's induce panic?

Figure fifteen seconds for a solid-to-solid flip would do it?

I have found the most effective strategy is to play the first 5 minutes as if you were playing a skirmish. Your goal being to easily kill your opponents as they split up lance by lance by having superior numbers face one lance at one cap point. Once you have a lance advantage you can move to another cap and repeat.

When you have more mechs then your opponents you can easily cap and hold 3 points with superior numbers or, more common, kill the remaining mechs.

Either way, I think the current victory conditions are fine.

[Lefty Lucy]

nehebkau, on 12 September 2014 - 09:50 AM, said:

I have found the most effective strategy is to play the first 5 minutes as if you were playing a skirmish. Your goal being to easily kill your opponents as they split up lance by lance by having superior numbers face one lance at one cap point. Once you have a lance advantage you can move to another cap and repeat.

When you have more mechs then your opponents you can easily cap and hold 3 points with superior numbers or, more common, kill the remaining mechs.

Either way, I think the current victory conditions are fine.

It depends on the map. On small maps this strat is best. On bigger maps you need your main force to cap the closest point, your lights to split off and cap a farther point, and then fight for a 3rd point.

[Armament]

The only map I cap on is Alpine Peaks. My team usually rolls onto a single point and kills a lance or two while their last lance is out capping. I can't speak for solo queue though.

[Lefty Lucy]

Lupin, on 12 September 2014 - 08:19 AM, said:

I have lost count how many times the brute force and ignorance has lost conquest.

You are not forced to play game mode, leave it to the players that like skill and tactics.

You misunderstand. I love conquest, it's my favorite game mode by far. Because it gives teams a mechanic to force the enemy to engage them. Assault and Skirmish very often devolve to stand-offs when both sides are tactically competent because assaulting a prepared defense doesn't succeed against good players.

[Linkin]

Rizzelbizzeg, on 12 September 2014 - 08:10 AM, said:

Agreed, the time to cap is way too long.

Also it'd be cool if I could get a consumable knockback so I can typhoon mechs off lumbermill

Also agree cap times could use some reduction perhaps.

Also... nice lol, druid mech activate? And don't forget about T-Storm RIP the fire mage ability that used to do that too...

[Triordinant]

EgoSlayer, on 12 September 2014 - 08:25 AM, said:

Except when the last Mech on a side in Skirmish runs off to a hidden or remote area and powers down. Which happens more often than not.

LOL, I've played nothing but Skirmish since that mode came out and I've seen a player do that exactly 4 times in all those months. It's so extremely rare that it catches my attention when it happens.

[Lukoi Banacek]

THE POINT OF CONQUEST WAS TO CAP, RIGHT?

Neg, as noted...the point is to win. Capping is merely one available method among multiple, unlike say...skirmish.

[AssaultPig]

points in conquest should be looked at as a way to force the other team to engage you on your terms, not as a victory condition in themselves. The way to win on conquest is not to have mechs run all over the map grabbing all the points; it's to take 3/5, post up in a high-leverage position and make the enemy team come to you or split up.

That's why conquest is a much better game than skirmish or assault; it gives both teams incentive to actually push forward an engage, rather than everybody just waiting around until one team gets bored and gives up position.

[Theodore42]

I agree that the point of conquest is to get 3/5. Usually the smart thing to do is to grab theta ASAP and then run away and shoot the enemy from cover as they try to grab it. You get a few kills in the process and cause lots of damage while taking only a little.

Some exceptions being Alpine and HPG.

Alpine has really cool gameplay imo. Do you send a lance after that one point far away? Or if you see red send a lance there, do you stack the other 4 points and hope to make enough kills to wipe the solo lance? There are lots of decisions to make, and if you do it right (on purpose!) it is really rewarding.

Also, there are tricks on HPG, where you can skip theta all together and cap the points at red spawn. Sometimes you can get away with that.

[Almeras]

How to play conquest;

Cap 2 or 3 points, smash the enemy

you personally get no points for capping objectives with no damage, the guy fighting will benefit from the points your have gained them.

[Goose]

Soooo most people view Conquest as what Assault used to be, before the sentries covered for any given teams disinterest in recon? "Oopsie: Teh Deathball Won?"

I'd druther the mode become three parallel 4-on-4s, then improvise for rounds two and three …

If Conquest isn't the mode that punishes deathballing, then …

[Theodore42]

Conquest is the only map mode where you can win the deathball fight and still lose the map. Happens all the time.

[Khobai]

Quote

Cap 2 or 3 points

by then the game is over. it takes like 3 minutes to cap a friggin point.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

Conquest is a test of where can you convince your pugs to go.
Assault is a test of how many pugs can convince to defend.
Skirmish is a test of how many pugs brought LRMs/ECM.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Capping is a possible win.

Destroying every mech on the other team is a definite win.

Its usually better to pursue the definite win in conquest over a possible win.

The team that groups up and goes for straight kills wins I would guess 70% to 90% of the time.

Lowering capping requirements to give teams that focus on capping, better statistical odds of winning, could add to gameplay depth and make things more interesting.

It could also emphasize role warfare with lights and mediums having more of a cap based role.