Jump to content

About That Dropship Mode We All Been Waiting For


362 replies to this topic

#1 SirLANsalot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,540 posts
  • LocationWashington State

Posted 25 September 2014 - 05:32 PM

Been waiting for this thing to show up for 2 years! Its finally being talked about, and finally being added and programmed. However with the CC post that came out, it might not be what we all had dreamed of over all these years.


The Original Concept.

4 mechs, with a drop "deck" style load out, based on tonnage.


What we read in the CC post.

1 mech of each type......


Drop Deck loadouts allow the PLAYERS to choose what they want to take, weather that be 4 lights, or 2 100 ton assaults. The number that most people have floated out has been either 200 or 250 tons per a player deck. This drives home a good self limit into the game. At 200 tons, you would only get 2 Dire Wolfs/Atlas. It would also limit the number of assaults on the field if people "spammed" them. 200 tons is only 2 assaults of ANY kind, 250 opens it up just a little too much (ergo you would get 4 respawns even while taking an Atlas).

200 tons puts a nice self limit into the game and opens up the use of many "border" mechs that normally are overlooked. 3x4 helped some, but was broken from the moment it was put in. If it was a hard limit like it was supposed to be, the border mechs would be getting more use. (Border mechs are a reference to the lighter medium/heavy/assaults that just tick over into the class). I would forsee the attackers in an attack/defend mode getting a slightly higher drop deck, then the defenders. 225 or even 250 for the attackers, since the defenders have turrets/advantageous terrain on there side.

Either way, it should be 4 mechs or 200 tons, whichever comes first when building your drop deck. None of this 1 of everything crap.




On another note, here is something for everyone to think on. With having multiple respawns for the enemy (as well as yourself). What is going to happen to Ballistics? What about LRM's? Ammo based mechs are going to have to think long and hard about how much ammo they want to take with them. LRMs might be in need of an ammo buff as they already suffer greatly from so many limitations. Remember, you might get a nice kill, but that enemy is going to be coming back....and he knows how hurt/out of ammo you are. Skill is going to play even more into Dropship mode then ever before. The big boy assault mechs, the ones that could walts through 4 or 5 mechs, might be having some ammo issues to think about when outfitting that AC20 or twin UAC10's.

#2 Lyoto Machida

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 5,076 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 05:37 PM

PGI will probably give surviving defenders full ammo and armor/structure. You know...for balance, and all.

#3 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 25 September 2014 - 05:38 PM

While I agree with you re: tonnage limits (and have always wanted to have that setup), I suspect the reasoning is this:

Resulting 12 man teams are inherently balanced in terms of weight classes. If every player brings one mech of each, then each team has 12/12/12/12, always.

Of course, the downside is that this continues the marginalization of mechs on the lower end of the weight scale, and removes the encouragement to run Mediums, as with a 200t limit, you could run 4x40t mechs. In a 200t/4mech max cap, mediums would become much more plentiful, which IMHO would be fantastic for the game.

#4 LordKnightFandragon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,239 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 05:47 PM

Respawns in MW games is always very meh...I played a similar mode in MW4 vs my uncle once, we each respawned and each time the one who freshly respawned would win....simply because its a badly beaten mech vs a fresh one...it will be the same meh kinda crap here. Unless of course we also get a repair bay somewhere in teh base camp or something.....

#5 Johnny Z

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 9,942 posts
  • LocationDueling on Solaris

Posted 25 September 2014 - 05:49 PM

Great OP. Brings up some of the strategic elements for the players in dropship mode. That along with which mech to use first and I am guessing many other strategic elements, its a good addition.

The one mech drop has its place, but the 4 mech dropships will add alot to the game and thats a good thing.

I am for the 1/1/1/1 dropship for alot of reasons, but it is easier to say that I think the push for all heavy and assault mech direct fire game play makes the game more generic to put it simply.

Edited by Johnny Z, 25 September 2014 - 05:54 PM.


#6 DAYLEET

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 4,314 posts
  • LocationLinoleum.

Posted 25 September 2014 - 05:54 PM

View PostSirLANsalot, on 25 September 2014 - 05:32 PM, said:

Drop Deck loadouts allow the PLAYERS to choose what they want to take, weather that be 4 lights, or 2 100 ton assaults. The number that most people have floated out has been either 200 or 250 tons per a player deck. This drives home a good self limit into the game. At 200 tons, you would only get 2 Dire Wolfs/Atlas. It would also limit the number of assaults on the field if people "spammed" them. 200 tons is only 2 assaults of ANY kind, 250 opens it up just a little too much (ergo you would get 4 respawns even while taking an Atlas).



Why would anyone take anything but 2 assault or 3 of the biggest mech possible in 200ton range? Why would anyone go for 4 smaller mech? Why would i take 4 nova instead of 2 timberwolves + 1 nova?

#7 Johnny Z

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 9,942 posts
  • LocationDueling on Solaris

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:02 PM

View PostLordKnightFandragon, on 25 September 2014 - 05:47 PM, said:

Respawns in MW games is always very meh...I played a similar mode in MW4 vs my uncle once, we each respawned and each time the one who freshly respawned would win....simply because its a badly beaten mech vs a fresh one...it will be the same meh kinda crap here. Unless of course we also get a repair bay somewhere in teh base camp or something.....


If i thought this was respawn i wouldnt be for it. This is the player given some serious assets for important battles. This gives important battles some character, gives the game as a whole new elements.

I am thinking that eject pod will play a role in this at some point to allow the pilots to get back to their waiting mechs at the dropship or not. Which very well may be why eject isnt in game yet.

#8 Rhent

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,045 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:06 PM

Do not want.

#9 Impyrium

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God
  • The God
  • 2,104 posts
  • LocationSouth Australia

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:07 PM

View PostDAYLEET, on 25 September 2014 - 05:54 PM, said:

Why would anyone take anything but 2 assault or 3 of the biggest mech possible in 200ton range? Why would anyone go for 4 smaller mech? Why would i take 4 nova instead of 2 timberwolves + 1 nova?


This is the only reason I'm against the tonnage idea.

With 1/1/1/1, you can be sure that each team is bringing twelve lights, twelve mediums, twelve heavies and twelve assaults. If you go pure tonnage restrictions, than it's highly likely drop decks will only focus on the purely meta 'Mechs again. If you're not required to bring the unpopular weight classes and 'Mechs, the fact is nobody will bring them.

I also don't see how this is going to balance teams at all. Not only will the quantity of 'Mechs vary per unit, but you may very well end up with a light team versus a heavy team. Which might be interesting, mind you, but I can still see every Clan faction unit taking Timber Wolf primary decks. Fun fun. :P Just don't see how that can be balanced effectively.

I'm happy to see tonnage in it, but freedom needs to be restricted to avoid a new meta emerging.

Edited by AUSwarrior24, 25 September 2014 - 06:08 PM.


#10 Eddrick

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 1,493 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanyon Lake, TX.

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:08 PM

I'm not a fan of 1/1/1/1. But, it's better then no limit at all. A reasonable Tonnage Limit would be nice. Especialy, if there was no minimum Mech limit.

I like and do best with Mechs in the 50-65 Ton range. So, a max tonnage of 200-220 would be perfect for me. If I HAD to bring 4. But, may be a bit low for many.

View PostSirLANsalot, on 25 September 2014 - 05:32 PM, said:

On another note, here is something for everyone to think on. With having multiple respawns for the enemy (as well as yourself). What is going to happen to Ballistics? What about LRM's? Ammo based mechs are going to have to think long and hard about how much ammo they want to take with them. LRMs might be in need of an ammo buff as they already suffer greatly from so many limitations. Remember, you might get a nice kill, but that enemy is going to be coming back....and he knows how hurt/out of ammo you are. Skill is going to play even more into Dropship mode then ever before. The big boy assault mechs, the ones that could walts through 4 or 5 mechs, might be having some ammo issues to think about when outfitting that AC20 or twin UAC10's.


Bring back-up energy weapons. Like, many of the stock builds have. Even a Medium Laser or two may not be much. But, it's better then nothing. It's the best we got untill we get the ability to make physical attacks.

Limited ammo is one of the trade-offs of Ballistic and Misslie weapons. It was only increased to make up the differance for double Armor. Normaly, Rearm cost would also be another factor. But, that got removed.

#11 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:18 PM

View PostDAYLEET, on 25 September 2014 - 05:54 PM, said:


Why would anyone take anything but 2 assault or 3 of the biggest mech possible in 200ton range? Why would anyone go for 4 smaller mech? Why would i take 4 nova instead of 2 timberwolves + 1 nova?

It wouldn't be 2 of the heaviest. Larger mechs != Better mechs, after all.

This because while an Atlas vs. a Hunchback is generally going to favour the Atlas, it's not grossly one-sided. Then that damaged Atlas with spent ammo needs to face a fresh, second Hunchback (mechs of course will vary, but you get my point I'm sure).

Sure, people will take 2 Timberwolves vs. 3 Novas, but a major factor there is the Timberwolf is a perfect storm of clan tech vs. the Nova being.. well, a fun niche mech but not really competitive.

With that said...

View PostAUSwarrior24, on 25 September 2014 - 06:07 PM, said:

With 1/1/1/1, you can be sure that each team is bringing twelve lights, twelve mediums, twelve heavies and twelve assaults. If you go pure tonnage restrictions, than it's highly likely drop decks will only focus on the purely meta 'Mechs again. If you're not required to bring the unpopular weight classes and 'Mechs, the fact is nobody will bring them.

I also don't see how this is going to balance teams at all. Not only will the quantity of 'Mechs vary per unit, but you may very well end up with a light team versus a heavy team. Which might be interesting, mind you, but I can still see every Clan faction unit taking Timber Wolf primary decks. Fun fun. :P Just don't see how that can be balanced effectively.

I'm happy to see tonnage in it, but freedom needs to be restricted to avoid a new meta emerging.


This is true. Even like this, of course you'll see swafts of Timberwolves instead of Summoners, for example, each battle will feature a good mix of mech classes. I understand some like having it be very random, but there's pros and cons to that.

8 man teams of Atlases didn't make for great gameplay back in the day either, IMHO, and in competitive matches you'd absolutely find tonnage limits leading to specific mechs being VERY heavily played.

Clan mechs in particular gain there, because even if there was a "1 per variant" limit to prevent the old "8 DDC spam" (it'd be different now, but you get my point) you could just bring a set of whichever clan mechs of different variants with identical builds.

I'd prefer tonnage limits, but I understand fully why they're going 1/1/1/1. And, it'll lead to interesting gameplay: Do you lead out with 12 Assault mechs to attempt to crush your opposition, and then supporting with ever faster mechs as the assaults die? There's a lot of possibilities for interesting strategies utilizing each players drop deck choices.

#12 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:29 PM

View PostSirLANsalot, on 25 September 2014 - 05:32 PM, said:

On another note, here is something for everyone to think on. With having multiple respawns for the enemy (as well as yourself). What is going to happen to Ballistics? What about LRM's? Ammo based mechs are going to have to think long and hard about how much ammo they want to take with them. LRMs might be in need of an ammo buff as they already suffer greatly from so many limitations. Remember, you might get a nice kill, but that enemy is going to be coming back....and he knows how hurt/out of ammo you are. Skill is going to play even more into Dropship mode then ever before. The big boy assault mechs, the ones that could walts through 4 or 5 mechs, might be having some ammo issues to think about when outfitting that AC20 or twin UAC10's.


On this in particular:

It'll really reduce the effectiveness of a few problem builds that rely exclusively on a couple large ballistics (twin Gauss, twin AC20 Heavies, for example).

However, the real strength of Ballistics is when they are paired with Energy weapons, getting low heat/high damage to go with the high heat/low weight energy weapons. B+E > 2B or 2E, in general. While in a limited-respawn game, Ballistics (and missiles) will be somewhat poorer, this does serve to balance how in general ballistics and missiles are simply better than most energy weapons right now simply because of how the heat system works. There's little need to worry much about ammo unless you're bad at the game and can't hit the broad side of a barn.

Having endurance be a more important factor is very interesting. It may happen that they need to increase ammo per ton, but I'm honestly really against Ammo reload bays or what have you. Being able to get reloads in game makes Ballistics and Missile Weapons substantially better in ways that are somewhat unintended. I'd bring even less ammo on-board, knowing I could get reloads, saving room for more weapons/heat sinks.

PPC's being so low has curtailed them a lot, and lasers are certainly not OP now. Going to a Dropship mode may serve to balance the weapons better as it stands.

#13 Pendraco

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 469 posts
  • LocationSpokane, WA

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:32 PM

Couldn't They give us a tonnage Limit, and the requirement to bring a mech from each class. Just don't Give us enough tonnage to bring the heaviest of each class.... Would that work?

#14 geodeath

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 449 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:34 PM

View PostDAYLEET, on 25 September 2014 - 05:54 PM, said:


Why would anyone take anything but 2 assault or 3 of the biggest mech possible in 200ton range? Why would anyone go for 4 smaller mech? Why would i take 4 nova instead of 2 timberwolves + 1 nova?

I would love to take an Ember, Jenner, Shadowhawk, and a Jager.

#15 Stonefalcon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Messenger
  • The Messenger
  • 1,323 posts
  • LocationSuccessfully stole beer at Mech_Con. Thanks Chris and Russ

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:35 PM

View PostDAYLEET, on 25 September 2014 - 05:54 PM, said:


Why would anyone take anything but 2 assault or 3 of the biggest mech possible in 200ton range? Why would anyone go for 4 smaller mech? Why would i take 4 nova instead of 2 timberwolves + 1 nova?

Because 200 tons will allow 4 AC/40 cicadas, that damage!!

#16 King Arthur IV

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • 2,549 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:41 PM

i would also prefer a tonnage and/or 4 mech limit oppose to the 1 of each class constrains.

if you want to bring 4 lights and sacrifice damage or if you want to bring 2 assaults and sacrifice speed then that is a choice we should be given. it should be up to the player and team to figure out what is the right balance to bring into battle.

#17 Bhael Fire

    Banned - Cheating

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 4,002 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationThe Outback wastes of planet Outreach.

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:45 PM

I am glad they forcing players to bring one of each weight class. Not only does it keep things balanced, it forces players to play outside of their comfort zone once their main mech is destroyed.

Many people are looking at it ALL wrong; most players are seeing like, "I should be able to bring whatever I want for all 4 mechs"...when in reality, you can bring whatever you want for your main mech. The extra mechs are meant only as emergency backup re-enforcements.

It's basically 3 extra chances to help your team, but each time you die you get weaker and weaker.

This is very wise design decision.

#18 DEMAX51

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 2,269 posts
  • LocationThe cockpit of my Jenner

Posted 25 September 2014 - 06:47 PM

View PostDAYLEET, on 25 September 2014 - 05:54 PM, said:


Why would anyone take anything but 2 assault or 3 of the biggest mech possible in 200ton range? Why would anyone go for 4 smaller mech? Why would i take 4 nova instead of 2 timberwolves + 1 nova?


Because your team would be completely gimped by sheer lack of numbers.

Let's say the tonnage limit is 200 (though personally I think 240 is the magic number). One team has all 12 players bring 2 Atlases, while the other side has each person bring four 50 ton Mediums.

24 Atlases vs. 48 'Mechs. Those are some pretty tall odds to overcome for the team of Atlases.

Have you ever run a just for fun private match with like 2 or 3 Atlases up against a pack of Locusts? It doesn't normally end well for the Atlases. The number of 'Mechs on the field makes a much bigger difference than the tonnage.

Edited by DEMAX51, 25 September 2014 - 06:51 PM.


#19 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,717 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 07:28 PM

Quote

I am glad they forcing players to bring one of each weight class. Not only does it keep things balanced, it forces players to play outside of their comfort zone once their main mech is destroyed.


actually 1/1/1/1 will force you to bring the best mech for each weight class. it completely kills mechs like the locust/commando which are at the bottom of their respective weight classes.

tonnage limits are better because it allows players to play the mechs they want. you can take a locust or a commando and not be at a disadvantage for doing so because your other mechs will benefit from extra tonnage.

tonnage limits also add a convenient way to balance IS vs clan better simply by giving clans less drop tonnage.

Edited by Khobai, 25 September 2014 - 07:31 PM.


#20 Asyres

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 433 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 08:00 PM

I'd love to see a 200t drop limit instead of 1/1/1/1. I'd be all over medium and light mechs if that was the case.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users