362 replies to this topic

[SirLANsalot]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 29 September 2014 - 12:08 PM, said:

Funny how its not a problem for ppl bringing 4 lights but its a gamebreaking necessity that something be done to prevent assauly/heavy players from playing their chosen mechs in the same game

or ppl like me who get motion sick in lighter mechs but not heavier, sturdier ones

With the system I was posting, 2-4 mechs or 200t whichever comes first. You CAN bring your pure assault deck, you just get to only bring 2 of them, not 3 or 4, its the cost you must pay, for playing something so much heavier in tonnage/firepower/armor.

Its a Firepower vs Lives system. If you want to have more re-spawns, you will be "paying" less firepower for it. If you want more dakka and killing power, you will be paying for it in how many times you can come back. This is a self balancing system, and the players that are good with every class will be some of the best players in this game. Taking a mixed deck would be something a player could do OPTIONALLY, rather then being REQUIRED. Its best to give the players an options rather then forcing them to do thing they do not want to take/do.

[Brody319]

SirLANsalot, on 29 September 2014 - 05:56 PM, said:

With the system I was posting, 2-4 mechs or 200t whichever comes first. You CAN bring your pure assault deck, you just get to only bring 2 of them, not 3 or 4, its the cost you must pay, for playing something so much heavier in tonnage/firepower/armor.

Its a Firepower vs Lives system. If you want to have more re-spawns, you will be "paying" less firepower for it. If you want more dakka and killing power, you will be paying for it in how many times you can come back. This is a self balancing system, and the players that are good with every class will be some of the best players in this game. Taking a mixed deck would be something a player could do OPTIONALLY, rather then being REQUIRED. Its best to give the players an options rather then forcing them to do thing they do not want to take/do.

They have said it will start off in 1/1/1/1 drops. So there is no point to arguing for a tonnage system now.

[Shadowdragonne]

Forgive me if someone already brought this up, I skipped ahead in the thread because I wasn't willing to wade through ten more pages of identical arguments. But:
This is respawn based on mech destruction, yes? So.... I leg you. I peel open the can with some heavy weapons, then I rip you up with MG's until you are unarmed. Or, more realistically, thats what my team does to your team. While we are doing this, your team is doing it right back. The winner is the one with the last mech able to finish the match objective, and few people went past their first or second mech in the dropship.

Potential fixes that will nullify (in my opinion of course. your milage may vary) in the main all of the arguments regarding 1/1/1/1 vs tonnage limits vs points vs. et cetera ad nauseum.

Bigger maps- most of them should be double the size of Alpine Peaks at the least. All of a sudden medium mechs or fast heavies become dominant except in planetary assaults. Which is what they are for after all.

Specific objectives other than kill everyone or sit on a spawn point for x seconds. Recon missions where you get xp and cbills for every point of armor your team has left, Smash missions where you have to disable a base, Raids where you have to go to a resource base, "get" a resource and then make it back to your dropship to escape. Et Cetera...

Fog of war that makes BAP and ECM more useful. ECCM modules. Each team has to FIND each other first. Voila! Recon mechs are needed!

Spawn points for mechs and bases that change from match to match so, again, light mechs get used for recon like they are supposed to be.

Bases that fight back, requiring players to think about how to take them if they dont have some assaults to help them. Yes, the bases on assualt currently have automated defenses - that my grandmother could slap aside. How many people get taken out by them without it being just bad luck? Or stupidity, I did see one guy camp the enemy base once. For a little while.

Separate timers for game objectives versus overall match timer.

Basically this game needs matches that cater to the diffeent mech classes, rather than the Solaris VII-ish group matches we currently have. And for that matter, add Solaris VII to the CW as a neutral planet that has the competition play many people like. Ladders and winnings and wordfame and riches.

Just my .02 c-bills

Edited by Shadowdragonne, 29 September 2014 - 07:30 PM.

[Brody319]

Shadowdragonne, on 29 September 2014 - 07:27 PM, said:

Forgive me if someone already brought this up, I skipped ahead in the thread because I wasn't willing to wade through ten more pages of identical arguments. But:
This is respawn based on mech destruction, yes? So.... I leg you. I peel open the can with some heavy weapons, then I rip you up with MG's until you are unarmed. Or, more realistically, thats what my team does to your team. While we are doing this, your team is doing it right back. The winner is the one with the last mech able to finish the match objective, and few people went past their first or second mech in the dropship.

Potential fixes that will nullify (in my opinion of course. your milage may vary) in the main all of the arguments regarding 1/1/1/1 vs tonnage limits vs point et cetera ad nauseum.

Bigger maps- most of them should be double the size of Alpine Peaks at the least. All of a sudden medium mechs or fast heavies become dominant except in planetary assaults. Which is what they are for after all.

Specific objectives other than kill everyone or sit on a spawn point for x seconds. Recon missions where you get xp and cbills for every point of armor your team has left, Smash missions where you have to disable a base, Raids where you have to go to a resource base, "get" a resource and then make it back to your dropship to escape. Et Cetera...

Fog of war that makes BAP and ECM more useful. ECCM modules. Each team has to FIND each other first. Voila! Recon mechs are needed!

Spawn points for mechs and bases that change from match to match so, again, light mechs get used for recon like they are supposed to be.

Bases that fight back, requiring players to think about how to take them if they dont have some assaults to help them. Yes, the bases on assualt currently have automated defenses - that my grandmother could slap aside. How many people get taken out by them without it being just bad luck? Or stupidity, I did see one guy camp the enemy base once. For a little while.

Separate timers for game objectives versus overall match timer.

Basically this game needs matches that cater to the diffeent mech classes, rather than the Solaris VII-ish group matches we currently have. And for that matter, add Solaris VII to the CW as a neutral planet that has the competition play many people like. Ladders and winnings and wordfame and riches.

Just my .02 c-bills

No. There are objective it isnt just a TDM. You have to cap the point or defend the point, you can't do either without killing the enemy. so you can't just strip the enemy and walk away. They addressed this in the FAQ for the most recent announcement about CW.
I believe so far the map involves a gate with multiple capture points, defenders cannot respawn till the gate is busted open. while attackers can respawn at will. In order to open the gate you must own those points. then the gate opens and I believe it turns into a one sided base capture game.

[EgoSlayer]

MicroVent, on 29 September 2014 - 04:16 PM, said:

Mixed message on the solo Q. CW phase 2 update. This looks like a no solo rule to me. Either way it works out but some claity would be nice.

Any thoughts about opening up an experience of contested planets to the solo queue allowing players to pick an involved house, carry its banner and run its favored 'Mechs for the match, get a loyalty points for that house and a tiny bit for their permanently declared faction? Wouldn't have to affect the planet's control much or at all; essentially, themed public matches.
[color=#00FFFF]Not immediately out of the gate but this is something could eventually address.[/color]

This question is entirely about loyalty points for players who fight for something other than their declared a faction to still accrue points for the conflict for that faction conflict. Current plan won't allow anyone but the defending faction from joining the defense. Has nothing to due with the solo queue itself and how the players are assigned.

Brody319, on 29 September 2014 - 07:32 PM, said:

No. There are objective it isnt just a TDM. You have to cap the point or defend the point, you can't do either without killing the enemy. so you can't just strip the enemy and walk away. They addressed this in the FAQ for the most recent announcement about CW.
I believe so far the map involves a gate with multiple capture points, defenders cannot respawn till the gate is busted open. while attackers can respawn at will. In order to open the gate you must own those points. then the gate opens and I believe it turns into a one sided base capture game.

Um, you read that totally wrong. Complete elimination of the enemy is still a victory condition:
http://mwomercs.com/...71#entry3760671

Quote

If the attackers successfully eliminate all the defenders, this presumably constitutes a victory even if not all defensive structures are destroyed or will the attackers be required to cap the base (similar to Assault) before the timer runs out?
Total annihilation of the enemy team will result in a win assuming there are no more drops available to any of their players.

Edited by EgoSlayer, 29 September 2014 - 08:20 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Wintersdark, on 29 September 2014 - 02:10 PM, said:

Why? You can play your heavier mechs. More than youbcould with 1/1/1/1, in fact. You can bring an assault, 2 heavies and a medium even. Or all sorts of otger combinations. Under the 240t limit at least.

Theres no limit from what ive read, its you have to bring one of each. Ive already passed out from pain for this game, im not running mechs that make me puker, sorry.

Davegt27, on 29 September 2014 - 02:21 PM, said:

Here is a crazy idea
How about we let the game designers be the game designers

If you really want CW you’re going to have to suck it up leave them alone so they can finish it

Big whoop if its 200 tons or 4 types

We tried that for years. They cant do it

[Wintersdark]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 29 September 2014 - 08:10 PM, said:

Theres no limit from what ive read, its you have to bring one of each. Ive already passed out from pain for this game, im not running mechs that make me puker, sorry.

The point being discussed is that Russ is proposing a 240t limit, 4 mechs required instead of 1/1/1/1, so no... You do not in fact have to run mechs that make you puker.

[Rattlehead NZ]

Honestly I just want to see the promised dropship mode in the game regardless of how it's done. Once we have it then we can ***** and moan about what needs to be done to make it better. This mode is one of the things i was looking forward too from the beginning that made becoming a Founder worth it. Though I havent played in a long time, I'll wait till either this or CW to start before I give it a serious go again.

[Shadowdragonne]

Brody319, on 29 September 2014 - 07:32 PM, said:

No. There are objective it isnt just a TDM. You have to cap the point or defend the point, you can't do either without killing the enemy. so you can't just strip the enemy and walk away. They addressed this in the FAQ for the most recent announcement about CW.
I believe so far the map involves a gate with multiple capture points, defenders cannot respawn till the gate is busted open. while attackers can respawn at will. In order to open the gate you must own those points. then the gate opens and I believe it turns into a one sided base capture game.

(No? what kind of response is that anyway?)

Yes.
My point, which you seem to not be able to understand, is that if the respawn is driven by the destruction of your mech, I can prevent you from respawning by not destroying you. I make you slow, I take away your weapons, and all of a sudden it doesn't matter if you have a TimberWolf next in the queue, because your mech has not been destroyed. I hope that cleared up what I was saying. I didn't realize I was being so obtuse, I apologize. Furthermore:

It is a choice between cap a point or kill everyone now, except for assault, which is just kill everyone. You most certainly can cap a point without killing the other team. Do it all the time in conquest matches. Go back and re-read what I wrote. I was suggesting additions, potential changes, IDEAS that in my opinion would make the arguments about 1/1/1/1 limits or tonnage limits null. So far all of the "objectives", I have heard about all are varients of what is already in play, and will ultimately turn into team death matches regardless. Conquest matches rarely are won by gathering resources in my experience. So I made some suggestions as to alternate ideas which might work. I wasn't discussing any potential inclusion in the release, I was responding to the arguments regarding dropship platforms for players.

Another .02 C-bills. This is gonna be expensive I think..........

Edited by Shadowdragonne, 29 September 2014 - 09:46 PM.

[Reported for Inappropriate Name]

moment pgi leaves igp we start getting **** we were promised? people who bought preorder packages shown love when it was previously stated this would never happen? new maps when we were told they werent economically viable? I really want to believe igp was responsible for cashgrab hell, but when there's some history to look back on I'll make that decision.

although I will say that I find it reasonable to suspect all the cash grabs were an effort to buy the game rights from igp, and this is why we're seeing them giving handouts to previous customers for being customers, like "thank you for helping us buy our freedom" kind of rewards.

but this isn't facts, just speculation from a hopeful mind because I want to believe that in a year from now the game will be more than spawn and metabrawl around red squares simulator.

Edited by Battlecruiser, 30 September 2014 - 01:20 AM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Wintersdark, on 29 September 2014 - 08:45 PM, said:

The point being discussed is that Russ is proposing a 240t limit, 4 mechs required instead of 1/1/1/1, so no... You do not in fact have to run mechs that make you puker.

Hey Im cool with that

Rattlehead NZ, on 29 September 2014 - 09:30 PM, said:

Honestly I just want to see the promised dropship mode in the game regardless of how it's done. Once we have it then we can ***** and moan about what needs to be done to make it better. This mode is one of the things i was looking forward too from the beginning that made becoming a Founder worth it. Though I havent played in a long time, I'll wait till either this or CW to start before I give it a serious go again.

Then again, get it in the game and then fix it doesnt work well here. When ECM was dumped in, it was months of us being told that it is "working as intended" before they droke down and gave us a counter.

I kind of feel that if they put in DSM here and its crap so noone uses it, that they wont fix it, they will abandon it and move on

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 30 September 2014 - 03:42 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Shadowdragonne, on 29 September 2014 - 09:39 PM, said:

(No? what kind of response is that anyway?)

Yes.
My point, which you seem to not be able to understand, is that if the respawn is driven by the destruction of your mech, I can prevent you from respawning by not destroying you. I make you slow, I take away your weapons, and all of a sudden it doesn't matter if you have a TimberWolf next in the queue, because your mech has not been destroyed. I hope that cleared up what I was saying. I didn't realize I was being so obtuse, I apologize. Furthermore:

It is a choice between cap a point or kill everyone now, except for assault, which is just kill everyone. You most certainly can cap a point without killing the other team. Do it all the time in conquest matches. Go back and re-read what I wrote. I was suggesting additions, potential changes, IDEAS that in my opinion would make the arguments about 1/1/1/1 limits or tonnage limits null. So far all of the "objectives", I have heard about all are varients of what is already in play, and will ultimately turn into team death matches regardless. Conquest matches rarely are won by gathering resources in my experience. So I made some suggestions as to alternate ideas which might work. I wasn't discussing any potential inclusion in the release, I was responding to the arguments regarding dropship platforms for players.

Another .02 C-bills. This is gonna be expensive I think..........

Dropship mode isn't for pug matches, it doesn't happen in Conquest or Assault, it only happens in the described Attack/Defend game mode. Stripping my mech doesn't stop a defender or attacker from point capture/defense, so its not really a good option. I wouldn't say you'd never want to do that, but then that happens now and people still focus on sticked mechs when they should stop firing at someone who's harmless and choose a dangerous target instead.

Until we see the game mode in action though its hard to say.

[Killstorm999999]

Shadowdragonne, on 29 September 2014 - 09:39 PM, said:

(No? what kind of response is that anyway?)

Yes.
My point, which you seem to not be able to understand, is that if the respawn is driven by the destruction of your mech, I can prevent you from respawning by not destroying you. I make you slow, I take away your weapons, and all of a sudden it doesn't matter if you have a TimberWolf next in the queue, because your mech has not been destroyed. I hope that cleared up what I was saying. I didn't realize I was being so obtuse, I apologize. Furthermore:

It is a choice between cap a point or kill everyone now, except for assault, which is just kill everyone. You most certainly can cap a point without killing the other team. Do it all the time in conquest matches. Go back and re-read what I wrote. I was suggesting additions, potential changes, IDEAS that in my opinion would make the arguments about 1/1/1/1 limits or tonnage limits null. So far all of the "objectives", I have heard about all are varients of what is already in play, and will ultimately turn into team death matches regardless. Conquest matches rarely are won by gathering resources in my experience. So I made some suggestions as to alternate ideas which might work. I wasn't discussing any potential inclusion in the release, I was responding to the arguments regarding dropship platforms for players.

Another .02 C-bills. This is gonna be expensive I think..........

There is a very easy solution to the problem you pointed out. Allow the mech pilot to self destruct and respawn at will.

[KraftySOT]

Yeah and there will ALWAYS be a **** that no matter how much you tell him not to kill the legged Direwhale...he kills the legged dire whale.

[Sevronis]

Bhael Fire, on 25 September 2014 - 06:45 PM, said:

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.

Xtrekker, on 25 September 2014 - 09:59 PM, said:

Seems like it would be better to run the opposite. Bring in your worst mechs up front, assuming they're bringing their best. You do as much damage as you can, and then make a strong finish against their gimped metas.

I think 1/1/1/1 works best with tonnage limits that encourage you to rework your drop deck depending on your strategy and to repurpose some little-used chassis as needed.

I would suppose both methods could work depending on certain variables. If you were to put your very best mech first and then fill in the other spots, you could do a lot more up front and possibly clean up afterwards depending on how long your first one lasts. On the flip side, your worst ones first would help add the damage and also soak up the damage so your best mech comes in last nice and fresh. Personally, I would most likely end up choosing my best mech in each class regardless of order, but I'm sure that was going to be an obvious decision for anyone.

[SirLANsalot]

After reading http://mwomercs.com/...2-update-oct-8/ my heart sank a little.


Russ, you are missing the point of allowing players to CHOOSE if they want to take 2 or 4 mechs. By forcing players to take 4 mechs, you are literally forcing players who do not want to pilot lighter mechs, to take them.

Also, 240t is NOT enough tonnage for Clanners. Clans do not have every mech tonnage available to them, 240t will not allow a Dire Wolf player to take his best mechs. Ya he can take ONE of them, but thats it, he will have to take 3 lights or a medium and 2 lights due to the lack of tonnage diversity currently in the Clan lineup. Note: I am said Dire Wolf player, I love my DW, and I am quite deadly inside one, however I hate using Mediums and Lights, I'm not bad in them, I just do not like them.


If the "Must Take 4 mechs stays" then CW will be a bad taste in my, and many others, mouths each time we play. Clans will not be able to take there best mechs, while IS will be able to pull out 2 Atlas and 2 Locusts (if min/max). While Clans will not be able to take 2 Direwolf at all, hell taking just ONE DW will be so limiting on the other mechs taken, he might as well not even bother since he is going to be out gunned and out tonned so quickly. Clans are not as strong as they once were, all those nerfs to them have done wonders in killing there power, that the TT had.


This is why a 2-4 limit IS NEEDED, system NEEDS to be flexible, to allow for the play styles for all players. I have said this before, forcing players to do things they DO NOT WANT, kills the game for them each time they step into something they did not want. They will resent it every time XX situation they were forced into, happens. Overall souring the game for them and eventually leading to there quitting.

[Hoax415]

Four mechs required, 240 is a good system to maintain good balance and weight distributions that make for good games.

You can type need in all caps all you want. But we don't need "Direwolf" only pilots to be catered to at the expense of overall fun.

[EvilCow]

The horror, we can't use 2 landpigs.

[Johnny Z]

It is amazing that some guys want the entire match maker or the coming dropship made made for them, and them only even if it is at the expense of all the other pilots that like mediums or heavies or lights, and yes even assaults.

I was all for 1/1/1/1 but if they go for 240 tons cap thats ok to.

Lights shouldnt have to face entire teams of assaults or any other bunk combinations. Its unrealistic for a start and just bad in a 100 other ways.

With the 4/240 every player can pilot any mech they want and the field will have some variety and a show of all the weight classes not just for 1 player to drop with but all the players.

How could they possibly come up with a more fair solution I have no idea. Any complaints at this point are simple trolling to me.

Edited by Johnny Z, 13 October 2014 - 12:55 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

SirLANsalot, on 29 September 2014 - 05:56 PM, said:

With the system I was posting, 2-4 mechs or 200t whichever comes first. You CAN bring your pure assault deck, you just get to only bring 2 of them, not 3 or 4, its the cost you must pay, for playing something so much heavier in tonnage/firepower/armor.

Id be fine only bringing two honestly, its the 4 or you cant go thing that bugs me