19 replies to this topic

[GuardDogg]

Why can no one ever figure out conquest? This is a game to take bases, but 90% of players only prefer to fight in it. Then when most enemy players are down, friendlies will take bases as fast as they can or lose. Their is no defences, meaning no one ever can defend a base. When taking a base, the losing team will criticize the friendly like cry babies (Why are you not helping your team, even when you in a light, med, heavy, assault)....like wth? No one is taking bases, so who is going to do it? Will this type of game play ever be fixed? Why have it? Appears players are more concerned about their KDR, than game type.

Edited by VeeDog, 07 October 2014 - 04:49 AM.

[Stoneblade]

This is why when I capture on Assault and people cry I say: "If you don't want to lose your base, play skirmish."

[DEMAX51]

Conquest needs to be changed so that it doesn't take nearly as long to capture a single point. Until that change is made, it's simply more effective to just roll over the other team as if you were playing deathmatch, and only worry about Cap points if you have to at the end of the game.

[Screech]

Having teammates continually fighting 10m next to capture points not on them and obscene capture times has forced me avoid conquest. I am feeling much better now.

[Artgathan]

• It takes way too long to actually capture a location
  
• Points accumulate way too slowly (especially on the small maps)
  
• No Respawns

The combination of these three means that the most efficient (quickest) way to win is typically to kill the other team. Messing around with the bases really only drags out the match and results in lower earnings (per hour) for all involved.

[Thorqemada]

Conquest is Slkirmish until you have won or be forced to secure bases - if you play Conquest first you lose bcs the enemy will wipe floor with your spread Mechs and you become unable to defend the Bases long enough to grab a ressource win.

A good Conquest match only occurs if two dumb/naive/stubborn Teams accidentaly agree to play Conquest first.

Edited by Thorqemada, 07 October 2014 - 08:27 AM.

[Duncan Jr Fischer]

DEMAX51, on 07 October 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

Conquest needs to be changed so that it doesn't take nearly as long to capture a single point. Until that change is made, it's simply more effective to just roll over the other team as if you were playing deathmatch, and only worry about Cap points if you have to at the end of the game.

It's pretty much the point. I feel dumb standing on the cap for minutes while everyone is fighting)

[Creovex]

@ OP

Welcome to my club!

http://mwomercs.com/...lect-game-mode/

FYI - With the "Kill Order" weekend we just had, NOBODY was going to be capping anything... If only we had a weekend challenge regarding capture.... WOW !! That would be something!

Edited by Creovex, 07 October 2014 - 08:42 AM.

[jper4]

DEMAX51, on 07 October 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

Conquest needs to be changed so that it doesn't take nearly as long to capture a single point. Until that change is made, it's simply more effective to just roll over the other team as if you were playing deathmatch, and only worry about Cap points if you have to at the end of the game.

when they changed the cap timers because of people complaining about bases capping too fast in assault (before the turrets got put in) to make it longer- they shouldn't have changed the conquest cap timers as well. put it back to the original rate and people might actually try to play conquest since instead of waiting a minute and change to turn a cap it's back to 30 seconds or whatever it was before so you can go cap then get back to the fight (except the big maps) in short order if you want.

[Mystere]

Duncan Jr Fischer, on 07 October 2014 - 08:37 AM, said:

I feel dumb standing on the cap for minutes while everyone is fighting

I don't. I wait for prey while capturing.

Anyway, the capture times in Conquest need to be drastically reduced to force fights at multiple locations and not at the usual spots.

[Mothykins]

You used to be forced to actually play conquest on Alpine, but then they changed the control points for the worse back before 3/3/3/3 was implemented because assault and heavy mech players who brought slow brawlers lost every match.

Alpine used to be the single best map for it, because the huge sprawl of the map made it so control points where very important.

Now you might as well play river city.

[Helsbane]

Long ago, capture times were a lot shorter and folks would actually focus on capping a lot more. Conquest was actually a fun mode back then. But, as with all things that were fun, it was altered due to people crying that the cap times were too short, and that they couldn't respond to bases far away in their assault mech doing 54kph. The bases on Alpine were stacked on top on one another so window lickers could shoot from one to the other without needing to move their 100 tonner. Adamantium turrets were added to Assault mode, and capping was pretty much abandoned as a viable option by most fast mover pilots. Slowly, those turrets have been reduced in material strength to the Reynolds Wrap models we see today, but Conquest mode still suffers from the sea of tears effect, saddled with slow capture timers and played by deathballs.... Sad really.

[Mystere]

Cavale, on 07 October 2014 - 08:48 AM, said:

You used to be forced to actually play conquest on Alpine, but then they changed the control points for the worse back before 3/3/3/3 was implemented because assault and heavy mech players who brought slow brawlers lost every match.

Alpine used to be the single best map for it, because the huge sprawl of the map made it so control points where very important.

Now you might as well play river city.

Because the player base has learned a very important lesson over the years:

Whining incessantly does indeed produce results!

[Artgathan]

Just for reference, each Conquest Location has 3 Bars (Ally - Neutral - Enemy). It takes a lone mech 60 seconds to completely fill one of these bars (locations that are initially neutral start halfway through neutral, so they take 30 seconds to move into Ally).

Thus, it takes a lone mech 3 minutes to completely flip a base from fully enemy to fully ally. It takes just over 2 minutes for them to turn it blue at all.

Adding more mechs to the location reduces time proportionally (IE: 2 mechs will make it take half the time, 3 mechs = 1/3 the time...).

Thus, it will take a full lance ~30 seconds to turn a fully enemy base to slightly ally, and ~45 seconds for them to fully slip the base.

[Rebas Kradd]

One of the original four pillars was "role warfare", and it featured a class of mech called "defense". When MWO actually went online, the nature of the gamemodes made that class irrelevant. What was the point of defending vs attacking? The roles were blurred because the maps were too small. I've been thinking about why a lot lately.

Yesterday, someone made a comment about "territory control". That's what Conquest needs to be, because it allows for battle lines instead of endless merry-go-round. Now at the very least, the merry-go-round gives purpose to faster mechs. But it makes it excessively hard on assaults who have to keep chasing the base roundabout (it SHOULD be hard on assaults, but not that hard). Making it about territory control, and not just capture points, would promote even more role warfare as well as discourage bunching further.

[Duncan Jr Fischer]

Rebas Kradd, on 07 October 2014 - 08:57 AM, said:

One of the original four pillars was "role warfare", and it featured a class of mech called "defense".

Even back then I couldn't imagine, what kind of 'defense' role is possible for a BT Mech? It was a very murky notion, no wonder it never saw the light. But it's a pity that the whole Role Warfare didn't see the light in whole.

Edited by Duncan Jr Fischer, 07 October 2014 - 09:42 AM.

[Alienized]

mining colony conquest.
0 points done and win.
so easy....enemy is spread all over and you can roll over them easily when you just push one point after another.

[Rebas Kradd]

Duncan Jr Fischer, on 07 October 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

Even back then I couldn't imagine, what kind of 'defense' role is possible for a BT Mech? It was a very murky notion, no wonder it never saw the light. But it's a pity that the whole Role Warfare didn't see the light in whole.

It does exist in rudimentary form.

Other than that, yeah, everyone just swallowed the four pillars as they were without asking "Umm, so what does that actually LOOK like on the battlefield? I don't see any way to implement that."

And then the tiny maps we started with made even more of it irrelevant. Information Warfare? Don't make me la---OH S*** THE ENEMY'S RIGHT THERE BLAM BLAM KERTHUNK BONK PEEWWWW DAKKA DAKKA PSSHHHZHZHZHZZHZHZ *you have been destroyed*.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 07 October 2014 - 09:58 AM.

[keith]

there is no bonus for u for capping a point. that is a design flaw, y as a player should i cap a point instead of killing? all u need is 3/5 to win then u go out kill maintain the 3 points and keep killing. if pgi wishes to make it a CTF like mode they need an perk for capping the points, XP cbills something.

[Duncan Jr Fischer]

Rebas Kradd, on 07 October 2014 - 09:57 AM, said:

It does exist in rudimentary form.

Other than that, yeah, everyone just swallowed the four pillars as they were without asking "Umm, so what does that actually LOOK like on the battlefield? I don't see any way to implement that."

And then the tiny maps we started with made even more of it irrelevant. Information Warfare? Don't make me la---OH S*** THE ENEMY'S RIGHT THERE BLAM BLAM KERTHUNK BONK PEEWWWW DAKKA DAKKA PSSHHHZHZHZHZZHZHZ *you have been destroyed*.

Yeah, Forest Colony, take that PPC or Gauss coming straight from one base to another, I remember that.. Information Warfare, my my.. Role Warfare is kind of a joke too. What we have is not too bad, but I wouldn't call it Role Warfare. All mechs even have the same pilot tree, mandatory pilot tree, and there is practically one role on the field - fighter - with a couple minor nuances. Oh, those pillars..