42 replies to this topic

[JD R]

Gallowglas, on 08 October 2014 - 12:18 PM, said:

That said, I'm glad to no longer be forced into conquest as a unit of 10 players who explicitly unchecked that box. We saw far, far more conquest matches last night than I wanted.

Is your skill too less to play conquest?

Edited by JD R, 08 October 2014 - 12:21 PM.

[Gallowglas]

BTW...an easy solution going into CW would be to have a certain number of victories in each mode requisite to controlling a planet. There's a massive difference in perception when using a pull versus push strategy.

[Blackscreen]

Ph30nix, on 08 October 2014 - 11:33 AM, said:

they need to fix the game modes(conquest) before attempting to force people to play them.

If they fixed conquest they wouldn't have to force people to play it... Problem solved!

[Gallowglas]

JD R, on 08 October 2014 - 12:21 PM, said:

Is your skill too less to play conquest?

My skill is just fine. I just don't enjoy the mode. If they added a mode requiring me to play mini-games of Tetris to score a hit, I wouldn't enjoy that and it wouldn't have anything to do with skill there either.

[JD R]

Gallowglas, on 08 October 2014 - 12:26 PM, said:

I just don't enjoy the mode.

I see a fine skills means i can fight but i can not cap.... or have an eye on caps

[Foxfire]

Kibble, on 08 October 2014 - 12:05 PM, said:

Probably gonna get flamed for this but maybe the players getting matched up closer to their ELOs realised they weren't as good as the group they normally drop with made them think and then when getting into solo queues found out the hard way?

Just a thought.

Or more likely that people are continually dropping into modes they don't have fun in.

Personally I think that something needs to be done to assess and address the reasons people don't enjoy certain modes. A step in the right direction is to make it more appealing to win via the mode's main victory condition.

[Ultimax]

Conquest needs more than a node cap reduction.


To start with, that also makes it more of a light mech bumble bee fest,
while that might be appealing to some that's part of what some players don't like in the first place.


(What I don't like is the lack of command wheel/VOIP - because my conquest PUG teams all seem to be on location filming Derp Hard 2: Derp Harder!)




Capping a node should be more than about points on the scoreboard, there has to be a real tangible reason you want to risk splitting your force
and have some cap different nodes - right now it mostly means you often get rolled, hard.


Another issue is that the rewards can sometimes be worse, give them CBills and XP and they will come.




For all modes in general, another issue are mechs at the extreme ends of the weight spectrum.

It can often not be much fun to be a locust or commando in a Skirmish or Assault match dominated by Heavies and Assaults, but it's equally as unfun to pop into Conquest in a Dire Wolf or Atlas.


Those mechs need a function in ALL map modes, or you will always see some players hating some aspect of a particular mode.

[Josef Nader]

They do function quite well in all modes.

They might not be -optimal- in those modes, but they're more than functional. I've won plenty of Skirmishes in my Locusts, and I've won plenty of Conquests in my Atlai/Dire Wolves.

The problem is that people just aren't as good as they think they are, and when that gets revealed to them, they get really buttmad and start blaming it on everything but their own complete lack of flexibility and adaptability.

[Kibble]

Foxfire, on 08 October 2014 - 12:40 PM, said:

Or more likely that people are continually dropping into modes they don't have fun in.

Personally I think that something needs to be done to assess and address the reasons people don't enjoy certain modes. A step in the right direction is to make it more appealing to win via the mode's main victory condition.

I totally agree. All modes should be fun and everyone should be able to enjoy them however that will never be the case. We might as well plop mechwarriors on a couch and play Sigmund Freud if we are wanting to figure out the age old question of "why?".

The main victory condition in all game modes is to kill the other team and you just happen to have a side objectives in assault/conquest.

[LORD ORION]

Kibble, on 08 October 2014 - 12:05 PM, said:

Probably gonna get flamed for this but maybe the players getting matched up closer to their ELOs realised they weren't as good as the group they normally drop with made them think and then when getting into solo queues found out the hard way?

Just a thought.

No, the problem is you can lose large on ELO in matches you won outright because of caps and end up in the bad matches you are trying to avoid.

You know, you used tactics to crush the enemy, and because of it lost the match.

I play all matches, but I 100% understand why some people do not want to play conquest and I am with them all the way.

Edited by LORD ORION, 08 October 2014 - 12:52 PM.

[Gallowglas]

JD R, on 08 October 2014 - 12:38 PM, said:

I see a fine skills means i can fight but i can not cap.... or have an eye on caps

I don't really particularly care how you see it when you seem intent to be insulting. I have a 2.17 W/L ratio on conquest, which is modestly higher than the other two other modes. Similarly, my two best maps are Terra Therma and River City Night which are, incidentally, also my least favorite.

My relative ability to play something often has zero to do with my enjoyment of it.

Edited by Gallowglas, 08 October 2014 - 01:10 PM.

[JD R]

Gallowglas, on 08 October 2014 - 12:59 PM, said:

I don't really care how you see it, particularly when you seem intent to be insulting. I have a 2.17 W/L ratio on conquest, which is modestly higher than the other two other modes. My relative ability to play that mode has zero to do with my enjoyment of it.

Ok but my W/L is close to 6*10²³ so haha i'm better at conquest. Numbers dont say anything.

At least because of Teamdrops W/L says nothing on your own skill.

You dont want to play a game you want just a MWO COD and kill kill kill....

[KamikazeRat]

Russ Bullock, on 08 October 2014 - 11:28 AM, said:

Sometimes we can leave a feature in the game even if the player base is split 50/50 on the subject. But if that feature is something that has been in the game for upwards of a year, I need a much larger majority of support than that.

We are going to have to find another way.

switch it back on for a weekend for group queue only. see what happens

[Coolant]

Haakon Magnusson, on 08 October 2014 - 11:50 AM, said:

I used to play all modes, but now, I'm out of skirmish, conquest is enough to level new mechs.
I'll take my choice out of skirmish fukkers

I heard there is a new Need for Speed out....

[zagibu]

LORD ORION, on 08 October 2014 - 12:52 PM, said:

No, the problem is you can lose large on ELO in matches you won outright because of caps and end up in the bad matches you are trying to avoid.

You know, you used tactics to crush the enemy, and because of it lost the match.

I play all matches, but I 100% understand why some people do not want to play conquest and I am with them all the way.

So you think using the wrong tactics should be rewarded? Why exactly? Conquest is not about crushing the enemy, it's about conquering terrain.

[Coolant]

JD R, on 08 October 2014 - 12:21 PM, said:

Is your skill too less to play conquest?

yes, i can't vroom vroom like you can....i can however use my weapons...

[Chrithu]

RG Notch, on 08 October 2014 - 11:30 AM, said:

Can't all the folks who liked it like this just pick any for modes and not be bothered? It seems like some folks just want to force other people to play the way they want. This would seem to be the way that causes the least friction.

That actually arises a question I'd like to pass on to Russ for possibly getting an answer from the PGI Matchmaker mastermind:

Would simply keeping all gamemodes selected result in a similar improvement as the voting system, if enough players do it?

Edited by Jason Parker, 08 October 2014 - 01:26 PM.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Screech, on 08 October 2014 - 11:47 AM, said:

To people who don't like skirmish or assault what would be needed to fix it?

Skirmish
The last person left alive on a team often runs into a corner, shuts down & disconnects. Or they spend the remaining time in full retreat. There's no base to cap (assault) and no cap points (conquest). Its not uncommon for everyone to wait 5+ minutes for the timer to run down.

Assault
In worst cases, your entire team will run into a corner and camp. Minutes will pass while everyone base camps. If you try to spot targets, snipe from a distance or scout, you'll be the only one doing anything to advance your team's cause. You'll get zero support. Or, your team will rush the enemy base (while the other team is sitting on it) and commit suicide.

.

I think most agree capping being faster on conquest could be a step in the right direction.

But who can really say what the effects will be. I thought disabling votes in game modes would result in more balanced games. In reality, it seemed to have the opposite effects.

[Chrithu]

Jason Parker, on 08 October 2014 - 01:25 PM, said:

That actually arises a question I'd like to pass on to Russ for possibly getting an answer from the PGI Matchmaker mastermind:

Would simply keeping all gamemodes selected result in a similar improvement as the voting system, if enough players do it?

Sorry to bump this but I'd really be interested in the answer to this question. Since if that get's confirmed I will just switch on all gamemodes in no time and stay happy with the faster match search and better team balance in the solo queue.

[psihius]

I didn't see much of a difference, what I see is that lights and mediums are very low % wise and we got matches with 4-5 DW or other assaults on the matches (but mostly the DW) and that amplified the bad matches a lot.