55 replies to this topic

[Livewyr]

Ok- first: This is planned to be part one of a series, querying the player base (which uses the forums) about what they think is wrong with the Game modes.

I have my own opinions about what is wrong with conquest as a game mode, but I do not want to plant ideas in peoples' heads so I will not post them here. (Yet)

Please, only actual mechanical issues.. if you post something stupid like "it sux" or "PGI screwed it up" I will likely dismiss you for being juvenile and unhelpful.

So. Go forth and bring flaws to light. (Let us try to defy GD trend and make this a constructive conversation.. the now more approachable Russ may be able to read the Readers' Digest version the flaws brought forth.)



-------------------------------------------------------------
[EDIT]
Ok: After 3 pages, and being relegated to page 2 with inactivity, time to classify the issues!

Capture Mechanic:
-TOO LONG (All caps, because it was in just about every post somewhere)
-Too boring.
--Standing in square = boring
--Kills immersion


Capture Locations:
-Maps too small
--Locations too close together
-Poor cap locations (locations)
--Exposed (sitting in a square in the open)
-Maps too big
--Assault mechs left behind
-Too many cap locations
--Too spread out (assaults)
--Too close together (small maps)

Win Condition:
-Points requirement too high
-Points requirement too low
-Can win by playing Skirmish
--Takes less time
---Less Rewards (efficiency punished)
-Resources collected at flat rate
--No sense of priorities

Rewards:
-Reward for capping one time, not for recapture.
-Reward for time and effort commitment insufficient.
--Rewards made significantly faster in combat.

Strategy:
-Mechanics too loose
-Combat Avoidance*
--Playing without fighting
-Confused and Disorganized combat*
--Everyone going everywhere, no cohesion = no strategy
-No respawn
--No way to take advantage of new information
--Short game
---Less rewards
-No Tangible Reward or Reason to cap
--How does capping help the fight?


Immersion:
-Capture Location Logic Flaws (drills in established runways)
-Win condition logic flaw (people just stopping..because)


Misc:
-Griefers (shutdown mechs)*


------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, I have categorized them a little bit. (some things were extra sub-reasons for larger things being problems so they were put as sub-reasons to the point over them) And, going to add my own. (Everyone covered all of mine except "Tangible rewards")

I have commentary for all, disagreements for some (but I copied them down to remain objective) I will address them IN A NEW THREAD where we can discuss how to fix them, when I can. (I purposely ignored suggested fixes in this thread as they were not the target information)


[ONE MORE EDIT: I am impressed at the LACK of venom in this thread, I thank you all, this has been a remarkable experience. Except you, Appogee You DIAF. ]

Edited by Livewyr, 09 October 2014 - 04:50 AM.

[Glaive-]

The only actual "flaw" that I can think of is that it takes too long to capture points, though there are also some upsides to having a long cap duration, IMO.

I would guess most people just find capping points to be tedious.

[ApolloKaras]

I think the most glaring problem is how long you have to sit on the cap to turn it. As a light mech pilot sitting on that cap for 3 minutes... Its not fun at all. Also paired with most of the maps being too small to really worry about the cap it really is pointless to devote 3 minutes to decap- cap out a point :|

[Appogee]

I keep running into teams who have obviously built specialised drop decks specifically to win Conquest only.

In addition:

• it takes too long to cap points
  
• too many games turn into frustrating "can't find the last invisible/shutdown Spider"
  
• most PUG teams play it like it's team death match anyway, making capping pointless
  
• some of the cap points are silly (eg. drill rigs in the middle of runways, or that don't extend through the top deck on Crimson)
  
• some maps (River City) are too small to make it worth capping anything

Oh, and also it sux and PGI screwed it up

Edited by Appogee, 08 October 2014 - 12:35 PM.

[EvilCow]

I am one of those who never play it, I usually enable assault and skirmish.

My opinion is that it fails at what it should be, most games just finish because enemy team destruction.

Those who played TC in MWLL probably will understand my position, conquest would require a similar approach in order to better differentiate it from the other two modes. As I already suggested in another thread I would limit it to large maps and add the new Dropship Mode.

Edited by EvilCow, 08 October 2014 - 12:32 PM.

[Deathlike]

I wrote a thread on it just moments ago (not specifically Conquest though), so I'll keep it brief.

1) Rewards - worse than Assault/Skirmish. Getting 10k-20k less than the other modes translates to less time wanting to spend in Conquest.

2) Cap times - self explanatory. it's waaaaay too long, even with multiple players capping the same point. The size of the map should dictate the speed, but that's asking for too much apparently.

3) "Skirmish" with "special locations" - also self explanatory. It's easier to play it like Skirmish and attack those cap points without much mercy.

Edited by Deathlike, 08 October 2014 - 12:33 PM.

[Training Instructor]

It takes too long to turn a point. Once upon a time, a dedicated light team could turn the tide early, and make people break their death blob to respond to points before they steamrolled 7 of the mechs on your team.

Of course, back then lights would actually fight each other over points, whereas now that's mostly a lost art amongst all the l33t backstabbing lights who complain that it's a waste of time to fight other lights, while also complaining that it's too easy for bigger mechs to cripple them.

[Supah]

The biggest thing is the time it takes to capture a node (too slow) vs the points gained for having a node (too high) relative to each other. If you tweak that, I think the game mode should be pretty decent. Maybe even weight capture points differently and give some higher tactical advantage (but lower points) and more difficult to defend positions (but higher points given). Or maybe even make it easier to capture points the less mechs the opponent has.

The big complaint I see from most people, though, is that "baww, it's not kill them all DM." The game is way too slow in the tactical side of it. Standing around a ridge, lobbing missiles, potshots, etc. As it stands, there is almost no difference between the other two modes. Balancing the aspect of pace of the other matches with Conquest is probably the second most important thing. It's just not efficient to play for XP or CBills or anything.

[Pkunk]

Assaults are kinda useless on conquest.. I'm very curious how a competetive conquest would look. I think both team would load up on mediums and fast heavies, perhaps some lights, but leave assault since they're kinda useless.

Also conquest induces unnatural combat tactics.. it's just weird..

[Rebas Kradd]

PROS: Encourages speed, promotes situational awareness, has room for role warfare.

CONS: Standing on a square is uninteresting and dull, merry-go-round mentality isn't enjoyable to everyone, missed other opportunities, paltry rewards, excessive cap times.

Make it about territory control. Score the teams by how many grid squares their team owns, forcing battle lines to develop and mechs to spread out and defend territory.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 08 October 2014 - 01:50 PM.

[Zepster]

There is only one thing mechanic wise and that's how long it takes to capture a point.

The MAJOR flaw is it has no place in MW and if people don't want to play it they shouldn't be forced to with the new MM changes...

[BARBAR0SSA]

1)It doesn't feel like an MW game mode, you're just getting points and you stop at a point and go home? I'd rather see it more of a your team has to "hack" a factory to get "big guns" to own a tactical base with other side objectives that can improve your chances and that you'd want your lights/mediums to go after.

2)People just running around completely avoiding combat...unacceptable. 1 central objective problem solved there as well

3) I find it's pretty much a game mode for bad pilots to play an ECM spider and hide to just piss off people by wasting time, it's troll mode a portion of the time.

[Odins Fist]

Because Standing in a square and counting down a timer, and up with points shouldn't stop anything...??

I digress..
I mean hey, if an eight point Whitetail Deer stood in my small Bait Pile long enough to eat all the apples does that mean he gets a pass and wins..?? Nope it means he gets a 150-gr nosler partition .308 through his heart.

I understand it's a Video Game no biggy, but to some people think a ticker that adds points shouldn't mean Victory.
They may see it this way, how is a standing in a square when the enemy still has Mechs on the field that can blast the last Light mech to pieces constitute a win..??

Same logic was applied to Assault Cap.

I guess some players DECIDED that they didn't want to be in that position, so they CHOOSE not to join a Conquest match.
I always thought the name Conquest was completely wrong for that game-mode, but whatever.

Oh well... The Customer is always right..??

[WM Jeri]

For me it starts out as this

• I do not control what non team members bring so in terms of balance for the match its an unknown and PUGS...builds well leave me wondering.
  
• The communication aspect of no VOIP with folks not in my group make communication difficult, I really dont like trying to type when I am shooting or running and what not.
  
• This leads to gameplay that can be akin to herding cats...its really futile if you never tried it.
  
• My experience with the game mode has been one of an uncontrolled degenerate brawl of mass confusion which I don't enjoy.
  
• Spawn points and capture points on certain maps due to size further just turn it into something other than what the mode is supposed to be so I would rather just play that.
  
• My history plays out it is the most ineffecient mode for C-bills per hour for me which allows me to derive more stuff contribute more $$ to my unit and fund my mech endeavors so I don't like it.

There are a few more but these are my main points for this

[Roland]

I want to kill giant robots. I do not want to stand in circles.

I want to be able to freely use all of the terrain to my advantage to gain a positional advantage over my opponent, in order to kill them.

[Alistair Winter]

It's been said already, but it bears repeating. The "stand on a square for two minutes"-minigame is what made me quit Conquest. It used to be my favourite game mode, because you could never predict where the engagements would take place. As opposed to assault / skirmish.

With the dramatically increased cap times, the tactic most of the time is just to kill the enemy and not worry too much about capping unless they get 4 or 5 bases for a long period of time. Which brings us back to predictable engagements as both teams just rush the good positions for a regular 10 vs 10 battle, with 2 light mechs capping on both sides.

And as a light mech pilot, I get yelled at by the 10 other players on my team in Timber Wolves and Dire Wolves, because light mechs are supposed to cap and the big boys are the ones who get to fight.

Screw that.

[Farix]

• Reduce to 3 cap points
  
• Allow infinite respawns from a dropship of 4 pre-selected mechs (no ability to change configurations or modules in the middle of a match)
  
• Speed up cap time dramatically (it should take less than minute without a cap accelerator)
  
• Game ends when one team gets the required 750 resource points. May even increase the points more to make the game last longer.

Edited by Farix, 08 October 2014 - 12:57 PM.

[EvilCow]

Or:

- Reduce to one central cap point on smaller maps.
- Call it "king of the hill".

Lots of fun.

[Joe Mallad]

Here is my idea. Make conquest an attack/defend mode. Instead of both sides rushing to capture Cap points, what if one side is the defender and one the attacker?

There is 1 base a few resource mining platforms and maybe a mech factory or something like that that needs to be defended. The attacking team starts at one side of the map with no base and has to take at least 75% of the map objectives or 50% of the objectives and destroy the defending force.

While the defending force has to outright eliminate the attacking force or defend so many objectives for a period of time to win.

This allows for all mech types to have a role in the game. Lights and fast mediums scout for objectives and take what they can. The slower mediums cans support the heavies and Assaults as either the main fighting force or hold "this point" after the lights and fast mediums have moved on to the next objective. And most of all, it still allows those that want to only brawl, a reason to still bring the heavies and Assaults as they are always needed in any fight.

Farix, on 08 October 2014 - 12:53 PM, said:

• Reduce to 3 cap points
  
• Allow infinite respawns from a dropship of 4 pre-selected mechs (no ability to change configurations or modules in the middle of a match)
  
• Speed up cap time dramatically (it should take less than minute without a cap accelerator)
  
• Game ends when one team gets the required 750 resource points. May even increase the points more to make the game last longer.

you realize what you discribe a is more or less already what we are getting in Drop Ship mode?

[Farix]

Conquest is a variation of Domination and should remain so (just as Assault is CTF and Skirmish is TDM). However, there is plenty of room for to improve this variant of Domination.