44 replies to this topic

[Bilbo]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 October 2014 - 09:47 AM, said:

Are you playing someone who is supposed to think for himself or a soldier (of fortune) with a CO who gave you an order to get the rocks first and foremost!


Usually! I have had a few awesome wins where in my Atlas I was part of a Ninja Cap! An Atlas Bilbo! Know how many times I have done that in some 6,000 matches?

I used to do it all the time. I don't intentionally play assault mode anymore though.

Edited by Bilbo, 09 October 2014 - 09:50 AM.

[wanderer]

I find if nobody shoots at me (cause they're DEAD), I can get the rocks faster. And get better paid, which means they like it that way!

[Joseph Mallan]

wanderer, on 09 October 2014 - 09:57 AM, said:

I find if nobody shoots at me (cause they're DEAD), I can get the rocks faster. And get better paid, which means they like it that way!

But you had to HAVE the rocks before the count down. If you spent the time killing you weren't getting the rocks. You didn't follow the orders given.
in order:
Collect rocks
Kill bad guys

Bilbo, on 09 October 2014 - 09:49 AM, said:

I used to do it all the time. I don't intentionally play assault mode anymore though.

You know me, I take what the game throws at me. As few restrictions as I can impose.

[MoonfireSpam]

Holy crap this is the kind of thread that makes devs probably not want to engage communities. Because anything they say gets twisted or taken as gospel by randoms and blows up into hyperbole. Grats to PGI for continuing anyway.

He didn't even really answer the question, he just said no PVE.

If people play conquest and decide not to cap points then well.....

[Scratx]

MoonfireSpam, on 09 October 2014 - 11:09 AM, said:

Holy crap this is the kind of thread that makes devs probably not want to engage communities. Because anything they say gets twisted or taken as gospel by randoms and blows up into hyperbole. Grats to PGI for continuing anyway.

He didn't even really answer the question, he just said no PVE.

If people play conquest and decide not to cap points then well.....

Paul seems to have misunderstood the question and steered the answer as "We're not doing PvE scenarios atm, we will revisit the idea after the new year", or just about.

[RussianWolf]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 October 2014 - 09:40 AM, said:

Conquest was supposed to be about the collecting more than teh fighting. Getting more resources was the goal. But players in their infinite wisdom chose the bloodbath over the skillful victory.

I thought Conquest was the first attempt to stop the full on base rushes that were happening in Assault. Matches where both teams went left and the quicker team won. Without EVER firing a shot.

Now at least you had to gather enough points from several locations to win, and you typically had to spread out a bit to prevent the other team from getting ahead. Thus causing SOME contact.

Now admittedly, it is easier to capture points once all the opposing force is dead and can't shoot you any longer.

"They don't like it when you shoot at them. I worked that out myself" - Cap. Malcolm Reynolds

Edited by RussianWolf, 09 October 2014 - 11:37 AM.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

Xarian, on 08 October 2014 - 08:27 PM, said:

[b][b]

Takeaway message: Any content that is not directly related to blowing up an enemy mech is not PVP content, and we aren't interested in changing Conquest/Assault to make capture attractive.

I am... not happy about this. By definition, any game mode which pits you against another player is PVP content; forcing all the game modes to be essentially identical just makes for a boring game.

Capture the Flag isnt a game mode?
I'm guessing you dont think CS bomb planting is PvP?

[Killstorm999999]

Why is there this myth going around that Skirmish is a no-brains slug fest? I would say the Skirmish requires more tactical acumen because there are no arbitrary squares that award you points. Instead you have to figure out the most tactically advantageous position on the map based on your team's current position and the enemies position, and there is no metric to tell you what the best place is other then your ability to kill the enemy. It's much more difficult to deal with that, then being told that this location or that location will allow you to win.

[Powder Puff Pew Pew]

OMG I seriously hope they are coming out with PVE content!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! XD I've been wanting that **** for ****** FOREVER!!!!!! It burns me so bad that they never considered this till now. Ive made posts bitching about the fact there was no campaign missions where a party of friends couldnt assault a very difficult base, airport, bunker instilation, some sort of defencive position or even scrambled in our own mech hangers at a base where we need to defend. This is what I want, pvp is so ******* BORRING Zzzzzzz seriously. I like pvp sometimes but when I want pve action, ill switch over to GUILD WARS 2 cuz they know how to actualy make a descent game. Its got a wide range of pve and pvp, or wvw.

Now for any1 whos going to reply to my post and say, well you realize you can just leave right? I'm here because I LOVE Mech Warrior. I had the very first mw, and wow it was bad lol. Totaly 2d but here we are 2014 and still having issues figuring out what people want even tho there is a HUGE range of interests in peoples likes. Every1s got their own view on things. I just simply want to drive my mech in an invironment for once where I dont got wait for a ****** COUNT DOWN for other players to get ready. NAILS ON CHALKBOARD!

[Killstorm999999]

Powder Puff Pew Pew, on 09 October 2014 - 12:47 PM, said:

OMG I seriously hope they are coming out with PVE content!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! XD I've been wanting that **** for ****** FOREVER!!!!!! It burns me so bad that they never considered this till now. Ive made posts bitching about the fact there was no campaign missions where a party of friends couldnt assault a very difficult base, airport, bunker instilation, some sort of defencive position or even scrambled in our own mech hangers at a base where we need to defend. This is what I want, pvp is so ******* BORRING Zzzzzzz seriously. I like pvp sometimes but when I want pve action, ill switch over to GUILD WARS 2 cuz they know how to actualy make a descent game. Its got a wide range of pve and pvp, or wvw.

Now for any1 whos going to reply to my post and say, well you realize you can just leave right? I'm here because I LOVE Mech Warrior. I had the very first mw, and wow it was bad lol. Totaly 2d but here we are 2014 and still having issues figuring out what people want even tho there is a HUGE range of interests in peoples likes. Every1s got their own view on things. I just simply want to drive my mech in an invironment for once where I dont got wait for a ****** COUNT DOWN for other players to get ready. NAILS ON CHALKBOARD!

Agreed, PvE content!! I just want to drive my mech around and blow stuff up without having to worry about constantly bringing my A game.

[Xarian]

Thorqemada, on 09 October 2014 - 09:49 AM, said:

I guess the OP would say that Soccer or Football is not PvP bcs they dont blow up...but the real term here is "Shoot em Up" which the Op mistakes with PvP.

Tldr: I wanna play a "Shoot em Up" and any other Dimension of PvP is to much for me!

You interpreted my post as exactly the opposite of its meaning. Go read it again: I was summarizing a post made by someone who isn't me.

[Asmudius Heng]

In a NO RESPAWN environment killing will always be the top priority.

Objectives therefore are should be optional and give in game bonuses to help kill or defend - so aiding the main objective.

OR

They should be there to influence the shape of the game. Conquest does this fairly well, assault does not as it is such a restrictive mode.

Objectives help shape the game and the more objectives tie back in with the main thrust of MWO which is shooting each other the more value objectives have.

Unless it is full on respawn where you die as many times as you need to complete an objective this is the way it will always go.

With AI elements this could actually add a huge amount of life to the game.

• capture points that give control of AI tanks and VTOL etc which either patrol an area, sit and defend, or even give the command access to send them places.
  
• Infantry that hide in buildings and come in swarms, try firing your gauss to kill a single guy when they are unloading SRMs on you - this is where some machine guns and small lasers would come in handy.
  
• Objectives that give you additional sensor coverage
  
• Objectives that grant the commander an arty strike every few minutes or an airfield that gives a bombing run etc
  
• Objectives that give control of turrets, and generators that can be killed to stop them
  
• Objectives that help you capture other objectives faster (some sort of command base or something)

There are so many ways in game objectives can aid the battle and not just be for end of game win conditions that would add a huge amount of immersion, role warfare and strategy. Do you send a lance to go capture the AI spawners as a distraction, or do you go in force to get them on your side for a push, or do you go and take all the sensor points and use them to help position and outflank etc

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

if PVE does make it in. One of the things that should be considered is handling it similar to how Chromehounds handled it.

You could take a group of 12 players into matches in Chromehounds against AI opponents. And you could even contest a region that way.

However, the points you would make, that would change that region, would be minimal, compaired to actually fighting it out against players for that region.

And that's how it should be handled. fighting against the AI should never give the same or better points than fighting humans. It should have a minimal impact. Perhaps useful for gaining c-bills though mercernary contracts or the like.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

meh the most disturbing thing is that Paul is back

J/K

XD

[Asmudius Heng]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 09 October 2014 - 02:50 PM, said:

meh the most disturbing thing is that Paul is back

J/K

XD

That was not really a joke right ... you meant every snark!!!

[Xeven]

They don't have any developers strong in AI is what I see.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Asmudius Heng, on 09 October 2014 - 02:53 PM, said:

That was not really a joke right ... you meant every snark!!!

no its a joke

[Dracol]

Xarian, on 08 October 2014 - 08:27 PM, said:

[b][b]

Takeaway message: Any content that is not directly related to blowing up an enemy mech is not PVP content, and we aren't interested in changing Conquest/Assault to make capture attractive.

I am... not happy about this. By definition, any game mode which pits you against another player is PVP content; forcing all the game modes to be essentially identical just makes for a boring game.

What I took away from it was that CW will still be focused on combat. There might be objectives, but only to help promote combat. PvP = combat. Standing in squares is not PvP, its people from different teams standing around. There would be no game mode in CW that doesn't put combat as the main attraction.

His line about PvE would be if one was interested in a mode that could be won by avoiding combat and completing an objective, CW is not the place for it, but PvE might see it. Example: Sneak into an enemy base, steal intel, sneak back to home base without being seen.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Powder Puff Pew Pew, on 09 October 2014 - 12:47 PM, said:

OMG I seriously hope they are coming out with PVE content!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! XD I've been wanting that **** for ****** FOREVER!!!!!! It burns me so bad that they never considered this till now. Ive made posts bitching about the fact there was no campaign missions where a party of friends couldnt assault a very difficult base, airport, bunker instilation, some sort of defencive position or even scrambled in our own mech hangers at a base where we need to defend. This is what I want, pvp is so ******* BORRING Zzzzzzz seriously. I like pvp sometimes but when I want pve action, ill switch over to GUILD WARS 2 cuz they know how to actualy make a descent game. Its got a wide range of pve and pvp, or wvw.

Now for any1 whos going to reply to my post and say, well you realize you can just leave right? I'm here because I LOVE Mech Warrior. I had the very first mw, and wow it was bad lol. Totaly 2d but here we are 2014 and still having issues figuring out what people want even tho there is a HUGE range of interests in peoples likes. Every1s got their own view on things. I just simply want to drive my mech in an invironment for once where I dont got wait for a ****** COUNT DOWN for other players to get ready. NAILS ON CHALKBOARD!

Basically my feelings, expressed in a more eccentric way lol.

I am kinda over PVP games. I played Planetside 2 for 2 years, over 100 combined Battle ranks there, had a good KD for awhile, it was fun, but between hit detect, design decisions and other stuff, its kinda boring now.

I played WoT for 4500 some battles, got to Tier 9 in the US line, had a 52% win rate, 1250 overall efficiency, did ok, but got tired of the nerfs here, nerfs there, russian bias, and atrocious playerbase.

MWO, its just WoT with mechs as our avatars......plus this game is poor in the performance dept.

I love mechs and I wanna like this game, but since its just WoT style TDms...meh....I wantz some PVE action as this game was initially described.

[KraftySOT]

Deltron Zero, on 09 October 2014 - 12:22 PM, said:

Why is there this myth going around that Skirmish is a no-brains slug fest? I would say the Skirmish requires more tactical acumen because there are no arbitrary squares that award you points. Instead you have to figure out the most tactically advantageous position on the map based on your team's current position and the enemies position, and there is no metric to tell you what the best place is other then your ability to kill the enemy. It's much more difficult to deal with that, then being told that this location or that location will allow you to win.

And thats totally still true in conquest...but theres also squares. Thus being more challenging.