83 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Mr Beefy, on 19 October 2014 - 01:27 PM, said:

No, that is not my logic at all. Some how I don't think there will be any shortage of C-bills if a team decides they are at a point they can afford to take the base. Battles in Assault mode many times either, comes to you to protect their base, or has mostly already happened and they can chose to leave one or two mechs on the enemy team as Zombies. Rewards seem good either way on c-bills and xp and I believe its more. It might be worth less if both teams decide to take the base and by off chance one side goes right and one goes completely left. In the games I have played, this doesn't happen as much as the other two.

I could care less about rage quitters, as long as they are not in a drop when they do it, of course unless they are toxic and or a team killer. I think guys that team kill and or leg golden mechs on their own team are really big tools ;-)

I'm not sure you've ever done the math on how much you get for capping a base.

+0 C-bills, +75 XP for cap win, +50 XP for cap assist (this means, just touching the base briefly when everyone is trying to cap it out).

Capping a base is a financial disincentive in MWO. If you cap a base after killing most mechs, you're probably fine. If you cap a base after killing close to NOTHING, you get the bare minimum in rewards.

Edit:
Let me remind you of the event's reward system for Assault:
Cap Win = 20 pts (unlikely scenario)
Kill Everything = 10 pts (most likely scenario)
Draw = 5 pts (irrelevant statistically)

Logically, why would you want to do the objective, if you can't gain enough money in the matches to afford the discounted mechs?

Edited by Deathlike, 19 October 2014 - 01:35 PM.

[Mr Beefy]

Death,

You have valid points about the lack of rewards to do such things in game. I think the whole system of earnings is low, and needs a 30% boost min. This post was never about that, even though the valid points everyone has brought up about the lack of rewards for a game mode is true. The fact that they are true doesn't justify the examples of play choices some players are making. The reason for the post was simple, and I think its pretty clear.

I don't have PT right now, and I am making around $100,000 a match average. Do I wish it was more and do I feel it needs to be, sure. I have the game modes checked that will not only help me with the c-bill earnings, but when I am able and our team is able, completing the primary objective is the goal on any of the game modes play. The rest is secondary to me. Will it stop me from getting all those Storm crows coming on sale for C-bills....nope it won't. Does it mean I will have to get better as a pilot until PGI changes things with the rewards/econ, yep it sure does. Or I could be a tool and just kill every mech I see when I could achieve the Primary goal...Hmmmmm the right choice seems obvious to me.

Edited by Mr Beefy, 19 October 2014 - 01:54 PM.

[Lykaon]

Mr Beefy, on 17 October 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:

I understand your points, really I do, and I agree with you that there are several short comings on the maps, modes of play, rewards etc. etc. However, many matches I have played tonight, we have had a clear choice of taking the caps, or the base, for 20 points instead of 10, with out risking the win and many players seemed to only care about their K/D ratio. That is my point, we are given a option to not make it a death match per say, and have the chance to use the tactics PGI put forth to gain more than what we would if we just kill em all....Yet many players don't care. How can PGI's design flaws be the problem in these games if we the players don't take advantage of what they put forth for us to get by winning a certain way?

People are inherently well...lazy.It's just easier to mash alpha strikes at robots until they are all dead than to carefully calculate the best means to increase a score that is essentially heavily weighted to rewarding players who shoot as often as possible at as many enemy mechs as possible.

Eventually this routine becomes an automated function.Zombie pilots doing the things that are always rewarded instead of thinking on how to optimize the rewards.

I wouldn't be to concerned about it though it is not very likely that the general theme of shoot as often as possible and hit as many as possible will change.I would venture that the majority of players prefer this simplistic approach to rewards rather than have to think about what the best course of action is to win.

If it's always blast the enemy mechs indiscriminatley then it's always a simple path to follow.Less thinking less effort more repetative.This is best for lazy humans.

Edited by Lykaon, 19 October 2014 - 02:20 PM.

[Mr Beefy]

Lykaon, on 19 October 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:

People are inherently well...lazy.It's just easier to mash alpha strikes at robots until they are all dead than to carefully calculate the best means to increase a score that is essentially heavily weighted to rewarding players who shoot as often as possible at as many enemy mechs as possible.

Eventually this routine becomes an automated function.Zombie pilots doing the things that are always rewarded instead of thinking on how to optimize the rewards.

I wouldn't be to concerned about it though it is not very likely that the general theme of shoot as often as possible and hit as many as possible will change.I would venture that the majority of players prefer this simplistic approach to rewards rather than have to think about what the best course of action is to win.

If it's always blast the enemy mechs indiscriminatley then it's always a simple path to follow.Less thinking less effort more repetative.This is best for lazy humans.

So Gatoraid is good because it has electrolites? Yes, I see

[Dazzer]

Well they put the offer on in the middle of the month, like a lot of people I am flat broke till payday which is two weeks away.

If they want to do a 'reduces price on X' comp they should do it in the last or 1st week of the month when folks are about to or have just been paid.

[Lily from animove]

Issue is still the rewards, 20 points for caping 750 ressources, 10 for team destruction. But what is the average time for gathering 750 ressources vs deathmatch ending? It's not very efficient.

I am quite sure we cna get this modes better once CW is out and they have some ressources free, because without IGP the understanding of "when it not makes money its pointless" is gone and so PGI may have some interset and ressources for doing this.

[Mr Beefy]

Lily from animove, on 20 October 2014 - 02:59 AM, said:

Issue is still the rewards, 20 points for caping 750 ressources, 10 for team destruction. But what is the average time for gathering 750 ressources vs deathmatch ending? It's not very efficient.

I am quite sure we cna get this modes better once CW is out and they have some ressources free, because without IGP the understanding of "when it not makes money its pointless" is gone and so PGI may have some interset and ressources for doing this.

This is a valid point also..... and I agree with you, given the crazy long cap times it takes to cap a point in conquest mode. Once again though, My Beef is not with lets get it over with when in Conquest to get to the next match, but if players feel this way, why not just check off conquest, after all they got their choice back and would get 15 points in a death match mode for the win. As I have explained several times, it is the ones that we have in the bag for sure, we have already taken the time or can get the primary objective in the match, and these tools end the match only to ensure we do not get the max points.

If these players are so intent on not only not trying to get the max points in a match by completing the Primary objective of the match mode they picked, but to ruin the chance when we have it in the bag on purpose..... how the hell is CW gonna play out? lol

Many of the responses to this post just claim, but wait, there are problems with the game modes and that is why they do it. Well I look at this BS excuse the same as all the cry baby rage droppers that exited out of matches when PGI first changed the MM to try and make it a better system, more even matches. They cried, stomped their feet, laid down and kicked their legs up in the air, rage quit any match they didn't wanna play in, and they got their choice back, and still the same old BS from these, I want it my way only players, or I Quit! If this doesn't change, nothing PGI does design wise will ever matter to these types... and from what I have seen in solo drops, their are more of them then players that try to complete the primary objectives of a given match.

Play the matches you want to play, but try to at the very least follow the primary objectives of the matches you pick to play..... my god, you got your choice back. If they kept the MM the way it was after the change and said screw you players that want to choose, I would completely understand everyone that has said, "but wait, there are serious things that need to be changed about the rewards, objectives, etc. etc..."

Edited by Mr Beefy, 20 October 2014 - 03:30 AM.

[Mr Beefy]

Dazzer, on 19 October 2014 - 02:26 PM, said:

Well they put the offer on in the middle of the month, like a lot of people I am flat broke till payday which is two weeks away.

If they want to do a 'reduces price on X' comp they should do it in the last or 1st week of the month when folks are about to or have just been paid.

This is not a legit excuse to not pick a match you like to play, and try to get the max points by completing the primary objectives. If you are gonna take the time to play, make it count, not excuses.

[Joseph Mallan]

I did my part, I helped get the savings from 25% to 30%. I am not buying a Stormcrow... Well maybe for my Clanner Account, but I don't need more than the 14 bays I already have. Also I did my part by killing or wounding a bunch of you guys, Heck I even challenged myself and did it from my Phract and Jager (More Phract than Jager).

I had fun, I won, I lost, I killed and was killed. It was fun!

[Tombstoner]

Action Mac, on 17 October 2014 - 05:04 PM, said:

The lack of real objectives in conquest and assault are the problem imo, conquest should be about controlling the map not just a few squares and assault would be better if it was one team defending a base while the other tries to take it. Just my thoughts on the matter no doubt there are more ideas out there.

Best way to control the map is to "crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of de women".

[Lily from animove]

Mr Beefy, on 20 October 2014 - 03:25 AM, said:

This is a valid point also..... and I agree with you, given the crazy long cap times it takes to cap a point in conquest mode. Once again though, My Beef is not with lets get it over with when in Conquest to get to the next match, but if players feel this way, why not just check off conquest, after all they got their choice back and would get 15 points in a death match mode for the win. As I have explained several times, it is the ones that we have in the bag for sure, we have already taken the time or can get the primary objective in the match, and these tools end the match only to ensure we do not get the max points.

If these players are so intent on not only not trying to get the max points in a match by completing the Primary objective of the match mode they picked, but to ruin the chance when we have it in the bag on purpose..... how the hell is CW gonna play out? lol

Many of the responses to this post just claim, but wait, there are problems with the game modes and that is why they do it. Well I look at this BS excuse the same as all the cry baby rage droppers that exited out of matches when PGI first changed the MM to try and make it a better system, more even matches. They cried, stomped their feet, laid down and kicked their legs up in the air, rage quit any match they didn't wanna play in, and they got their choice back, and still the same old BS from these, I want it my way only players, or I Quit! If this doesn't change, nothing PGI does design wise will ever matter to these types... and from what I have seen in solo drops, their are more of them then players that try to complete the primary objectives of a given match.

Play the matches you want to play, but try to at the very least follow the primary objectives of the matches you pick to play..... my god, you got your choice back. If they kept the MM the way it was after the change and said screw you players that want to choose, I would completely understand everyone that has said, "but wait, there are serious things that need to be changed about the rewards, objectives, etc. etc..."

thats the point, CW may be just a big giant mechzerg. with probably a light troll hiding in all his 4 light chassis across the entire map if hes going to lose. If hes the defender, this won't work, the othes cna do the main objective. If hes attacker, god he could probably annoy a load of people. At leats a valid retreat should be allowed, like going home to the dropship and eiting the game without getting a kill counted (to prevent people form hiding for their k/d). Because if you are hopeless lost, you try to retreat.

[Mr Beefy]

Tombstoner, on 20 October 2014 - 03:56 AM, said:

Best way to control the map is to "crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of de women".

True, true....but what better way to spank the enemy team and help increase bigger winnings/savings then maxing out the points you get by completing the primary objective of a given match mode. To me this is the biggest challenge and what makes gaming fun! Death has said that taking a base can be hard to do and most of the time it fails.... well it is the primary goal of assault mode, and I play to complete primary goals 100% of the time if it can be completed, as should every pilot on a team, regardless of pug match or group. To the players saying this is just a death match game, you are making it this way with your actions. PGI doesn't force you to not complete the primary objectives, and to claim that they do is BS. Could they reward you more for doing so...sure they could. They could also choose to give no reward if you fail to complete a primary objective in a given match mode.

How we play every match, is all on us, its that simple.

[Cygone]

Because shooting 'Mechs is a lot more fun that standing in 1 / 5 squares!!!!!!!

[Killstorm999999]

Mr Beefy, on 17 October 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:

I understand your points, really I do, and I agree with you that there are several short comings on the maps, modes of play, rewards etc. etc. However, many matches I have played tonight, we have had a clear choice of taking the caps, or the base, for 20 points instead of 10, with out risking the win and many players seemed to only care about their K/D ratio. That is my point, we are given a option to not make it a death match per say, and have the chance to use the tactics PGI put forth to gain more than what we would if we just kill em all....Yet many players don't care. How can PGI's design flaws be the problem in these games if we the players don't take advantage of what they put forth for us to get by winning a certain way?

You said so yourself that a lot of players will not be motivated because they already have plenty of mech bays or they already have mechs.

Additionally, there is a disconnect between achieving the primary objective and the reward. An individual player feels like their extra 10 point contribution is not enough to justify passing up the opportunity for additional kills. The prospect for an extra kill is far more tantalizing then a miniscule contribution to a sale.

[Mr Beefy]

Deltron Zero, on 20 October 2014 - 04:55 AM, said:

You said so yourself that a lot of players will not be motivated because they already have plenty of mech bays or they already have mechs.

Additionally, there is a disconnect between achieving the primary objective and the reward. An individual player feels like their extra 10 point contribution is not enough to justify passing up the opportunity for additional kills. The prospect for an extra kill is far more tantalizing then a miniscule contribution to a sale.

Yes I did say that some players are not being offered any more motivation to do the primary objectives of the game mode they choose, or have a choice of playing. This really is a mute point, because if they care about this game, or any game for that matter they play, why waste others time that do pick a game mode, that are willing to play to get the max points for the primary objective for that match mode picked by the player. As said before, they have the choice to play the match mode they want to play, why be a tool and pick match modes that do not fit their preference in game play style? Every game they drop in a mode they will not try for the primary objective and if they are able to help obtain it, they are taking away everyone's choice that picked the match mode.

You guys really can't have it both ways, and the continued arguments defending the reason's why they do it went out the door when PGI gave into all the cry baby rage quitters that dropped from matches simply because their choice got taken away. If this is how the bulk of our player base chooses to play the game, and it is our choice on both levels as pilot. There is no chance in hell of them ever wanting to listen to us in any forums regarding game development. Why would they listen, we are the problem if this is how we choose to play, acting like complete tools.

[Killstorm999999]

Scratx, on 19 October 2014 - 11:54 AM, said:

Tell that to the guys who finished off a lamed Centurion in River City Conquest mode..... when we owned all the bases and were at 743 f'ing points.

Yep. Sure win, and they still flippin' went for the kill.


No wonder matches play like deathmatch. Too many people don't care about the match objective even if a reward is dangled under their nose and the match is all but won already.

This doesn't make any damned sense though. In the 'real world' if this happened, I think the primary objective will still have been considered accomplished, because you will get the required resources in literally 3 seconds. It's not like your commanding officer is going to say, "Ok, pack it up. The enemy is dead so we gotta get the hell outta here." More likely it will be the opposite. The enemy is completely wiped out so you can harvest even more resources.

It's counter intuitive for the guy to not finish off the lamed centurion, because destroying the enemy is what would make completing the primary objective considerably easier.

My point is that Conquest and Assault have artificial and unrealistic win conditions. If I can wipe out the enemy team, then it's much easier to waltz on over to the base and capture it, or capture all the resource points, but the rules of the game modes do not allow for that very sensible course of action.

Edited by Deltron Zero, 20 October 2014 - 05:19 AM.

[Mr Beefy]

Deltron Zero, on 20 October 2014 - 05:12 AM, said:

This doesn't make any damned sense though. In the 'real world' if this happened, I think the primary objective will still have been considered accomplished, because you will get the required resources in literally 3 seconds. It's not like your commanding officer is going to say, "Ok, pack it up. The enemy is dead so we gotta get the hell outta here." More likely it will be the opposite. The enemy is completely wiped out so you can harvest even more resources.

It's counter intuitive for the guy to not finish off the lamed centurion, because destroying the enemy is what would make completing the primary objective considerably easier. In both Conquest and Assault, destroying the enemy team should guarantee completion of the primary objective, but this would of course defeat the purpose of having those objectives as both games would just become Skirmish. Instead, destroying the enemy team should be primary objective of every game mode, but if you have captured the enemy base or resource points before the games ends, and you win, you will get more rewards.

Step back from your keyboard, and read your post again.....

Do you not fully understand the argument you are making, makes 0 sense. Your argument is simply one that justifies, and tries to justify all the players who choose to drop into a match mode that have no desire or intention of trying to play the match to the rules and rewards for meeting the primary goal set forth by PGI for that match mode. Instead, your argument made by you and others, is stating, you believe that you should be able to set the primary objectives and play your style or belief of what they should be for the primary objective. The problem is and why there is no justification for your and others argument or actions are very simple,

1. You can pick a single match mode that fits what you and other so long for, KILL EM ALL! Best part is, if you are an adult and pick this mode of match game, this weekend you get 15 points instead of dropping in a match where your made up style and desired style of match play gets you only 10 points for completing your desired play style of "kill em all boys!" Or some players can be a child about it, even after the fact of PGI listened to us giving us our choice back.

If some of the players here keep making this a DEATH MATCH only game by there fantasies of what each drop they play should be and are unwilling to try to play the match mode to the primary objectives set by the game mode.... PGI should just say screw you guys and if the MM changes helped to bring more even matches after the change, bring it back! Some of you guys are going to play the way you want regardless what the primary objectives are in a game mode and this weekend only goes to show this is a fact. No one really wins with players that act this way, PGI doesn't win, because no matter what they do to please players that act this way, it won't work. It's like they have a void in them and nothing will fill it, and when there blood lust for "killing em all" gets boring, they dog the game and complain about how its all the game is.

Your teammates you drop with don't win either, sure they get the win counted on the W/L score board, but given that they have dropped and are trying to get the rewards of completing the primary objective of the given match mode they picked if they are able to do so with out loosing the matches secondary goals, this really isn't a win in my book. If PGI adds a single player, chances are if we all played with fantasy mindset of doing what ever the hell we want in the game, ignoring the primary mission goals, we would have to start over or get next to nothing for our time trying to play the mission.

Some have brought up how hard it is to take the base, or to cap out on conquest, well that is apart of the fun and the challenge. You win some, or you loose some, that is what makes it fun. Or instead we can just make every match a endless "kill em all" mode and be done with it, instead of using the choice by tickin that little box and mode you all seem to desire so much and cried about when it was taken from you. You demanded that PGI not take your choice from you..... so please don't take ours from us.

Edited by Mr Beefy, 20 October 2014 - 05:56 AM.

[Gattsus]

Mister D, on 17 October 2014 - 06:30 PM, said:

Its been like that since the Clan mechs came.
Seriously.

With all that firepower came alot of bravado, and rambo tactics seemed to win out over playing smart, popping out and doing snap shots, 1 or 2 mechs completely dead stopping an enemy flank with a couple LL's and AC2's.

Rambo rushing into the entire enemy force by yourself was typically frowned upon, and often did not reward you but rather punish you harsly.

Theses clan mechs with their XL survivability + maximum firepower just lets people get away with it, the pilots know they can now survive a fast assault and do some serious damage with often much less risk than the old IS XL highspeed builds allowed for.

Since the clans, the game has transitioned into "HIT THE GAS, AND KICK SOME ASS!"

Previously the only games that stupid rambo rushing tactic allowed success was when the LORDS all sync dropped into their Poptart CTF-3d's and Vtr-9B/DS and bunnyhopped their way as fast as they could with the PPCx2/AC5x2 meta.

Back in the day, XL didn't allow for such high speed and firepower without cost, aiming well meant it was easy to knock out a single side torso for a kill, keeping the balance and forcing players to play smart to protect their weak spots.

IMO, clanmechs are dumbing down players, and allowing for just full out rambo rushing just mashing the W key and the firebutton, because they can get away with it, often with much more success than trying to play smart.

This has trickled down into every game mode, because its much easier now to just kill and wipe out the enemy than even bother playing for the objectives.

On a daily basis, objectives mostly get ignored in favor of just circle jerking around the middle of the map in a fast murderfest.

2 things to blame for this.
1. Map layouts are almost entirely king of the hill, or circular in nature, reinforcing the "racecar" tactics that is popular.
2. Clan Xl survivability + maximum firepower + much higher average speeeds for much less risk than the IS-XL balance mechanic.

People complain that this game has become just a "fps death match"?
Its absolutely right, because since the clans, that is exactly what it has become.

we went from poptart action to fps deathmatch

[Nicholas Carlyle]

The modes are boring, flat and unimaginative. It has nothing to do with rewards.

Take rewards out of the equation for a second.

Is it FUN to go stand on some little square? Is it fun to stand on 1-5 little squares? Is it fun knowing the squares are exactly in the same place every time?

Nope.

Wouldn't you rather have a huge city map created specifically for an Escort style mode? And maybe depending on what kind of movements the attackers make, it could influence the route that the caravan takes?

How about a Base attack mode (thankfully they are coming out with this, but I have reservations), where you have a big map, lets say a huge redwood forest. And your lances drop in random locations. With randomly spawned secondary objectives, like an ammo dump which gives you an extra 25% ammo if you take it. Or a VTOL site, that pops 3 UAVs to give you information on certain areas of the map.

How about a King of the Hill Mode, say a VTOL carrying some sort of new weapon plans crashes in a jungle. And it's randomly placed, with lances randomly spawning depending. And you need to find and hold the site while your techs extract the information.

I mean there is just SO much we could have done.

[Dino Might]

Standing in a square is boring, and probably the reason most people don't go for the objective. What if PGI added in a mini-game or some thing you had to do to cap. I know the coding would be crazy for this, so I wouldn't expect it to come out right now, but if you hopped out of your mech, had to run to the capture point and hack into a computer or something, that'd be pretty cool. It would do a couple of things - make it much more risky to capture, potentially reduce time to capture if you got good at the skill based capture mechanic, and give reasons to defend capture points (because someone who is good could cap relatively quickly). For now, before doing all the animation, they could just play it as a remote hack from your mech - screen pops up with whatever mini-game type of system they come up with. Could be kind of neat if done well with a fitting mechanic.

Along these lines, I think ECM would be much more interesting if the ECM mech had to do something like set jamming frequencies (ideally the ones that the enemy mechs use for LRM guidance lock), and counter ECM mechs would select those frequencies to counter, have a dynamic system that people would need to use to get the full effect. It could get overly-complex, so there would have to be some kind of limit to the number of possibilities.

People are complaining about the game being mindless? Not enough role-warfare? Fine, add more varying skill-oriented tasks. Then balance those with the aiming/shooting task.