Jump to content

Welcome To Community Warfare!


129 replies to this topic

#81 Vincent V. Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Star Colonel IV
  • Star Colonel IV
  • 299 posts
  • LocationWarrior, Command Star, Alpha Galaxy, Clan Wolf.

Posted 06 January 2015 - 02:38 PM

View PostXavier, on 05 January 2015 - 08:06 AM, said:

sheer number mean nothing if they are not organized.


Actually, having the numbers to do it affect the game quite a bit. Think about it, if a faction fields 72 people in 6 12-man groups to defend one planet and is attacked by 108 players in 9 12-man groups, there will be ghost wins.

If the matches start off at the same time, you would only need 7 groups to get the ghost win in.

I think Community Warfare has a long way to go for proper balance. Right now it is a numbers game.

Also, something that needs to be fixed are the attack lanes

Edited by Vincent V., 06 January 2015 - 02:43 PM.


#82 Ragnar Bashmek

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 60 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationChandler, TX

Posted 21 January 2015 - 06:58 PM

The fundamental problem with CW is the 12 man drops. Most units can not consistently put a 12 man together and playing CW any other way is a waste of time.

The solution to this is 4 man drops. This would reduce the advantage the 12 man comp teams have considerably and make CW enjoyable for small Units and solo droppers.

I could list several advantages but it is pointless. CW is designed to be a playground for 12 man competition teams and is obviously not intended to be enjoyable for the rest of us. It reflects Russ's obsession with what competitive players want/think.

Why PGI would put this much effort into a product that is only useful to 10 or 15% of MWO players escapes me. But then a lot of what PGI has done with MWO defies logic (like for instance stealing a mech module slot from virtually all IS mechs a few months back)

I looked forward to CW for a long time. It really pisses me off that PGI hyped CW like it was going to be great thing and then rolled out this Cluster Frack.

A few tweaks here and there are not going to make CW playable for typical (non-competitive) MW's. It has a fundamental flaw in that it is setup for 12 man teams and it will never be any fun for anyone except pre-made 12 mans.

Pugs and small Units have no place in CW as long as it is based on 12 man drops.

#83 White Bear 84

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,857 posts

Posted 21 January 2015 - 07:24 PM

View PostRagnar Bashmek, on 21 January 2015 - 06:58 PM, said:

Small Units have no place in CW as long as it is based on 12 man drops.


Small units have as much place in CW as they want and as they fight for...

#84 Ragnar Bashmek

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 60 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationChandler, TX

Posted 21 January 2015 - 08:15 PM

View PostWhite Bear 84, on 21 January 2015 - 07:24 PM, said:


Small units have as much place in CW as they want and as they fight for...


Well, if your small group likes the "Cannon Fodder" role and are good with losing nearly every match, then you have a place in CW.

#85 White Bear 84

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,857 posts

Posted 21 January 2015 - 08:42 PM

View PostRagnar Bashmek, on 21 January 2015 - 08:15 PM, said:


Well, if your small group likes the "Cannon Fodder" role and are good with losing nearly every match, then you have a place in CW.


Even better if our unit takes the enemy for cannon fodder and are good at winning matches. Don't go discrediting small units, its not the size that matters - its what you do with it that counts ;)

Edited by White Bear 84, 21 January 2015 - 08:59 PM.


#86 Juvat

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 671 posts
  • LocationIn the Mechbay tinkering with my Mechs...

Posted 24 January 2015 - 10:34 AM

I don't know if this has been asked or not (just got back from a 2 month vacation so did my first CW drops a few mins ago) but why with IS vs. Clan is it still 12v12 instead of 12 v 10 according to lore?

#87 Redistribute

    Rookie

  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 7 posts

Posted 25 January 2015 - 02:40 PM

Just waited 16 minutes with 12 pilots, no match.

This after waiting all day for the ceasefire (during my premium time). This, after waiting 2 years for CW.

Beta? Nah, this is what MWO always has been. Buggy, incomplete, shipped too soon to make a buck, and slow.

Your a bunch of crappy programmers, who don't even know how to design a MMO interface, I mean, could it be any less intuitive?

All totaled, 20 minutes for cease fire, 30 minutes match maker. No game. Wow, that is really fun. Glad I didn't spend any more money after my Founders Package and my Phoenix pack.

Game is 2.5 years old, and still in Alpha.

Time for you guys to hire some people that know how to design software, including User Interface and voice-chat.

Seriously not going to give you any more money, or more importantly, convince my friends to play, and waste their time, waiting for MWO.

#88 BjornAreStolen

    Member

  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 03 February 2015 - 02:12 PM

Here's my input:
In the army, one allways preached 3:1 odds as a minimum to attack. I have problems seeing how anybody can possibly win an attack, unless the defenders are total *******. I've read the Idea of having a union-dropship land closer to the gates, once the gates are breached, or the Leopards keep dropping the attackers closer and closer to the gates as the game progress. My Idea is that the defenders only get to go to the planet-defence with 2 or 3 mechs. This way, they will have to be more careful, and it adresses the odds-mantra, sort of :)

IMO the waiting time is improving. I took the consequense of the advantage of playing in a group, and I strongly reccomend it to any solo-player out there. It was really not that hard, and now I have new friends in England that I have fun playing with, and chatting with on Teamspeak :)

#89 Tetra One

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 22 posts

Posted 05 February 2015 - 03:06 AM

Is it still possible to target mechs while they are in dropship, and if so why?

#90 Enigmos

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,290 posts
  • LocationPhiladelphia

Posted 09 February 2015 - 07:10 AM

Until the gate is open the gates protect both sides equally. Once the gate is open both are equally exposed. Defender advantages consist of

1. Scattered, easily destroyed large laser turrets with large laser cool-downs able to fire two beams once, at only one intruder. Then there is a four second cool-down and by the time that is up the turret is usually destroyed.

2. Drop ships arriving with reinforcements will fire medium lasers for 5 points of damage at any hostile mechs standing around on the drop pad.

3. Drop pads for reinforcements are closer than those for attackers. However this 'advantage' has drawbacks. If that landing pad is overrun, then the four reinforcement mechs will often arrive one at a time, dropped smack dab in the middle of the waiting hostiles, enveloped in 360 degree fire before they even hit the tarmac. If the attackers invest one drop pad (usually the closest to their chosen gate) they'll harvest 33% of the defenders' forces, one overwhelmed mech at a time. Naturally, unless they have their wits about them, the defenders will be using cover on the other side of the base unwittingly letting themselves quickly be outnumbered.

It takes more time for attacking reinforcements to reach the battle, but on the other hand they have that time to organize and regroup. Defender pads are hot, often overrun by hostiles, and the poor pilots dropping into the middle of a swarm of reds drop right out in the open, one at a time, and survive hardly long enough to acquire a target (and if they ar taking SRMs to the face even that is challenging.

Recommend that drop ship AI pilots should show a just a bit of intelligence and prefer to drop their reinforcements only at a landing zone which is under friendly control.

It isn't as if the defenders were in entrenched or fortifide, which is what that 3:1 assault odds requirement assumes. If the defenders position themselves, then as soon as they see which gate is under attack they will have to reposition or let the lance at that gate face the three lances of the attackers anyway. All the attacker has to do is have a fast light at the other two gates pecking away at the generator and turret to keep the defenders split among approach vectors.

Once the real target gate is down they have a temporary 3:1 advantage over the defenders there, and usually it is that lance who spawns at the nearest drop pad so once they are cleared, three or so mechs encircle (enfilade) the landing pad while the rest hold off any counterattack. The attacker eliminates the down lance every time they drop from the drop ship, one at a time, and surrounded.

Edited by OriginalTibs, 09 February 2015 - 07:34 AM.


#91 Kenneth Osis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 314 posts

Posted 11 February 2015 - 01:28 AM

??? Why should the Clan Wolf attack Clan Smoke Jaguar but we do not attack the Wolf Clan ???

Edited by Kenneth Osis, 11 February 2015 - 01:29 AM.


#92 Dawnstealer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 3,734 posts
  • LocationBlack Earth

Posted 13 February 2015 - 11:15 AM

View PostKenneth Osis, on 11 February 2015 - 01:28 AM, said:

??? Why should the Clan Wolf attack Clan Smoke Jaguar but we do not attack the Wolf Clan ???

Posted Image

#93 Lazarus40k

    Rookie

  • The Widow Maker
  • The Widow Maker
  • 2 posts

Posted 19 February 2015 - 07:45 AM

What about a faction Queue? Non world specific. I sign up for Steiner, and i get dropped with any attack/defense that Steiner would support. This puts people/groups at a higher queue level, and lets groups form more quickly for anyone who is less concerned about a particular planet.

#94 Tyicus

    Rookie

  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 8 posts
  • LocationGabriola Island BC

Posted 17 March 2015 - 01:26 AM

Glad to see they finally got a start on faction wars. It is still difficult to get into a match, but you CAN get into one. So that's a start. I'm sure this isn't the 'final draft' of faction wars, since so much is obviously broken, but that's how these things go.

Que definitely needs tweaking, I doubt anyone who tries to play a game will deny that.

Choosing your opponents would be nice, iirc the clan invasion didn't stop the houses fighting amongst themselves.

Balancing the IS vs Clan battles seems to need addressing too. While some people may say 'it is possible to beat a clan team 12v12..', it's very unlikely.

It doesn't mesh with cannon battletech at all either, as the clans always tried to use the least mechs possible, and fought honorably. While the teams running clanmechs now fight like freebirth scum, using a game mechanic to secure easy wins.

If this was how the clans fought in the battletech universe, Terra would have been clan territory long before the battle of Tukayyid.

I guess we should just consider ourselves lucky they don't have elementals as well...

#95 Will HellFire

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 203 posts

Posted 17 March 2015 - 01:50 AM

Pug Clan groups are easily defeated (and I say easily, like 90% of the times) with a COORDINATED 12 man IS group.

Organized 12 man clanners is a whole different story, and undoubtedly much more fun for the 12 man coordinated IS group.

I find balance to be a little bit on the clan side, but not so much that teamwork and skill can easily overcome it.

Good job PGI, keep the improvements coming!

#96 Ragnar Bashmek

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 60 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationChandler, TX

Posted 17 March 2015 - 04:23 AM

Apparently doing the 10v12 thing is beyond the capability of PGI's coders. A simple "work-around", since they can't figure out how to give the IS teams the lore based 20% more mechs would be to give the IS teams 20% more drop deck tonnage. I'm sure they could handle that and at this point in time have to wonder why PGI hasn't already none this.

#97 Ragnar Bashmek

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 60 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationChandler, TX

Posted 22 March 2015 - 05:49 AM

Well I tried CW again yesterday after a several week hiatus. It still sucks.

It is still fun for 12 man pre-mades and nothing but a PITA for solo droppers. I had 3 drops 2 with a 12 man team and one as a solo dropper. We won both of the drops in a 12 man and they were both hard fought close battles... good fun. The solo drop came up against a 12 man Wolf pre-made and we got slaughtered.

This the main problem with CW, it needs to have separate queues for groups and solo-droppers.

Playing in the 12 mans was successful but is still a nuisance, both matches involved ~ 30 minutes of sitting around doing nothing while waiting for various players to diddle with their mechs, decide to change mechs, decide to take a smoke break, etc, etc before actually initiating the match. The solo drop happened reasonably quickly but came up against a 12 man pre-made team and was a pointless exercise in futility.

I want to be able to solo drop in CW and come up against other solo droppers, just like the regular game.

#98 Tainen

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 39 posts

Posted 03 April 2015 - 10:38 PM

What determines what unit gets a planet, when defending or attacking?

For instance, if a unit with 5 members attacks the same planet 10 times, do they get the planet? or the unit with the most participants?

#99 Maxwell Albritten

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 426 posts
  • LocationWoogi, Taurian Concordat

Posted 09 April 2015 - 09:59 AM

View PostTainen, on 03 April 2015 - 10:38 PM, said:

What determines what unit gets a planet, when defending or attacking?

For instance, if a unit with 5 members attacks the same planet 10 times, do they get the planet? or the unit with the most participants?


It goes to whichever unit has the most players that won/saved the planet. This means if you lose a game then your numbers don't count.

So, if you have 5 members attacking a planet and wins 10 times your unit gets 50 "points". If by the end of ceasefire no other units have helped as much as your unit then your unit gets the tag.

#100 Sandersson Jankins

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 352 posts

Posted 09 April 2015 - 11:56 PM

View PostRagnar Bashmek, on 22 March 2015 - 05:49 AM, said:

Well I tried CW again yesterday after a several week hiatus. It still sucks.

It is still fun for 12 man pre-mades and nothing but a PITA for solo droppers. I had 3 drops 2 with a 12 man team and one as a solo dropper. We won both of the drops in a 12 man and they were both hard fought close battles... good fun. The solo drop came up against a 12 man Wolf pre-made and we got slaughtered.

This the main problem with CW, it needs to have separate queues for groups and solo-droppers.

Playing in the 12 mans was successful but is still a nuisance, both matches involved ~ 30 minutes of sitting around doing nothing while waiting for various players to diddle with their mechs, decide to change mechs, decide to take a smoke break, etc, etc before actually initiating the match. The solo drop happened reasonably quickly but came up against a 12 man pre-made team and was a pointless exercise in futility.

I want to be able to solo drop in CW and come up against other solo droppers, just like the regular game.


I have not had an experience similar to yours- but regarding your suggestion...

I think that a complete separation between units and "solo" players is bad. It will more than likely either severely damage most unit's playtime (AND FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION!!), or make it so the most hardcore will try to "sync-drop" a planet to get around this.

I could agree with enabling an option stating "I would PREFER to drop with other solo players", and the match-maker will attempt for some reasonable length of time to find solo players for you. Perhaps you could limit the group-size, as in "I would PREFER to play with solos and groups no larger than 4."

But a complete disconnect isn't good. It's COMMUNITY WARFARE after all; by intended design you are a bit shoe-horned into cooperating with...you know...the community!





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users