91 replies to this topic

[Angel of Annihilation]

KraftySOT, on 14 December 2014 - 04:18 PM, said:

You know whatever they do to stop rushes, doesnt change the outcome when you come up against teams that can coordinate a rush...and just makes it so pugs never ever ever ever win on the attack.

Good job dude.

The need to reduce the defender waves to only 2-3 waves instead of 4 and they need to make the generator much more durable in the process.

As it stands now, the attacker can't win through fighting it out, not against anything approaching a competent team. The attacker has to come through a choke point under concentrated enemy fire from both mechs and turrets, then as they push forward facing effective supporting fire from dropships that are dropping reinforcements literally less than 100-200m from the front while the attacker has to run 1500m to get back into the fight. Most matches have the defenders making 2-3 kills for every loss which is actually reasonable considering they are in a defensive position.

So to balance this you have to give the attackers the advantage in numbers to offset the effectiveness of being in defensive positions studded with fixed defensive emplacements and shorter supply lines. I am ex-military and this is battle strategy 101. No attacking force can reasonably expect to succeed against a defensively entrenched enemy force give equal numbers and quality. There always has to be some sort of force multiplier to win whether it is in the form of better training, equipment, support, numbers or anything else. Random chance will only carry you so far without this force multiplier.

[Randal Waide]

I'm thinking the solution would be multiple objectives behind the wall with different values that randomly reset. That way the light zerg may get the gun but the value may be lower than expected. The lower objective could also activate other unknown defenses, again randomly. Vibrabomb minefields, tank bunkers, and VTOL or aerospace flyovers. (Especially if outside the gates)

I think it would be very cool to have the side of a wall open and tanks roll outside the gates or flyovers on the paths to the gates.

Possibly limits to ecm on both sides would help also.

On a single objective shield generators would all have to be put out before hitting the gun.

I have more of an attacker mindset. Sitting back and waiting is not my forte. But we occasionally are able to hold of the zerg.

Sue me, I'm a dreamer.

[Bagheera]

Vassago Rain, on 14 December 2014 - 05:43 PM, said:

There's a million and one solutions, but no one during the CW private beta or through development thought about it.

List 5.



-------------------


Am I the only one that thinks that "bypass the enemy and go for the objective" is exactly the sort of thing a light mech should be doing where there are objectives to be obtained?

Not saying the light rush is the be-all-end-all or anything, but most players found ways to deal with the same tactic in closed beta, so I imagine this won't be a huge problem for too long. Tweaks could be in order so that an insta-win isn't all but guaranteed against the unorganized, but nullifying yet another thing that lights are good at seems overboard.

Edited by Bagheera, 16 December 2014 - 10:14 AM.

[Shae Starfyre]

How about a randomly placed poer node that has to be scouted out and destroyed before the generator can be attached; this way it causes the two sides to have to engage the map, defend the node but in such a way as to be prepared to get back to the generator, and the attacker needs to amount a tactical decision on how to best position itself to hunt out the node, destroy it, and push the objective.

This would foster the early deployment of scouts, on a two front war (even if all lights go to the node first, there is more of a chance that less lights will be available for the generator rush, thus curbing that tactic).

I like random.

[AlphaToaster]

Gotta love that TTK, mmm mmm good.

By this weekend I suspect we will see more streak boats on both sides of the front.

The tactic works against unorganized teams and will work less so as more understand what changes need to be made.

Taking 1 streak boat in the drop deck is just good while this keeps up. It's like the AMS problem, people complained about LRMs but wouldn't bring AMS. Well people are complaining about light zerg rushes, but I've seen barely any streak boats hunting them down.

When there's a team of 12 SSRM/30 stormcrows, or 12 SSRM/10 Kintaro's that cannot stop a light zerg rush, then we know there's a real problem. Min/Max strats require Min/Max counters.

Think football. There's a defensive front line near the gate, this should be your faster mechs who can give chase. There should be a second row of defensive backs who fill any gaps. And there should be some corner back type players way back near the generator.

What I see? Big blob at the gate when the lights run past. FAIL.

Change starts within each of us and the old game of murderball = win just won't cut it anymore.

Look at the mini-map. Are you in the right position relative to your team? Are you that guy who is at a gate alone, and leaves it to join the fight at another gate only to have a bunch of lights jump your gate on your watch? Are you chasing that mech off to the side to score your 90 points for the challenge and leave a big gaping hole in your line?

Edited by AlphaToaster, 16 December 2014 - 12:15 PM.

[Kirkland Langue]

Came up with another idea to modify what I posted earlier.

3 Parts to this idea:
1. Increase Turret ROF by 200%. Make the turrets very very deadly.
2. Add a Generator which, when destroyed, disables all Turrets.
3. Add a Generator which, when destroyed, enables Orbital Bombardment.

Orbital Bombardment would effectively be Artillery fire placed at the feet of random Defending mechs like once per minute. With smoke and delay, exactly like player arty strikes.

[BourbonFaucet]

OR... OR...

We could simply do what most of the other attack/defend modes do in other video games, and make the defender's respawn time painful, say, triple what the attackers have. Now if you knock a hole in the defense, you have some time to wreck the base before they come back in fresh 'mechs.

To prevent the light zerg rush, the best thing to do would be to strengthen the turrets near the generator.

[Kirkland Langue]

Techorse, on 16 December 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

We could simply do what most of the other attack/defend modes do in other video games, and make the defender's respawn time painful, say, triple what the attackers have.

Got a few examples of other games handy? I'm curious as to the details, outcomes, and how similar those games are to MWO.

[Mystere]

Kirkland Langue, on 16 December 2014 - 12:13 PM, said:

Came up with another idea to modify what I posted earlier.

3 Parts to this idea:
1. Increase Turret ROF by 200%. Make the turrets very very deadly.
2. Add a Generator which, when destroyed, disables all Turrets.
3. Add a Generator which, when destroyed, enables Orbital Bombardment.

Orbital Bombardment would effectively be Artillery fire placed at the feet of random Defending mechs like once per minute. With smoke and delay, exactly like player arty strikes.

Techorse, on 16 December 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

OR... OR...

We could simply do what most of the other attack/defend modes do in other video games, and make the defender's respawn time painful, say, triple what the attackers have. Now if you knock a hole in the defense, you have some time to wreck the base before they come back in fresh 'mechs.

To prevent the light zerg rush, the best thing to do would be to strengthen the turrets near the generator.

That's a whole lot of changes, when the simplest solution of all is to just:

Defend your base!

Edited by Mystere, 16 December 2014 - 02:08 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Raise the respawn timer for the defender. They have the stronger position and the easier fight. Bump up their respawn timer to 60, or even 90 seconds. Make the death of a defender matter. Give the attackers an opening to seriously push the base. A defender going down needs to be an opening. As it stands right now, it's cripping the attacker's ability to actually accomplish their goal.

If that were even remotely true than no planets would be captured. The fact quite a few planets have been captured means attackers are succeeding more than defenders.

attacker has the advantage. rushing the cannon is friggin easy wins.

Edited by Khobai, 16 December 2014 - 02:11 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

Just reiterating what most people realise is needed.

MULTIPLE objectives ... objectives that need to be HELD so attack and counter attack happen.

There are a dozen ways to do this well but the more objectives more more depth in how and when you attack and so forth.

FORCE the teams to split up because there is no single objective and no single front ... you have to decide where to commit, where to distract, when to let the enemy take a point, when to advance, and when to pull back.

My idea again:

3 points in the middle of the map - power stations needing capture or something. You can ONLY damage the gun if you capture one - but its health is really high, the more you capture the less health the gun has.

So now do you zerg the base and try to cap a single point on the side to allow your attack to happen ... suddenly risky if the defenders take the midpoints you are left being smashed by turrets.

Do you ignore the gun and take the midpoints forcing the enemy to counterattack you where you try to win via attrition or send a flanking force to take the gun while the defenders panic?

Do you send lots of distractions on the mid points to split and confuse the enemy holding your rush force in reserve?

So many new ways to engage and more decisions on when to hold and when to attack etc.

Single objectives nearly always suck and they suck MORE the bigger the player numbers.

[DarkCain]

Change the mission type from destroy to capture. The entire dynamic of the match changes.