91 replies to this topic

[Popper100]

Just came out of a game with clan wolf where the enemy decided to not fire at us, not even pay attention to us and walk to the gen in Mad Cats and Ryokens. And we could not put them down with half assaults, a handful of heavies, and a few lights.

As it stands this game mode is now pointless, fun when we engage with rules of etiquette, but ultimately pointless if the best way to accomplish an attack is to mindlessly walk up a ramp and shoot a box. True, hit reg is a part blame, putting shots where they shouldn't be and generally being absolute trash. But the fact remains that we have a map that is somewhat tactical and a map that is a shooting gallery or ramp of acension, depending on zerg or not.

So here's what needs to be done.
1. Redesign the maps: Sulfurous is a pretty good map, just needs a bit more space behind the gen to spawn defenders so they aren't right on top of a kill attempt. Vault is god awful. Two gates that have no tactical value to choose one or the other. Claustrophobic combat lanes or shooting gallery hills. And another defense spawn point right on top of kill attempts.
2: Multiple objectives: Make a 3 objective chain to win an attack, spread all over the defense area, with only the final objective being heavily defended. Telling someone go do this one thing to win is a terrible way to make a grand scale base assault.

Of course defenders would need a down side, longer spawn times, raised pedestals for the drop off point so enemies can shoot them first if they can, inherent base flaws that can be exploited. Altogether we want to fight and win a base, not just play shooting gallery mode with "have this accuracy to win, otherwise you lose" as the tag line.

[EvilCow]

The problems, from my POV, are:

1) Defenders have definitely the upper hand unless:
2) The attackers use the rush tactic, basically ignore the defenders and bring some tonnage to the generator, then repeat until victory.

Soon everybody will just be rushing making the game mode pointless.

My recommendation would be to create secondary objectives:
1) Secondary generators, the cannon would have 2 additional weaker generators placed in less protected locations.
2) Turret generators, each one controls 3 turrets. A way to make attacker's job easier on the final attack.
3) Control tower and Radar Array, once destroyed dropships would take one minute to land instead of 30 seconds.
4) Possibly more, like destroyable structures, once destroyed a structure would no more offer cover to the defenders.

The combination of all the secondary objectives, their quality, placement and number, would make each map more unique.

Simply rushing should be almost impossible before achieving at least some of the secondary objectives. Game time should be extended a bit because the added objectives.

[Eddrick]

I learned from Armored Core games long ago. The easiest way to complete a mission is to stick to the objective. Those games tend to put WAY to many targets to possibly destroy them all and be in a good position to finish the objective.

The Defenders have little reason to leave the Base unless they have more then one thing that needs defended. Leaving the Base when it is the only thing that needs defending is just asking for the Attacking team to slip behind you and Attack the Base instead of the Defenders.

The Attackers have little reason to not rush the Base if it is the primary objective and destroying the enemy team as a secondary objective. They have little reason not to, because it would slow down momentum. If you require both destruction of the base and enemy team. The Attackers have little reason to try for the Base while the enemy team still stands.

It's a tough issue to fix. The idea of adding more objective will slow the Attackers down. But, the only way fighting the defenders will happen without their destruction being a requirement is if the Defenders themselves can slow/stop the rush.

[Joe Mallad]

The game mode is already pointless if you have the "warriors" in the Clan not doing what they do best, fight and would target rush the base like frenetical WOB Jihadists lol.

I mean, come on! The whole idea of the Clans is to fight and die a warriors death right? But when you have a game mode where even the Clan players don't want to fight and would rather rush the cannon generator for a easy win (most times), the game mode needs to be reworked in more ways than one.

[totgeboren]

To promote other kinda of gameplay there has to be other realistic paths to victory.

Path number one, destroy the gun, is achievable, but to achieve it you want to minimize the amount of fighting you are involved in.

Path number two, destroy all enemy mechs, is not achievable as attacker, but it requires you to maximize the amount of fighting you do.

So, how to fix this? Only give the defenders three drops instead of four, but double the health of the big gun.

Light rush becomes much harder, but win by gun destruction is still doable, while there is also a reason to fight the defenders as they have less numbers. So you can in theory win by slugging it out too.

[Donnerkeil666]

On Friday people were complaining that Defense was "OP". Then came the Zerg rush. In the current installment of CW I don't see any other way to win an attack. But Zerg Bansai all the time is absolutely no fun. There should be an incentive to shoot other mechs.
Besides winning an attack in that fashion is detrimental to the bankroll as it nets only small amounts of c-bills (minus coolshots and strikes). When loosing an attack I make 5-6 times the amount of c-bills I make winning.
Also some of my unit members complained for not getting a matchscore 80+ in wins. But it's a win, right?

Edited by Donnerkeil666, 15 December 2014 - 06:11 AM.

[ContingencyPlan]

I've found that fighting vs. clans as IS is pretty pointless because there's no viable IS counter to a Stormcrow + Timberwolf/Hellbringer drop deck. Those mechs combine high mobility + a level of raw firepower and effective range that IS has to one-up them on tonnage to match. And after the first wave of IS heavy + assault mechs is eventually taken down, they no longer have the tonnage left in their drop deck to stop the next oncoming rush of the EXACT SAME THING by clanners.

When fielded by an organized 12 man whose team is composed ENTIRELY of people fielding that specific drop deck, it is literally unstoppable when attacking IS. There is no viable IS counterpart, even when fielded by an equally organized 12-man, because with how much IS has to step up the tonnage to match their firepower IS only gets one wave of mechs that can effectively counter it.

[Kirkland Langue]

I like the idea of additional Generators.

My gut tells me that 4 things should happen:

1. Turrets should get INCREASED rates of fire.
2. Gun Generator should get about 50% INCREASED hit points.
3. A new Generator should be added which, when destroyed, disables all Turrets.
4. A new Generator should be added which, when destroyed, reduces Gun Generator Health to 50% (which would be 75% of what it currently is).

[Vassago Rain]

Donnerkeil666, on 15 December 2014 - 05:15 AM, said:

On Friday people were complaining that Defense was "OP". Then came the Zerg rush. In the current installment of CW I don't see any other way to win an attack. But Zerg Bansai all the time is absolutely no fun. There should be an incentive to shoot other mechs.
Besides winning an attack in that fashion is detrimental to the bankroll as it nets only small amounts of c-bills (minus coolshots and strikes). When loosing an attack I make 5-6 times the amount of c-bills I make winning.
Also some of my unit members complained for not getting a matchscore 80+ in wins. But it's a win, right?

Defense is OP.

That's why you have to avoid it with a massive zerg rush on the poorly designed base.

[Chemie]

why not have it with both sides with guns to defend....now that makes each side have to make decisaions and take risks,...right now, defends just deathball at their base and hope attackers are unorganized pugs

Single attack objectives drives to light zerg

Edited by Chemie, 15 December 2014 - 06:37 AM.

[B0oN]

And now for something "entirely unrelated" ...

Did you know that in military doctrine it is called downright suicide to attack a fortified enemy position without atleast having 3-4 times the strenght of the defenders ?

I dare say that we were lucky with CW as is, attackers could have been in far worse than this, like going against well-thought out and prepared mech-sized dig-outs, armoured trenchlines and what ever there might be that helps Mechs get hard cover .

One thing could be desirable though when dropping the defenders in their base :
make their way to the generator longer (read as : third, half or whatever of the waylength of attacking side), adjusting it along ETA´s of attackers ?

Yes,yes, I know ... this calls for a complete redesign of bases and maps but would at least call for even more tactical restraint on both sides and even out defenders advantage a touch .

Make a fuss´n discuss

Edited by Rad Hanzo, 15 December 2014 - 06:48 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

Rad Hanzo, on 15 December 2014 - 06:47 AM, said:

And now for something "entirely unrelated" ...

Did you know that in military doctrine it is called downright suicide to attack a fortified enemy position without atleast having 3-4 times the strenght of the defenders ?

I dare say that we were lucky with CW as is, attackers could have been in far worse than this, like going against well-thought out and prepared mech-sized dig-outs, armoured trenchlines and what ever there might be that helps Mechs get hard cover .

One thing could be desirable though when dropping the defenders in their base :
make their way to the generator longer (read as : third, half or whatever), adjusting it along ETA´s of attackers ?

Yes,yes, I know ... this calls for a complete redesign of bases and maps but would at least call for even more tactical restraint on both sides and even out defenders advantage a touch .

Make a fuss´n discuss

They need to redesign the maps, period. There's no buts or ifs. PGI needs to hire someone who knows how to make maps, and just do it.

[Grom181]

Yoseful Mallad, on 15 December 2014 - 04:44 AM, said:

I mean, come on! The whole idea of the Clans is to fight and die a warriors death right? But when you have a game mode where even the Clan players don't want to fight and would rather rush the cannon generator for a easy win (most times), the game mode needs to be reworked in more ways than one.

Just had to add my two cents here, I enjoy the fight, personally (often think I should rock the smoke jag rather than the wolf). However; when clan mechs have been nerfed, due to the unbalanced nature that they posed in PUG matches in the "Solo" games, it is rather clear why they would rather act like Trashborn (just had to add that for the fun). Thats my only thoughst on that.

Back on topic...

What I get from this is that everyone wants to see more objectives to help tip it in favor of the attackes/defenders, once the objectives are completed. One thing that I got a thought of, since you wanted to enforce fighting, why not use the objective of numbers? Simply put, one of the objective should be the enemy force has to be below 50% strength in order for either team to win. So, if the attackers want to light rush, let them. They blow the turret, oh no! If you kill the attackers trying to take the planet (in that attack game) the defenders win. If the defenders don't get the attackers down to a 50% strength status, more time is added, much like we do in sports. This, along with other small objectives to help give a capture/defend nature to the invasion game mode would help IMHO.

Edited by Grom181, 15 December 2014 - 07:00 AM.

[mad kat]

What's ticked me off the most about CW is that brawling and knife range fighting is now a ridiculous concept. There is next to no incentive to bring my arrow with 6 machine guns to the fight as i'll get torn apart by gauss and PPC before i even get within range to use my pulse lasers effectively let alone the guns. If a brawl does happen which is rare only then can i use the brawlers unfortunately the maps and team layout highly favours long range LOS weapons and the rush is usually a desperate measure.

I noticed it was tricky to use my centurions with ac20's like this too. The only time when you get to close enough range to punch hard with SRM's and AC20's is when there's a full on assault going on which usually means throw caution to the wind and hope that your team will join in with the fray.

CW has actually killed off some of my best mechs!

Edited by mad kat, 15 December 2014 - 07:04 AM.

[Donnerkeil666]

Vassago Rain, on 15 December 2014 - 06:35 AM, said:

Defense is OP.

That's why you have to avoid it with a massive zerg rush on the poorly designed base.

But how can it be OP if there's a singular strategy that works more than half the time?

[Vassago Rain]

Donnerkeil666, on 15 December 2014 - 07:04 AM, said:

But how can it be OP if there's a singular strategy that works more than half the time?

Because only that one strategy works. No one wants to play a videogame where the only way to win is to zerg rush.

[Darth Futuza]

Yoseful Mallad, on 14 December 2014 - 05:34 PM, said:

and you know what will put a stop to the light mech rush for the generator? Once knock downs are added back in, watch how fast this tactic dies. Once lights and any mech for that matter has a chance to be knocked down, most will rethink this tactic.

This is actually a brilliant idea. (And I'm a light pilot).

[Matthew Ace]

I'd very much look forward to reintroducing collisions and knockdown once they fixed it.

Beyond existing maps, it may be helpful if the Orbital cannon was built on a high plateau (high enough to need a light with at least 8 jump jets to scale effectively.). But something needs to be given to attackers to make up for the reduced effectiveness in a zergrush.

Alternative idea? making certain types of lighter weapons less effective against structures. This means lights need to either carry heavier weapons or be limited to dealing with mechs. But then we'll still have to deal with Large-sized lasers on Clan laservomit builds.

Edited by Matthew Ace, 15 December 2014 - 07:07 AM.

[Hobo Dan]

Yoseful Mallad, on 14 December 2014 - 06:03 PM, said:

im all for it being fair for both sides. But I do believe each side needs more objectives other than take out all enemy, kill the cannon or just sit and wait for the attackers to come to you. These maps have all this middle ground. Put an objective there that needs to be fought over/ destroyed or something. And from that point the battle would either shift to pushing the attackers back to their drop points or push the defense back to their main base.

I like that we are getting these new maps and game types but they really are just too cut and dry with not a lot of added thought about depth an making the game modes and maps feel awesome.

Put a radar tower out in the mid ground (outside the gates) that can be capped by either team and would provide target locks in a 500m radius around it. Also, they should allow the defenders to open and shut the gates before their generator is destroyed. Maybe give that ability to the Commander.

[Clint Steel]

This was going to be a new thread, but it seems like it will have a decent home here.

My Ideas to "fix" CW:

1.
[Problem] Right now there is no penalty to dieing, so why not throw yourself on enemy.

[Solution] Make dieing costly. The penalty could be things such as less C-bills and less loyalty. I would like to seem more of a penalty for dying, but i'm not such what else they could do.


2.
[Problem] Attacking is too easy if you simply rush in and destroy the objective.

[Solutions] There could be a few.

1. Instead of a single objective to destroy, have several, this would make coordination more difficult for the attackers, and defenders, letting the superior team shine.

2. Have a minimum required kill percentage. So you can't take the planet unless you've eliminated at least 25% (12 Mechs in this case) of the enemy. This would require at least some battling to take place.

3. Objective(s) could be easier to defend, such as having a power plant under ground, with tunnels leading to it, funneling enemies into defensible spaces.

4. After the main objective is destroyed, have a counter start, that signifies how much time the Defenders have to "repel and repair." This makes the enemies not only have to destroy the objective, but also keep it down, while "The ships in space" get into position to attack the planet.

3.
[Problem] Defenders have the advantage, with turrets and the act of defense itself being easier. On top of that dropships that put new mechs right where you would want to start (and the firepower of those ships aiding defense).

[Solutions] There are several ways this could be dealt with. (These assume "Rushing" has been dealt with)

1. One option would be maps that are not just a path to the Defenders Base, but rather the Defenders Base sitting in the middle of the map, being able to be assaulted from all sides.

2. I would not use drop ships for the defenders, rather use something like underground bunkers that open up and use elevators that raise Mechs up to the battlefield as needed, or something of the sort. Perhaps you even start in the Mech under the battlefield in the bunker, and have to walk your way out. If dropships need to be used, they could at least drop away from the main objectives.

3. Another option to explore would be giving the Attackers the ability to change where their dropships deposit mechs, still limited to certain landing sites, but allowing much closer positioning for faster entry to battle after forward objectives are taken.

4. A strong handed approach might be to limit the amount of defenders, either in total Mechs, or in Mechs on the field at a time. So Attackers get 48 while Defenders get 36 Mechs, or The Attackers field 12 Mechs, while the Defenders can only field 8, these are just the first numbers that came to my head, and I'm not sure this is a good idea or not, but could be an option.


4.
[Problem] If you run out of ammo, you have to eject and get in another Mech, making many builds less viable.

[Solution]
For the Defenders, a depot in the base where you move your mech to, power down and ammo will be refilled.
For the Attackers, a consumable that lets your team request a drop of a mobile ammo station, functioning the same as above
Both could be destroyed by the enemy.


5.
[Problem] Matches are hard to find

[Solution] For the smaller units, A button that lets you join any battle that needs help, with check boxes that would limit the search to certain parameters (such as only vs Clan battles, or only vs IS battles, in the future if they make distance travel an issue, then cost for that could be incorporated here) This would let a match maker grab from one large pool to fill in the gaps that the 10 mans and below have.