17 replies to this topic

[Lefty Lucy]

The attackers shouldn't be able to open the gates without receiving enemy fire. Giving the defender covered platforms to fire from would solve a big problem.

[Vassago Rain]

Just put in little elevators that take mechs onto a catwalk.

But this just further highlights my original points: the maps need a complete rework.

[Lefty Lucy]

Vassago Rain, on 15 December 2014 - 10:59 AM, said:

Just put in little elevators that take mechs onto a catwalk.

But this just further highlights my original points: the maps need a complete rework.

Were I designing a base I would make it a ramp. Ramps are a lot harder to disable than elevators with artillery.

[Scratx]

Lefty Lucy, on 15 December 2014 - 12:32 PM, said:

Were I designing a base I would make it a ramp. Ramps are a lot harder to disable than elevators with artillery.

They also don't require coding in new features, just modifying the map geometry a bit. So, yes, ramp = good.

[Malleus011]

I don't see why we even have the gates. They're basically a speed bump.

[Scratx]

Malleus011, on 15 December 2014 - 12:39 PM, said:

I don't see why we even have the gates. They're basically a speed bump.

They actually are also a big glaring sign post saying "We're coming from here!" that works great against most attacking teams.

Rare is the team that thinks about and does something to confuse which gate they're coming from.

[101011]

Scratx, on 15 December 2014 - 12:41 PM, said:

They actually are also a big glaring sign post saying "We're coming from here!" that works great against most attacking teams.

Rare is the team that thinks about and does something to confuse which gate they're coming from.

I think it is rarer to see a team which leaves any gates standing than one which takes down all of them.

[Lefty Lucy]

Defending Omega should be at least two stages. Right now the maps are designed so that attackers can fire at the gate generators with essentially zero return fire. This means that the gates always open basically unopposed, and defenders are required to "hold the line" against twelve undamaged mechs who simply move directly for Omega.

If defenders had firing positions, then base rushes would be a lot less viable on the first wave of attackers. Make the big fight at the gates, and then the rush for Omega after they open is a lot more desperate.

[WarHippy]

Lefty Lucy, on 15 December 2014 - 12:44 PM, said:

Defending Omega should be at least two stages. Right now the maps are designed so that attackers can fire at the gate generators with essentially zero return fire. This means that the gates always open basically unopposed, and defenders are required to "hold the line" against twelve undamaged mechs who simply move directly for Omega.

If defenders had firing positions, then base rushes would be a lot less viable on the first wave of attackers. Make the big fight at the gates, and then the rush for Omega after they open is a lot more desperate.

I have been able to attack the attackers while they worked at taking the generators down, and I have been hit rather hard by defenders when taking a generator down. It seems fine to me. There is one viable tactic for the attackers and everyone seems hell bent on getting it shut down without understanding that half the changes they are asking for would make it dam near impossible for anyone to ever win when on the attacking side.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Bases should extend out further. There should be a 1st line of defense outside the wall consisting of maybe 6 turrets packin 2 ML each. On the wall, 1 more LRM5 turret.

The target should be the gate, not the Gen behind it.

I should try to play in MC2 editor to make a base how I think CW base should be lol...if only it didnt crash every time I make a single misclick.

[pwnface]

I think there are a few small blind spots where attackers can attack gate generators without being able to be shot at by base defenders. If we got rid of the blind spots, it would go a long way to making it more fair for defending the gates. I think as it currently stands though, defenders have a pretty big advantage over attackers.

[Sug]

The gates would make more sense if they were just walls.

Why did we build gates that lead to no where?

[Lefty Lucy]

WarHippy, on 15 December 2014 - 12:49 PM, said:

I have been able to attack the attackers while they worked at taking the generators down, and I have been hit rather hard by defenders when taking a generator down. It seems fine to me. There is one viable tactic for the attackers and everyone seems hell bent on getting it shut down without understanding that half the changes they are asking for would make it dam near impossible for anyone to ever win when on the attacking side.

No, this would leave the generator rush a viable tactic, it would just mean that you have to actually work to get the gate down first to do it.

[WarHippy]

Lefty Lucy, on 15 December 2014 - 01:13 PM, said:

No, this would leave the generator rush a viable tactic, it would just mean that you have to actually work to get the gate down first to do it.

If the defenders are half paying attention they can already make it hard on the attackers to get the generators down(The snow map in particular). The defense has all of the advantages in a stand up fight, and that is why the rush tactic is being used and even then without guaranteed success. Giving the defense even better positioning to fight from so they can inflict heavy damage to the attackers before they can even get the gates down makes it so absurdly lopsided that the attackers might as well eject from the start as it will end in the same result as attacking the gates only without wasting so much time.

[Peter2000]

Lefty Lucy, on 15 December 2014 - 12:44 PM, said:

Defending Omega should be at least two stages. Right now the maps are designed so that attackers can fire at the gate generators with essentially zero return fire. This means that the gates always open basically unopposed, and defenders are required to "hold the line" against twelve undamaged mechs who simply move directly for Omega.

If defenders had firing positions, then base rushes would be a lot less viable on the first wave of attackers. Make the big fight at the gates, and then the rush for Omega after they open is a lot more desperate.

This is true on Sulfurous, but on Boreal, it can be quite hard to shoot out the generator. We've run 6+ TDR-9S with ERPPC on that central hill, and you can see almost anything that can see the generator, and those TDRs hurt at 900m...

[Whiteagle]

Vassago Rain, on 15 December 2014 - 10:59 AM, said:

But this just further highlights my original points: the maps need a complete rework.

Eh, Sulfurous Rift is decent at least when it comes to layout...

Lefty Lucy, on 15 December 2014 - 12:32 PM, said:

Were I designing a base I would make it a ramp. Ramps are a lot harder to disable than elevators with artillery.

Scratx, on 15 December 2014 - 12:36 PM, said:

They also don't require coding in new features, just modifying the map geometry a bit. So, yes, ramp = good.

Indeed, plus they would allow Defenders to jump OVER the Gates!
In fact, if the Generator was also on said ramp, the Defenders could bodily block the Attackers shots.

Peter2000, on 15 December 2014 - 01:50 PM, said:

This is true on Sulfurous, but on Boreal, it can be quite hard to shoot out the generator. We've run 6+ TDR-9S with ERPPC on that central hill, and you can see almost anything that can see the generator, and those TDRs hurt at 900m...

Well to be fair, Boreal is a horrible map...

The two gates are RIGHT next to one another, allowing Long Range Builds to guard both from the Hill the Defenders Drop on.
Then the Generators are position so low that you have to be practically on top of the Gate to hit them in the first place...

This is actually the GOOD thing about the positioning of the Generators in Sulfurous Rift; YOU CAN ACTUALLY HIT THEM FROM FARTHER OUT!!!
Yes, there isn't much the Defenders can do about that right NOW, but Ramps would let them get up to where they could.

Edited by Whiteagle, 15 December 2014 - 02:15 PM.

[Desolator]

Lefty Lucy, on 15 December 2014 - 10:51 AM, said:

The attackers shouldn't be able to open the gates without receiving enemy fire. Giving the defender covered platforms to fire from would solve a big problem.

First off, the defenders can fire at the attackers on both maps.

If we are going to ask for stupid things, so the attackers have no chance of opening the gates.

Then lets ask for smart things they attackers would actually use to knock out base defenses. Things like indirect fire artillery, bombardments, airstrikes, bombing runs.
All things that are actually done, before you send in ground forces to take over a base.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Ramps to fortified firing positions (I'd recommend crenellated walkways) would be a great addition, but the attackers need something to go along with it. I'd suggest PGI add some power generators a bit forward of the main platform that will take a section of turrets offline when they pop. This'd give the attackers a somewhat more achievable bonus objective that'd make the final objective a little easier to complete. Combine this with the enhanced fortifications at the gates for the defenders and I think the dynamic of the maps will be a bit more interesting.