10 replies to this topic

[Popper100]

Preface: Alright, for the most part we can all agree that the current iteration and strategy for Invasion is piss poor to outright boring and predictable. The imbalance between defense and attack created the time honored strategy of not fighting people, but fighting a health bar while you are slowly dying. It needs to change, with attackers having their own intrinsic advantages and defenders having a few drawbacks. This manifesto is to outline my thoughts and ideas on a revamped game mode that I hope some of the higher ups will take a look at once any relevant feedback from the community is taken into account. I can't possibly foresee all the pitfalls and side-strategies as I'm only one person, so I do ask that people look at this and respond with professional criticism and counter-ideas.

To start off, this idea was born out of playing Evolve's alpha, which has managed to influence a lot of what I view asymmetric gameplay's strengths are. The idea in Evolve is that one team starts off strong (hunters) while the other is inherently weak and has to grow stronger (monster) to overcome the initial strength of the first party. There is a balance point as well where both parties are evenly matched and a game can go either way if one teams hand is forced. The inherent beauty of this system is that each team understands what is happening at each stage and why they are winning or losing, leading to a feeling of balance. I'd like to incorporate some of these ideas into CW.

Initial map redesign: Let me say, one of the maps is pretty good. I like Sulfurous for its variety of combat zones and attack paths and making defenders think about what they need to do. This is a good thing, a base should have flaws that must be accounted for in a defense game, otherwise it is very boring and tough for attackers. Vault? Not so much, there is no attack strategy other than keep low and walk to the gen. The defenders have high ground, predictable attack routes, distance, and better cover. This leads to the stagnation we saw before the zerg strategy.

So, my plan is to redesign the maps in a partial, minimal effort way. We start by adding twin generators to the map, one close to the gates and one at a half way point. On Vault this is an easy task since there is an open space right in front of the gates to utilize and a space over to the left if you are looking at the gates that also can be used. On Sulfurous this is a bit trickier, but my thoughts were to put one just inside the rift area off to the right of Beta if you are again looking at the gate and the second over behind the factory area of Alpha, more toward the rear of the base. More on what these generators do in the next section.

The next task is to move the gates out just a touch to allow for more combat are inside the base. There is a lot of dead area that is unused but so cool to fight around that could benefit an attacker greatly. Giving more distance in Vault will also prevent the sacrificial nature of the first wave there that happens when a defender has long range spam in spades.

Final modifications involve little things, like some lane clean-up and ground scatter clearing. Nothing kills it for the attackers more than getting stuck on pebbles.

New Mechanics: This is where things really change. The biggest mechanic change is to spawn timers. Defenders go to a 90 second timer. Attackers have no timer. This change allows attackers to wave mob defenders and burst holes that in the current system get plugged to fast to exploit. This gives the attack its own intrinsic, but not overpowering, advantage to use for successfully accomplishing its objective. Defenders must manage there troops well and shore up any holes as best they can and rely on their preset defenses to keep the enemy at bay.

The next changes have to do with the generators and turrets. First, let us address the IS light rush strategy. A simple fix really, but a two-fold one nonetheless. The first is that the eight turrets around Omega are upgraded to dual large pulse lasers. This change essentially will limit a light to one to two alphas on Omega at best and immediate destruction at worst. The second change to Omega is the introduction of the shield generator. This is a tough one to argue for lore, but I'm sure loremasters out there can find something for me.

The shield generator would always be setup as the generator further from the gate (i.e. the generator off to the left from earlier for Vault or off behind the Alpha factory in Sulfurous) and be protected by three current turrets, to discourage loners from taking it out in passing. The shield generator grants a 50% damage resistance to Omega while it is operational, short and sweet.

The other generator, the Turret generator, controls the eight LPL turrets around Omega. It should be guarded by two current turrets and should be placed as the closer of the two generators. The idea behind this is to give the attackers an immediate goal that will enable a traditional fatty push to Omega, since the firepower of the heavier mechs is enough to overcome the damage resistance fast enough to ensure a victory if a defenders line is broken up enough.

Each of these new generators is to be walled in so attackers have to go around to get an angle of attack on it. Omega receives a roof to prevent the lone mech from shooting out your gun.

UI Changes: These are thankfully simple, add two new bars next to Omega that signify the shield and turret generator. Change the color of the bar for Omega to purple while it is shielded and back to blue when it is not. Give defenders an on-screen counter for drops, as it is now important to plan ejections. All other things stay the same.

Desired Effect: These changes are made to enable the attacker to win his mission in ways that force fighting other mechs. The twin protections of the shield and beefier turrets should prevent early game rush downs and let all of us have a better reward and fun for our time. The defenders receive suitable disadvantages to make it a more ideal early game option that can be victorious if it can hold onto its advantages for long enough. The changes were also made with consideration to the timetable that PGI must meet and with as minimal change as possible to existing systems.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, I sincerely hope the game can benefit from these ideas. We all want a good Mechwarrior game.

[AlmightyAeng]

Your first sentence is so hyperbolic that I'm not even interested in the rest of your wall of text.

[Mao of DC]

While I understand your position and even agree with it somewhat if implemented the way you envision then very few attacks will be successful. Remember assaulting a well prepared defensive position is at best very dangerous and at worst outright suicidal.

Traditionally you don't need more personnel than the attacker to hold a well fortified position. In fact the reason you fortify a position is so that you can either repel a larger force or slow them down long enough to allow for reinforcements to show up and relive that position.

I have only every seen 2 matches out of close to 100 matches I have played where the attacker has won with more of the defenders dead. Usually the defenders have plenty of reserve mechs to call on while the attackers just squeak by with their last wave of mechs. So for your plan to work AND be fair and balanced there needs to be less defenders than attackers.

Edited for spelling.

Edited by Mao of DC, 16 December 2014 - 01:32 PM.

[Brody319]

I'm sorry the Beta of a gamemode released a few days ago isn't as complex and dynamic as you hoped. Maybe we can make it better by patching in new stuff to make it more interesting and dynamic...oh wait.

[Mystere]

Popper100, on 16 December 2014 - 12:41 PM, said:

Preface: Alright, for the most part we can all agree that the current iteration and strategy for Invasion is piss poor to outright boring and predictable. The imbalance between defense and attack created the time honored strategy of not fighting people ...

Mystere, on 16 December 2014 - 10:56 AM, said:

And which is why my words are as relevant now as they were then:

Defend your base!

[Popper100]

Mao of DC, on 16 December 2014 - 01:24 PM, said:

While I understand your position and even agree with it somewhat if implemented the way you envision then very few attacks will be successful. Remember assaulting a well prepared defensive position is at best very dangerous and at worst outright suicidal.

Traditionally you don't need more personnel than the attacker to hold a well fortified position. In fact the reason you fortify a position is so that you can repel a larger force or slow them down long enough to allow for reinforcements to show up and relive the position.

I have only every seen 2 matches out of close to 100 matches I have played where the attacker has won with more of the defenders dead. Usually the defenders have plenty of reserve mechs to call on while the attackers just squeak by with their last wave of mechs. So for you plan to work AND be fair and balanced there needs to be less defenders than attackers.

This is the idea behind the increased defense spawn timer and eliminated attack spawn timer. The attacker would have the ability to either regroup and mop up a generator while the defenders spawn or push for the win when they manage to gain an edge over the defenders. The defenders have their instrinsic benefits in static defenses that can be taken down piece-meal while the attackers have a perpetual weight of numbers as their benefit.

The idea is to get people fighting each other instead of fighting against a clock to dps something down while. Attackers, like you said, have the worse off job and will take more casualties. Do you have any more ideas for attacker advantages, as I do agree that even a no spawn timer might still be lacking?

Brody319, on 16 December 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

I'm sorry the Beta of a gamemode released a few days ago isn't as complex and dynamic as you hoped. Maybe we can make it better by patching in new stuff to make it more interesting and dynamic...oh wait.

Your sentiment is noted. Now please note my sentiment and all the specific ideas that I outlined to drive the game toward a balanced, asymmetric experience where both sides know their benefits and nobody feels short changed by being forced to attack or defend.

[Mao of DC]

Popper100, on 16 December 2014 - 01:34 PM, said:

This is the idea behind the increased defense spawn timer and eliminated attack spawn timer. The attacker would have the ability to either regroup and mop up a generator while the defenders spawn or push for the win when they manage to gain an edge over the defenders. The defenders have their instrinsic benefits in static defenses that can be taken down piece-meal while the attackers have a perpetual weight of numbers as their benefit.

The idea is to get people fighting each other instead of fighting against a clock to dps something down while. Attackers, like you said, have the worse off job and will take more casualties. Do you have any more ideas for attacker advantages, as I do agree that even a no spawn timer might still be lacking?

Short of outright numbers not really. Defenders of a fortified position almost always have the all advantages. I mean if you have food and water and the enemy is outside the walls of your castle why leave it? Let them break themselves on those wall like waves on a cliff face

Perhaps more time on the clock would help, this is not the best option I know. But it would allow the Attackers to take more time to plan and successfully execute that plan.

Perhaps there could be some additional objective for the Defenders like taking over the attackers LZ. If the they do it is a win for them. This way they could, if they chose to do so, stop an attack early by making the LZ to hot to land in. It would make securing the LZ more important than it is now. I been in matches where the guys on D took the fight to the LZ and it is alot of fun but we only ever did that when we know they have few mechs left and we still had plenty of reserves.

As far as your ideas on how to arm the turrets, Large Pulse Lasers are no good. The current ones are armed with ERLL for a good balance of damage and range. Now there is a type of turret that they could use that would be both deadly and frighting to any mechwarrior. Calliopes, they are turrets with a ERPPC and two LRM 20s very nasty things to run into. A couple of drawbacks for Calliopes are. They need a dedicated generator nearby to operate, and they are always exposed and not shielded, unless they are actively firing at something, like the smaller ones are.

Edited for spelling and grammer.

Edited by Mao of DC, 16 December 2014 - 02:14 PM.

[Ductus Hase]

I like your approach with different timers in order to buff attackers.
That side needs some love.

I don´t like stronger turrets and shieldgenerators.
Defenders are strong enough if organized.

Had to face IS light rush a few times, it´s defendable.
Rush fails if defending team has spotters and didn´t leave base deserted.
If you want to buff the defenders against early rush, one might consider light turrets as stationary spotters on the sneaky routes - that should be sufficient.

[Mao of DC]

So I just looked them up I unintentionally lied to you about the Calliope Turrets. They are armed with 2 LL 2 MPL and 4 LRM 5's. Sorry about that.

http://www.sarna.net...Calliope_Turret

Edited to add link.

Edited by Mao of DC, 16 December 2014 - 02:23 PM.

[Popper100]

Mao of DC, on 16 December 2014 - 02:09 PM, said:

Short of outright numbers not really. Defenders of a fortified position almost always have the all advantages. I mean if you have food and water and the enemy is outside the walls of your castle why leave it? Let them break themselves on those wall like waves on a cliff face

Perhaps more time on the clock would help, this is not the best option I know. But it would allow the Attackers to take more time to plan and successfully execute that plan.

Perhaps there could be some additional objective for the Defenders like taking over the attackers LZ. If the they do it is a win for them. This way they could, if they chose to do so, stop an attack early by making the LZ to hot to land in. It would make securing the LZ more important than it is now. I been in matches where the guys on D took the fight to the LZ and it is alot of fun but we only ever did that when we know they have few mechs left and we still had plenty of reserves.

As far as your ideas on how to arm the turrets, Large Pulse Lasers are no good. The current ones are armed with ERLL for a good balance of damage and range. Now there is a type of turret that they could use that would be both deadly and frighting to any mechwarrior. Calliopes, they are turrets with a ERPPC and two LRM 20s very nasty things to run into. A couple of drawbacks for Calliopes are. They need a dedicated generator nearby to operate, and they are always exposed and not shielded, unless they are actively firing at something, like the smaller ones are.

Edited for spelling and grammer.

I intentionally stayed away from LRM turrets since the debacle of the ones we currently have that fire across the map and are utterly ridiculous in annoyance. Now imagine those things times four times four again. It just doesn't feel right to give defenders infinite ammo LRMs to have at their disposal, even linked to a turret generator. The eight Omega turrets to me always feel like a last resort option, an extra bit of firepower to take the vanguard out. They also should be a deterrent to raiding forces so as to not allow the two men destroy the world strategy to occur.

Linking those turrets to the generator was a way to nerf defenders a bit, making a forward, easily crashed objective to enhance the inevitable rush to the gun. It's hard to come with anything that won't end up as a rush to kill the one thing in our way game, so I'm trying to play off of interactions between both teams and at least build a game around it. I'm not fond of giving defenders a win condition like that since it might encourage them to simply sneak past and try to take over the LZ without fighting the attackers, really exacerbating the problem we have with nobody fighting each other.

Trying to make this mode a touch better is not an easy task, since we have permadeath for each variant it makes the mob em strategy pretty much impossible. Trying to make attackers too strong could also result in what we have currently, a no fight scenario. So there is a balance that needs to be found, and I'm certain it is somewhere.

[Popper100]

Ductus Hase, on 16 December 2014 - 02:11 PM, said:

I like your approach with different timers in order to buff attackers.
That side needs some love.

I don´t like stronger turrets and shieldgenerators.
Defenders are strong enough if organized.

Had to face IS light rush a few times, it´s defendable.
Rush fails if defending team has spotters and didn´t leave base deserted.
If you want to buff the defenders against early rush, one might consider light turrets as stationary spotters on the sneaky routes - that should be sufficient.

Remember, the buffed turrets can be circumvented entirely by attacking a forward structure. The current turrets must be killed in person.

The idea isn't to defeat rush entirely, the idea is to delay it toward middle, end, or never game, depending on how well the defenders do. It's boring to watch an entire team walk casually to a generator and blow it up while you casually shoot them in the back or legs hoping to blow them up. I'm hoping to change that toward more confrontations and combat, which should culminate to a march on the gun with the defenders knowing it is do or die. Or the opposite, a defense standing strong with a line of mechs holding back the tide.