91 replies to this topic

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

So... it has come to my attention that the prevailing school of thought to win as the attacker is to
follow these five steps.

1) Mass Light Mechs
2)Push past the enemy team, essentially ignoring them entirely.
3)jump up behind the generator, put as much damage into it as you can.
4) repeat once you die.
5) most likely win.

This means, that the notion to fight, because it slows down the push, has become, in just a few days, pointless. As there is no incentive to whittle down the enemy. The only win condition is to whittle down the base as quickly as possible.

Thinking about this, this is a tricky situation to fix. By making it so that fighting isn't the primary way to win, you have given us a goal, which is GOOD... however, you have also made it so that eleminating the enemy team is pointless... thus removed the incentive to fight, and created an environment where using the cheese tactic of light mech rushing [which given the horrible lag in CW matches, makes the little guys nearly impossible to hit.]

Since this is CW: Beta. I figured now was the time to speak up about this.
The good things:

It is GREAT that we have a focused objective as attackers, or defenders.
The overall feel of the maps, makes this FEEL like Battletech.
The spawning system is wonderful, and really gives an air of authenticity to the setting.

The bad things:
The objective enforces cheese tactics on the attacking side as the match is stacked in favor of defenders otherwise.
LAG LAG LAG


Something needs to be done, to optimize CW's preformance primarily. But a major concern to me, and a major frustration. Is that this is what is enforced for attackers to win.

That's not a good thing... Fighting needs to matter, for both attackers and defenders.
Sadly I am unsure of what could be done in order to make fighting matter, other than if you destroy the defending team you win.

But that could invalidate the game-mode's overall objective, and that's the last thing I'd want PGI to do at this point... any ideas guys? CW is technically in beta, now is the time to get this stuff hammered out!

[KraftySOT]

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.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

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.

Ok, that's not helpful Krafty.

I understand that there is a fundimental problem all around here. the question is What can be done to fix said problem?

Also keep in mind, Pug teams, are NOT the focus of Community Warfare. Pug's have their gamemode, PGI has said, again and again, that CW is for the organized groups. That is the intention. So we are attempting to fix an imbalance in a gamemode geared towards orginized teams.

[TamCoan]

Yeah, I am noticing the same thing. The success to attacking is just mass pushing past the enemy and dropping as many arty and high damage attacks to the rear of the cannon as possible. While I love the idea of attack/defend, it seems lacking. Personally I'd rather see some form of progressive objective push that you have to fight to control. i don't know what the end solution is, but they will need to think of something to put the fight back into the design.

Flash Frame, on 14 December 2014 - 04:44 PM, said:

Ok, that's not helpful Krafty.

I understand that there is a fundimental problem all around here. the question is What can be done to fix said problem?

Also keep in mind, Pug teams, are NOT the focus of Community Warfare. Pug's have their gamemode, PGI has said, again and again, that CW is for the organized groups. That is the intention. So we are attempting to fix an imbalance in a gamemode geared towards orginized teams.

Yet PUGs or two-man groups probably make up the majority of players. You can't have CW be exclusive to 12-man groups, it will fade quickly as the same dozen teams get tired of seeing each-other. I PUG as I am simply too busy to dedicate to a 12-man group. Ten years ago, sure, I was all over that. Now all my old gaming friends have families and are just as busy as I am.

[Vassago Rain]

Maybe if this had been properly designed, we'd not be in a position where the ancient zerg rush effortlessly wins.

Just maybe. Not playing on MOBA maps without all the things that make MOBAS entertaining would also help.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Guys... the point of PUG/Orignized teams is not the cusp of the issue I am discussing here.

Please, get back on the topic of how do we fix it so attackers have more than one viable option than just zerg rushing?!

[Vassago Rain]

Flash Frame, on 14 December 2014 - 04:48 PM, said:

Guys... the point of PUG/Orignized teams is not the cusp of the issue I am discussing here.

Please, get back on the topic of how do we fix it so attackers have more than one viable option than just zerg rushing?!

Unless they redo the maps, we don't.

[TamCoan]

Vassago Rain, on 14 December 2014 - 05:02 PM, said:

Unless they redo the maps, we don't.

Agreed, I think it will take a bit more rework.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Yeah, the Rush looks like its destroying the entire point of CW.....Instead of a deathball and 12 mechs, its just a single light zerg and 48 mechs, of which none get used....meh...

[Vassago Rain]

This could have been avoided if they'd made it so victory requries multiple conditions, rather than just one, that's obviously located right on top of the big map feature.

For instance, you need to hold the defender's mechlab, and put at least one robot on top of a command-control node to 'hack' the cannon so it's vulnerable. Only then can the cannon actually be destroyed.

[KamikazeRat]

Vassago Rain, on 14 December 2014 - 05:02 PM, said:

Unless they redo the maps, we don't.

Sadly this is close to the truth. i think adding obstacles, would help, additional gates maybe, possibly a gate for the generator itself, to prevent side-shots and arty. i'd like the attackers to face a slog-fest to get to the generator. but without Zerg-rush tactics, Defenders have a clear advantage. so if you make Zerg-rush too hard, and you don't do it carefully, you'll make attacking too hard. its a problem to be sure.

[Joe Mallad]

Flash Frame, on 14 December 2014 - 04:16 PM, said:

So... it has come to my attention that the prevailing school of thought to win as the attacker is to
follow these five steps.

1) Mass Light Mechs
2)Push past the enemy team, essentially ignoring them entirely.
3)jump up behind the generator, put as much damage into it as you can.
4) repeat once you die.
5) most likely win.

This means, that the notion to fight, because it slows down the push, has become, in just a few days, pointless. As there is no incentive to whittle down the enemy. The only win condition is to whittle down the base as quickly as possible.

Thinking about this, this is a tricky situation to fix. By making it so that fighting isn't the primary way to win, you have given us a goal, which is GOOD... however, you have also made it so that eleminating the enemy team is pointless... thus removed the incentive to fight, and created an environment where using the cheese tactic of light mech rushing [which given the horrible lag in CW matches, makes the little guys nearly impossible to hit.]

Since this is CW: Beta. I figured now was the time to speak up about this.
The good things:

It is GREAT that we have a focused objective as attackers, or defenders.
The overall feel of the maps, makes this FEEL like Battletech.
The spawning system is wonderful, and really gives an air of authenticity to the setting.

The bad things:
The objective enforces cheese tactics on the attacking side as the match is stacked in favor of defenders otherwise.
LAG LAG LAG


Something needs to be done, to optimize CW's preformance primarily. But a major concern to me, and a major frustration. Is that this is what is enforced for attackers to win.

That's not a good thing... Fighting needs to matter, for both attackers and defenders.
Sadly I am unsure of what could be done in order to make fighting matter, other than if you destroy the defending team you win.

But that could invalidate the game-mode's overall objective, and that's the last thing I'd want PGI to do at this point... any ideas guys? CW is technically in beta, now is the time to get this stuff hammered out!

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.

[Mangonel TwoSix]

Two schools of thought.

1) Make it harder to zerg rush. Add turrets with small pulse and SSRMs with BAP to the area behind the gun. If the zergers have to take out the turrets before they can get the Omega, then that gives the defenders more time to fight the rushers. This decreases the sucessfulness of the rush.

2) Add some objectives to the game. Before you can kill the Omega at the gun, make it so you have to take out a communications array, or a command post, or a HPG uplink. Anything that slows down the rush. Or even a certain percentage of the defense turrets.

The rush not only makes it easier to win, but it gets you more wins on planet faster. So if you are rushing, you are getting attacks on faster on a planet than someone who is trying to push in with heavies and assaults....

Edited by Roknari, 14 December 2014 - 05:38 PM.

[Joe Mallad]

Vassago Rain, on 14 December 2014 - 05:25 PM, said:

This could have been avoided if they'd made it so victory requries multiple conditions, rather than just one, that's obviously located right on top of the big map feature.

For instance, you need to hold the defender's mechlab, and put at least one robot on top of a command-control node to 'hack' the cannon so it's vulnerable. Only then can the cannon actually be destroyed.

or put in 3 smaller generators in different locations in the base that need to be taken out before the cannon itself can be attacked.

[Brody319]

I'm fine when it doesn't matter. Defenders will always win against a team of equal skill if you just stand around and fight.

Unless you remove almost every advantage the Defenders have, attacking will always take a back seat to rushing the generator.

[Artgathan]

Quoting myself from another thread:

Quote

The title is a bit of a misnomer, as I feel that there are several issues with invasion mode. The confluence of these issues has culminated in the current 'Zerg Rush' tactic that is arguably the best way for the Attackers to win.

Many have voiced that they want more 'battletech' style battles (where the attackers attempt to overrun the defenders by actually engaging the defenders instead of simply running past them). The issues are thus:

• While the number of mechs on the field has quadrupled, the amount of time available to engage them in has not.
  
• Defenders spawn directly atop of the objective they are to defend
  
• Attackers spawn far from the objective
  
• Chokepoints increase the effectiveness of air and artillery strikes

The first point means that the attackers, if they want to destroy the defenders before attacking the base, must play very aggressively in order to make up for the short amount of time available. However the Attackers are further penalized by the fact that they spawn far away from the objective (meaning that they must spend time walking to engage the enemy), as well as the fact that the Attackers must usually wait for a majority of their group to respawn before moving up (meaning that they will also lose time waiting for people in different respawn waves to arrive).

Using slow-moving Assault and Heavy mechs to assault the base is also difficult as an intelligent defending force will maul these large mechs with Air and Artillery strikes as they pass through the doors to the base.

If the attackers do manage to gain ground, they typically cannot hold it. Assuming that both forces suffer roughly equal casualty rates in a given engagement, the defenders can reinforce their position much more quickly (allowing them to easily overrun the remaining attackers before the Attacker's reinforcements can arrive). Even if the Attackers manage to completely wipe out a defending team, they'll be facing fresh defenders within 30 seconds.

Since the Attackers and Defenders have the same number of mechs available to them, a war of attrition favors the defenders (especially since they receive support fire from turrets and incoming dropships).

Ways to fix these issues including:

• Moving the Defender respawn points away from the base
  
• Moving the Attacker respawn points closer to the base as the battle progresses (for instance, having a secondary drop port on the map that the attackers can capture, and if they do, can choose to spawn there)
  
• Reducing the number of mechs available to the Defenders (for instance, bring 4 mechs, only drop with 3 - I realize this can easily be abused)
  
• Increasing the width of the gates

These changes may necessitate an increase in the number of static defenses in the defender's base to compensate for their reduced number of mechs.

That said, I think Invasion is a nice change of pace from the regular battles we've seen. I'm really enjoying CW so far, I think there simply needs to be a few changes made in order to help get us to that 'battletech/thinking man's shooter' level that PGI is aiming for.

Essentially the problem is that the only reason to engage a defensive position is to take ground (IE: capture that position). However, since it's impossible to actually capture that position the only other course of action is to conduct a smash and grab, which is exactly what we're seeing.

To fix this: make controlling the map both possible and desirable.

[Vassago Rain]

Yoseful Mallad, on 14 December 2014 - 05:36 PM, said:

or put in 3 smaller generators in different locations in the base that need to be taken out before the cannon itself can be attacked.

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

[Squally160]

id like to see some AI units (tanks, infantry, and such) that we pushed along with, a la MOBAs. defenders get a smaller wave of them, and if defenders can "claim" our drop sight they could potentially win that way as well.

[Joe Mallad]

You know, the maps have all the open area between the attacking drop points and the defending base. What if a smaller defense (forward operations post) was put in and beyond its walls and single door, would be a generator that needs to be taken out before they (the attackers) can or should advance on the main base? This would give the attackers an objective they need to destroy before advancing on the main base. And give the defenders an objective other than the main base to protect, and more reason to come out of the main base. There would have to be a way the defenders could exit/enter their own base at will tho.

[Almond Brown]

Simply make the Generator tougher. Ever week, increase the points needed to destroy it "slowly" until they reach a point where a 12 Light Mech Wave Rush cannot accomplish the task by themselves.

OR

Allow the generator to be "repaired" when not under direct attack. So if Wave 1 fails but does 80%, by the time wave 2 arrives, the "Techs" have repaired the damage done.

Edited by Almond Brown, 14 December 2014 - 06:00 PM.