93 replies to this topic

[Lily from animove]

Mawai, on 18 December 2014 - 06:06 AM, said:

"he thinks trading shots at the gate leads to boring gameplay."

... and I have to agree with him to be honest. Pot shot sniping at the gates just isn't much fun.

I think one of the biggest issues with the game mode are the reinforcement drop zones.

When an attacker pushes all the way to the canon, the defender drop zone is right next to the canon. This means that the attacker usually gets wiped after a certain point since their reinforcements can't catch up in time to keep the battle going while the defender reinforcements drop directly into the fight.

Similarly, in some other cases, the defender has pushed out far enough to camp the attacker drop zones. If the attacker does not coordinate a mass drop ... then they have a problem. In addition, the defender can camp one of the three attacker drop points and eliminate 4 mechs with focused fire ... damaging them while still in the drop ship and then get to face the remaining 8 mechs split into two groups at their drop points.

I think this latter tactic is why the attacker drop ships have been upgraded to 12 ERLL from 7 medium lasers and the defender drop ships have been dropped to 7 ML from 7 ERLL. The defender doesn't typically need the extra support on their drop zone since the attackers are usually going for the gun. It will be interesting to see if this significant reduction in defender drop ship firepower will encourage some folks to camp the defender spawn points.

well honestly the reaosn why gate fighting is boring is that every gate is basically the same, yet they are no real defense gates, they are just unclimbable walls unless you have a lighter mech with enough JJ's.

[Kirkland Langue]

InspectorG, on 17 December 2014 - 08:50 PM, said:

Orbital fire support on the Attacker's drop zone. Support that HURTS.

If spawn camping is what Russ is talking about.

I hope this doesnt devolve into Skirmish v.2

Well that's basically the same thing as buffing the Dropship guns.

[Airox]

Most people want more mech on mech combat. Less of where the attacker just ignores defending mechs. The layered defense mentioned earlier would make this happen. It is the best solution to what most people (Russ included) have been asking for. The big issue is how to implement that.

I believe the best solution is layered defenses through tiered gates. Gate 1 is mostly as is now with defenders sitting right behind the gate. Attackers break through and take gate 1 territory, but they are delayed by Gate 2. This delay allows for the 2nd wave of defenders to get into place. Now gate 2 is destroyed and attackers move in to take gate 2 territory. Now gate 3 delays them but is all that prevents them from getting to the generator. Naturally, defenders would need access to all areas within the gates.

Everything mentioned is doable with resources already in game. It is simply a matter of map design. No need for additional spawn points or VTOLs. Simply have defender spawn be higher elevation (2nd floor) and they can fall into their desired zone.

[Kjudoon]

Yes, that answer to my question was kinda disappointing, but I appreciated his candor. BUT... I am still disappointed. If there was a reason like say:blowing up a command vehicle coordinating Artillery or Air Strike slows down the arty spam, or maybe one can delay the dropship arrival for the attackers and pay beaucoup Cbills and help your defense, I'd say it's something worth doing. Heavy landing zones always have to have someone coordinating or you get crashes.

But if it's only going to be in the walls, we're back to River City syndrome with a walk.

Look at this pretty walk in the country isn't this nice. Now 80% of the map is just the line to the ride. Starting to feel like Disneyworld without Fast Pass. 75 minutes of wait, 5 minutes of ride.

GGclose

Edited by Kjudoon, 18 December 2014 - 07:38 AM.

[operatorZ]

Mystere, on 17 December 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

Oh **** it, just replace Invasion with Skirmish already, as that seems to be what the larger mentally-challenged portion of player base wants.

Community Warfare, it was nice knowing you.

The mentally challenged want mech on mech combat.....damn them...just when I was getting good at this zerg rush deal...

[Kjudoon]

Violent Nick, on 18 December 2014 - 04:35 AM, said:

To spot and gain info, to flank, to rout/demoralise, for precision strikes, to ambush, to prevent artillery...

The problem there is it also provides no Cbills or XP worth the risk. Now if you had something valuable to attack with those scouts while the mechs and dropships are away, maybe some attackers are forced to hang back a little or be ready to deal with consequences. Again, even attackers need a little something to defend. Even a command RV or something. Retask the bases used in assault mode to be that.

operatorZ, on 18 December 2014 - 07:38 AM, said:

The mentally challenged want mech on mech combat.....damn them...just when I was getting good at this zerg rush deal...

Meh, the zerg rush is still going to exist. Just in potentially multiple phases and spread out. You still have the quickest goal to victory in taking out the generators and ignore the defenders unless those generators turn out to be REALLY tough to kill or so easy to defend you must kill the mechs first before you can go after it.

[Alistair Winter]

Kjudoon, on 18 December 2014 - 07:36 AM, said:

But if it's only going to be in the walls, we're back to River City syndrome with a walk.
Look at this pretty walk in the country isn't this nice. Now 80% of the map is just the line to the ride. Starting to feel like Disneyworld without Fast Pass. 75 minutes of wait, 5 minutes of ride.
GGclose

Haha, well put!

Maybe it'll change in time if people start playing the game differently, but right now the comparison to River City is very apt.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 18 December 2014 - 07:50 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Kjudoon, on 18 December 2014 - 07:36 AM, said:

Yes, that answer to my question was kinda disappointing, but I appreciated his candor. BUT... I am still disappointed. If there was a reason like say:blowing up a command vehicle coordinating Artillery or Air Strike slows down the arty spam, or maybe one can delay the dropship arrival for the attackers and pay beaucoup Cbills and help your defense, I'd say it's something worth doing. Heavy landing zones always have to have someone coordinating or you get crashes.

But if it's only going to be in the walls, we're back to River City syndrome with a walk.

Look at this pretty walk in the country isn't this nice. Now 80% of the map is just the line to the ride. Starting to feel like Disneyworld without Fast Pass. 75 minutes of wait, 5 minutes of ride.

GGclose

and yet all the hordes rush to disneyland, mankind isn't really that clever.

[InspectorG]

Kirkland Langue, on 18 December 2014 - 07:12 AM, said:

Well that's basically the same thing as buffing the Dropship guns.

Basically but permanent and tied to the drop zone.

[Bigbacon]

well now you get 3 new generators to take out before you can hit the gun.

[Kjudoon]

Lily from animove, on 18 December 2014 - 07:55 AM, said:

and yet all the hordes rush to disneyland, mankind isn't really that clever.

Never doubt the power of the mouse.

[Beo Vulf]

The current match system in regards to CW is broken that is evident.
1. The maps are to small.
2. There should be more objectives for the attackers than are provided in the current game mode.
The are several ways to fix these issues and I favor a composition of all of them.
1. Enlarge the maps and add defenses outside of the base so that more objectives out side of the base must be taken out.
2. Enlarge the base, add more objectives and change the defenses inside it.
3. The current locations for the defense turrets make them easy to take out. Move some of them up onto the mountain sides and make them calliope turrets.
These would eliminate all the current Zerg rush tactic.
It would eliminate the gate camping.
It would add to the complexity of the experience and make attacking or defending more enjoyable.

[Sandpit]

Karl Streiger, on 18 December 2014 - 12:49 AM, said:

So yep the Invasion Maps are again - to small..... ok considering the grid - of Smurfy Maps they are mediums sized.

They're only "small" outside the gate really. There's quite a bit of room to maneuver inside the base. They aren't even really "small" outside the gate, there's just nothing there. There isn't supposed to be. It's an attacker staging area. It's a hot LZ. That's it

[Mystere]

Mystere, on 17 December 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

Oh **** it, just replace Invasion with Skirmish already, as that seems to be what the larger mentally-challenged portion of the player base wants.

Community Warfare, it was nice knowing you.

xLAVAx, on 18 December 2014 - 06:03 AM, said:

How about using regular skirmish maps for the first 75 to 80% of planetary conquest and finish off with assaults on Omega as the final phase.

Do people see what I mean?

Edited by Mystere, 18 December 2014 - 09:07 AM.

[Sandpit]

Alistair Winter, on 18 December 2014 - 01:12 AM, said:

Sandpit, with all due respect, I don't even have to read your posts anymore. You're just spamming the same thing over and over.
1) Everyone's whining because they don't know how the game works
2) Everyone just needs to get better and see that everything is working as intended.

Ok. I get it. "Learn to play". No need to keep telling me. We're never going to agree on this.


There's no need for strawman arguments. I even included a link to a Wikipedia article explaining the whole concept, in case you felt my explanation was too shallow. It even has examples from WW2 and the Roman empire. Check it out.

With all due respect I never accused you of whining. If you have a guilty conciense take it up with your therapist.

You presented a thought and idea. I explained why I dont' like ti and why the maps are set up the way they are. You're the only one who's trying to turn that into "L2P" rhetoric.

You're just pissy because you weren't agreed with.

[Mystere]

operatorZ, on 18 December 2014 - 07:38 AM, said:

The mentally challenged want mech on mech combat.....damn them...just when I was getting good at this zerg rush deal...

Give me urban maps with the size and skyscrapers of Hong Kong to fight in and I promise I will refrain from challenging your mental capacity.

And imagine if River City looked like this instead:

Edited by Mystere, 18 December 2014 - 09:31 AM.

[Sandpit]

Mystere, on 18 December 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

Give me urban maps with the size and skyscrapers of Hong Kong to fight in and I promise I will refrain from challenging your mental capacity.

a true city environment would be fantastic. Mechs running in and out of streets, plenty of cover. Tons of avenues for approach. One good city map would change the entire landscape of MWO when it was played on

[Screech]

At some point I hope they make a large CW map based along the original Far Cry multiplayer maps. They would have 3 strategic positions which the attackers needed to take, but they needed to be taken in order and allowed defenders to fall back to deeper positions as the game progressed.

[Sandpit]

Screech, on 18 December 2014 - 09:59 AM, said:

At some point I hope they make a large CW map based along the original Far Cry multiplayer maps. They would have 3 strategic positions which the attackers needed to take, but they needed to be taken in order and allowed defenders to fall back to deeper positions as the game progressed.

I would like to see a king of the hill type mission. Where a few strategic locations need to be held but are neutral. it's kind of a quasi-conquest type deal.
it would force both teams to split off and handle multiple objectives. Tons of coordination and strategies.

I'd also like to see a modified CTF type mode. Both teams have bases that contain "data". Each team would be required to download the data and return it to their home base. First team to successfully bring home the objective wins.

[HARDKOR]

City map would rule.

A consumable that drops a calliope turret would be the bomb as well.