115 replies to this topic

[operatorZ]

RoadBeer ....next time try putting an argument together...

Your facts are opinion...your opinion.

I don't have facts either ...but at least I'm smart enough to know that....

The main component of this game "killing the enemy" and you say it takes no skill....you should feel bad for playing this game as it is apparently a betrayal of your beliefs....go play turn bases strategy games....as it is clearly more your style

[Kjudoon]

If he only has opinion, and you only have opinion, why do you persist? Nobody's changing their mind.

Look, Invasion maps are designed to NOT be any other mode. Leave them alone, go play the PQ on skirmish. You got 2 new maps in the last 2 months, and they're talking 4 more this year if not more now that the biggest hurdle is out of the way.

Skirmish freaks are not the majority. They're a moderate but loud minority as they have been since the first calls for deathmatch only came about. Besides, you earn better money and rewards in the PQs.

Be satisfied with that.

Edited by Kjudoon, 25 December 2014 - 03:34 PM.

[Roadbeer]

operatorZ, on 25 December 2014 - 03:29 PM, said:

The main component of this game "killing the enemy" and you say it takes no skill....you should feel bad for playing this game as it is apparently a betrayal of your beliefs....go play turn bases strategy games....as it is clearly more your style

That's so weird, because there currently IS a game mode that doesn't require "killing the enemy" as its primary objective and y'all want to screw with it to make it like the other 90% of MWO.

Rather than take OUR game mode and cater it to YOUR wants, how about you just go play in the portion of the game that already caters to you?

Just sayin.

My argument has been clear all along, just because you get stuck on stupid trying to wrap your brain around it is no fault of my own.

Edited by Roadbeer, 25 December 2014 - 03:39 PM.

[operatorZ]

Kjudoon, on 25 December 2014 - 03:33 PM, said:

If he only has opinion, and you only have opinion, why do you persist? Nobody's changing their mind.

Look, Invasion maps are designed to NOT be any other mode. Leave them alone, go play the PQ on skirmish. You got 2 new maps in the last 2 months, and they're talking 4 more this year if not more now that the biggest hurdle is out of the way.

Skirmish freaks are not the majority. They're a moderate but loud minority as they have been since the first calls for deathmatch only came about. Besides, you earn better money and rewards in the PQs.

Be satisfied with that.

Just to be clear...I'm not talking about removing invasion mode or changing the invasion maps to skirmish...just to be clear because it's seems there is some confusion on this. Invasion mode freaks are not the majority....you know the ones...the ones that belief that any change or expansion of the game modes in CW will Doooooooom it, kill it and other hyperbole

[Dirus Nigh]

Jman5, on 23 December 2014 - 12:42 PM, said:

PGI has made some good changes, but we have a lot of work to do. One important goal is to increase the average game length to reduce the impact of teams spamming games in the last couple hours. I think one good change is to alter how "Counter-Attack" game mode works. Making it more focused on clearing out the enemy and less about building destruction would make more sense in the context.

This is a good point.
When the defending faction is trying to push out the attacking team from a base they should not also have to fight a brand new base along with the opfor. Those defenses should not be there, after all they were destroyed when the base was taken in the first place. At minimum clearly be a hasty repair to face a counter attack.

The original turrets should be replaced by maybe half their number. The big orbital cannon generators should be replaced by an HQ truck and ammunition trucks. This would represent the clearing out of quickly dropped in defenses and resupply that were put in place for a counter attack.

The gates should work as normal. That is just part of the match mode in general.

WIth every attacker win the repairs of the base could be slightly better. Turrets could be added for every two wins an attacker has over the defenders. They could add in a second HQ truck to be destroyed. Or destroying an HQ truck could delay a drop ship landing by 10 seconds.

Another idea is that defenders, whether they are the original force, or the invaders defending a counter attack, could not have drops ships at all. Put in large hangers in the back of the map were lances spawn in. PGI could make the hangers similar to the ones in MWLL with four bays each.

To replace the drop ship guns each mechbay could have a turret or two on the roof, or in a tower next to it. These turrets could be drop ship scale lasers that have a charge time similar to the drop ship cycle time. if the invading force holds the base then they could be replaced by normal turrets that use med (ermed) lasers.

Just some ideas that could help make it so that a counter attack is more inline with the idea of rooting out an invader, rather than assaulting fort that magically repairs itself for the them.

[MischiefSC]

operatorZ, on 25 December 2014 - 02:40 PM, said:

Well....Mischief ....I don't think I'm getting anywhere with you or me with you. We have totally different takes about this idea. So I'll let it go as agree to disagree. PGI will implement all the current game modes in CW , that I am sure of and when it happens it will be good for CW, that I am also sure of. Merry Christmas!

And RoadBeer next time try putting an argument together instead of resorting to weak insults....people might actually listen to you. Merry Christmas!

The post I quoted above is a little more aggressive in tone than I would like but the more I argue for new modes in CW, which should be an obviouse yes, and the more resistance, very illogical resistance IMHO the more I think there is something to bobf's point here.

Any who....carry on.

I'm 100% on board with more game modes. More maps, more game modes, the more the better.

We have, however, already had no Elo pug vs premade games without alternate objectives. It was so terrible that it is exactly WHY we have Elo and pug/premade queue. The idea that *that particular experience*, Skirmish in CW, is a bad idea isn't based on assumption it's based on us already having had it for about a year and it contributed to a lot of mass exodus and is the underlying basis for all existing 'EVIL PREMADES RUIN EVERYTHING' threads that still exist today, even in the pug-only queue.

That's how bad a game experience it is. It's terrible.

Many of the arguments for it are trying to say that using lights to bypass a line of TWs and DWs to hit objectives is 'cheese'.... given that the Timber Wolf (while I wouldn't say OP) is the best in class heavy and the Dire is one of the best in class Assaults is just silly. 1 on 1 for straight combat anyone who can't beat any IS heavy in a TW is, no offense, not doing it right. In a Skirmish environment IS vs Clans really isn't balanced. The fact that Clans only have 4 passable mechs, Stormcrow Timber Wolf Hellbringer and Dire Wolf, is what makes CW balanced. IS isn't going to beat Clanners in a stand-up fight - aside from rolling 12 ERPPC Thuds with some Wubberbolts for backup. Every dropdeck would be 2 Thuds, a Stalker and a Spider. Same way almost all Clanner dropdecks involve TWs and Stormcrows.

Variety is great. Straight Skirmish though we've already had. Mixing player skill levels, pug and premade without Elo or pug/group queue for straight up combat isn't a new thing. You do that and we'll have Elo in CW and some sort of pug/premade division, even if only via matchmaking. 'It's just a preference, if there's groups it'll match group to group' followed by 'having seen that premades stomp pugs 99% of the time, we've decided to look at splitting the queues'.

Mixed tactic gamemodes give pugs an average probably closer to 30 or 40% if they're willing to do teamwork, vs a premade. Higher or lower based on the premades skill and theirs. Groups will always have an advantage over pugs; the question is how do you make it a manageable one.

[Kjudoon]

operatorZ, on 25 December 2014 - 03:40 PM, said:

Just to be clear...I'm not talking about removing invasion mode or changing the invasion maps to skirmish...just to be clear because it's seems there is some confusion on this. Invasion mode freaks are not the majority....you know the ones...the ones that belief that any change or expansion of the game modes in CW will Doooooooom it, kill it and other hyperbole

No, I didn't think you were trying to remove it. Just provide an alternative that people can then ultimately opt out of invasion and just deathmatch all day every day just like they do in the PQs.

I am not one who believes more game modes will dddddddddddddoooooooooooooooooooooooooommmmmmm anything. Bad game modes won't be played. I also don't think shoehorning everything to be

DEATHMATCH!!!! AAAALLL DEATHMATCH!!!!!

like a lot of skirmish freaks desire to make every mode is smart either. How about a no-death mode that's based on role warfare, stealth, scouting, and being sneaky petes? That's different but potentially boring even from my perspective.. Or a map so large that you actually have to choose to split up to be able to properly engage the enemy forcing true role warfare onto players.

I know a huge reason so many screaming 'skirmish everywhere' want it in the invasion maps... respawn dropdecks. So then they can be just like the Master Mech or whatever Cawl of Doody match they love so much they have to try and put that template on everything else.

Skirmish is simple and boring. You have it, quit trying to spread it like an infection to every other game and map.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Deltron Zero, on 23 December 2014 - 08:11 AM, said:

The better question is, why do we have such poorly designed objectives that discourage mech fighting and encourage suicide rush tactics?

Ive seen more interesting tactics in Skirmish. At least in skirmish you have to actually think about the locations you take and hold, as oppose to having the game mode just tell you what to do.

Gee, maybe because it's Beta?

Maybe it's because a significant portion of the player base is made up of <HPG signal lost>. No wait, that's why we have these threads popping up all the time.

[The Flying Gecko]

Let me relate a little experience I had the other day:

We loaded up a 12 man team, dropped in, stormed the gates and took down a generator or two.

We dropped in our next mechs, stormed the gates, took out the remaining generator(s).

We dropped our 3rd wave, destroying the orbital gun, and achieving victory! Or so I thought, until I examined the results of our efforts.

According to the match-end screen, I did 67 damage, and with the win bonus, got about 200,000 cbills and 50 loyalty points.
Using 3 waves of consumables, I spend 240,000 cbills, for a NET LOSS OF 40,000 CBILLS FOR A WIN!

What kind of self-respecting mercenary is going to PAY to put his life and mechs on the line?

Well, as it turns out CW ALREADY IS DEATHMATCH! Fighting for a loss is far more profitable then zerging for a win

The best way to earn loyalty points is to fight to the bitter end. The chump-change for the 'win' is irrelevant. If they want me to attack generators, they have to give me more incentive then the little coloured blobs on the map screen. Free Mech Bays! Free MC! Up To 50,000,000 Cbills! Those matter to me.

[operatorZ]

Roadbeer, on 25 December 2014 - 03:37 PM, said:

That's so weird, because there currently IS a game mode that doesn't require &quot;killing the enemy&quot; as its primary objective and y'all want to screw with it to make it like the other 90% of MWO.

Rather than take OUR game mode and cater it to YOUR wants, how about you just go play in the portion of the game that already caters to you?

Just sayin.

My argument has been clear all along, just because you get stuck on stupid trying to wrap your brain around it is no fault of my own.

You don't have an argument because the things you say are not logical nor do they reflect any sort of reality.

1. I don't want to change invasion. It's fine I enjoy it.
2. It's not your game mode....it's not mine...it's PGI's....
3. Your argument is based on idea that you have completely failed to represent with any logic at all..in fact you have..in your frustration resorted to insults in this post....I think you should just stick to liking Mischief's posts as he represents "your" argument with more precision and thought. ......

Just sayin

[operatorZ]

MischiefSC, on 25 December 2014 - 06:25 PM, said:

I'm 100% on board with more game modes. More maps, more game modes, the more the better.

We have, however, already had no Elo pug vs premade games without alternate objectives. It was so terrible that it is exactly WHY we have Elo and pug/premade queue. The idea that *that particular experience*, Skirmish in CW, is a bad idea isn't based on assumption it's based on us already having had it for about a year and it contributed to a lot of mass exodus and is the underlying basis for all existing 'EVIL PREMADES RUIN EVERYTHING' threads that still exist today, even in the pug-only queue.

That's how bad a game experience it is. It's terrible.

Many of the arguments for it are trying to say that using lights to bypass a line of TWs and DWs to hit objectives is 'cheese'.... given that the Timber Wolf (while I wouldn't say OP) is the best in class heavy and the Dire is one of the best in class Assaults is just silly. 1 on 1 for straight combat anyone who can't beat any IS heavy in a TW is, no offense, not doing it right. In a Skirmish environment IS vs Clans really isn't balanced. The fact that Clans only have 4 passable mechs, Stormcrow Timber Wolf Hellbringer and Dire Wolf, is what makes CW balanced. IS isn't going to beat Clanners in a stand-up fight - aside from rolling 12 ERPPC Thuds with some Wubberbolts for backup. Every dropdeck would be 2 Thuds, a Stalker and a Spider. Same way almost all Clanner dropdecks involve TWs and Stormcrows.

Variety is great. Straight Skirmish though we've already had. Mixing player skill levels, pug and premade without Elo or pug/group queue for straight up combat isn't a new thing. You do that and we'll have Elo in CW and some sort of pug/premade division, even if only via matchmaking. 'It's just a preference, if there's groups it'll match group to group' followed by 'having seen that premades stomp pugs 99% of the time, we've decided to look at splitting the queues'.

Mixed tactic gamemodes give pugs an average probably closer to 30 or 40% if they're willing to do teamwork, vs a premade. Higher or lower based on the premades skill and theirs. Groups will always have an advantage over pugs; the question is how do you make it a manageable one.

I agree more modes more maps is a good thing....
I think that you think that I want to only have skirmish as a mode....
I just want variety in CW...there have been many good ideas posted in this thread on how to implement different game modes into CW ...
I understand your fear that CW will get elo'do or toned down or split, so that it ruins the experience of gameplay that's just not "only" arrrrrr must kill mechs arrrrrrrr
I enjoy objective gameplay...even if you don't believe me....
I just don't buy into this slippery slope argument that skirmish will kill CW

And here is why.....
You do understand that there currently isn't elo in affect in CW?
You do understand that any pug can play CW?
You do understand that CW currently is "Mixing player skill levels, pug and remade without ELO or pug/group que " ?
The nightmare scenario that you propose skirmish will unleash...is happening...right now in invasion.

If your point...and correct me if I'm wrong is "skirmish won't allow pugs to compete against teams in CW"

Or "objectives other than just kill, allow pugs to compete against teams"

And this pains me to say this.....there are other game modes for you...it's called solo que.....

And I don't believe your statistics....unless you have a source

[operatorZ]

Kjudoon, on 25 December 2014 - 06:30 PM, said:

No, I didn't think you were trying to remove it. Just provide an alternative that people can then ultimately opt out of invasion and just deathmatch all day every day just like they do in the PQs.

I am not one who believes more game modes will dddddddddddddoooooooooooooooooooooooooommmmmmm anything. Bad game modes won't be played. I also don't think shoehorning everything to be

DEATHMATCH!!!! AAAALLL DEATHMATCH!!!!!

like a lot of skirmish freaks desire to make every mode is smart either. How about a no-death mode that's based on role warfare, stealth, scouting, and being sneaky petes? That's different but potentially boring even from my perspective.. Or a map so large that you actually have to choose to split up to be able to properly engage the enemy forcing true role warfare onto players.

I know a huge reason so many screaming 'skirmish everywhere' want it in the invasion maps... respawn dropdecks. So then they can be just like the Master Mech or whatever Cawl of Doody match they love so much they have to try and put that template on everything else.

Skirmish is simple and boring. You have it, quit trying to spread it like an infection to every other game and map.

You say that you don't want skirmish because people will opt out of invasion ......
You say that bad game modes won't get played....
I believe you should read the start of your own post again.

Do you see what your saying....?
I'll spell it out...your saying that people will opt out of invasion because it's a bad game mode....you said it...

Also,


How is providing a mix of modes and maps in CW...shoehorning everything into death match?
And with all do respect if you want a no-death mode ..where you are sneaky petes....this is not the game for you.
This game is about piloting massive mechs into glorious battle destroying our enemies where we find them...and the occasional generator.

And no you don't know why people want skirmish because ...you can't read minds...but you can assume

It seems like you and Mischief are stuck on this idea that skirmish will destroy CW...let me put you at ease..it won't.
It's going to happen ...with or without you...but it won't hurt CW
It will get more people playing CW...which in mine and PGI's opinion is a good thing...
Them because you know $$$$
Mine because you know...the more players the more viable the game.

You do understand that the first changes they made to CW was to get more mech battles or should I say...skirmish....going as they saw that "Zerg rush generator "...won't make anybody happy in the long run....

[MischiefSC]

The Flying Gecko, on 25 December 2014 - 08:39 PM, said:

Let me relate a little experience I had the other day:

We loaded up a 12 man team, dropped in, stormed the gates and took down a generator or two.

We dropped in our next mechs, stormed the gates, took out the remaining generator(s).

We dropped our 3rd wave, destroying the orbital gun, and achieving victory! Or so I thought, until I examined the results of our efforts.

According to the match-end screen, I did 67 damage, and with the win bonus, got about 200,000 cbills and 50 loyalty points.
Using 3 waves of consumables, I spend 240,000 cbills, for a NET LOSS OF 40,000 CBILLS FOR A WIN!

What kind of self-respecting mercenary is going to PAY to put his life and mechs on the line?

Well, as it turns out CW ALREADY IS DEATHMATCH! Fighting for a loss is far more profitable then zerging for a win

The best way to earn loyalty points is to fight to the bitter end. The chump-change for the 'win' is irrelevant. If they want me to attack generators, they have to give me more incentive then the little coloured blobs on the map screen. Free Mech Bays! Free MC! Up To 50,000,000 Cbills! Those matter to me.

Actually that was just the extra reward. You probably made another 150 or 200k if you did any damage at all, also a ton of extra loyalty points. The bit at the end? That's just your bonus for showing up and winning.

[MischiefSC]

operatorZ, on 25 December 2014 - 09:31 PM, said:

I agree more modes more maps is a good thing....
I think that you think that I want to only have skirmish as a mode....
I just want variety in CW...there have been many good ideas posted in this thread on how to implement different game modes into CW ...
I understand your fear that CW will get elo'do or toned down or split, so that it ruins the experience of gameplay that's just not "only" arrrrrr must kill mechs arrrrrrrr
I enjoy objective gameplay...even if you don't believe me....
I just don't buy into this slippery slope argument that skirmish will kill CW

And here is why.....
You do understand that there currently isn't elo in affect in CW?
You do understand that any pug can play CW?
You do understand that CW currently is "Mixing player skill levels, pug and remade without ELO or pug/group que " ?
The nightmare scenario that you propose skirmish will unleash...is happening...right now in invasion.

If your point...and correct me if I'm wrong is "skirmish won't allow pugs to compete against teams in CW"

Or "objectives other than just kill, allow pugs to compete against teams"

And this pains me to say this.....there are other game modes for you...it's called solo que.....

And I don't believe your statistics....unless you have a source

Why do we have Elo. What originated its creation and deployment by PGI.

Why do we have a split pug/premade queue. What originated its creation and deployment by PGI.

If you were around for pre-Elo 8v8 with premades, you already understand.

If you were not, please ask on the forums about what it was like.

We already had Assault with no turrets with no Elo and mixed pug/premade. It was functionally Skirmish, base capping was unofficially a no-no.

I'll give you a hint - those things came about because it was insanely horribly bad. Terribad. So bad that the game couldn't keep new players and if you look back on the forums you'll see people bitching about it as well as premade groups talking about getting their 100th straight win and being bored.

I'm all for more modes and whatever is fun. I drop Skirmish almost exclusively when pugging. However this isn't a new concept, we know how it ends.

Then again I really don't expect PGI to make that mistake; they paid a lot of money to make Elo work and split queues. It's been a big hassle for them but they do it for a reason; Skirmish with no Elo and mixed pug/premade generates endless rage and high churn.

[Inveramsay]

The bad old days of 8 man pre made roflstomps mustn't be forgotten as otherwise we are sure to repeat those mistakes again. While it now its bad when you solo drop and get stomped three times in a row it is nothing like it was playing prime time pre elo. Any game mode that boils down to just killing the enemy will fall flat as everyone who isn't in a big pre made will get stomped.

Second reason will also come down to the inherently better clan mechs. The only areas IS currently do better are in brawling and in light mechs. Everything else clan does better. With enough thought put in to it I'm sure something like conquest could work but only if it is designed to play to the strengths of IS mechs. A straight up free for all is only going to end one way and that is with 48 smoking is mechs unless they are on comms in which case it'll be the other way around. The way invasion is set up you can defend in a pug even against a 12 man. I've been in rag tag groups fighting and winning against big pre made teams. This never happened in the bad old days

[MischiefSC]

Inveramsay, on 26 December 2014 - 12:52 AM, said:

The bad old days of 8 man pre made roflstomps mustn't be forgotten as otherwise we are sure to repeat those mistakes again. While it now its bad when you solo drop and get stomped three times in a row it is nothing like it was playing prime time pre elo. Any game mode that boils down to just killing the enemy will fall flat as everyone who isn't in a big pre made will get stomped.

Second reason will also come down to the inherently better clan mechs. The only areas IS currently do better are in brawling and in light mechs. Everything else clan does better. With enough thought put in to it I'm sure something like conquest could work but only if it is designed to play to the strengths of IS mechs. A straight up free for all is only going to end one way and that is with 48 smoking is mechs unless they are on comms in which case it'll be the other way around. The way invasion is set up you can defend in a pug even against a 12 man. I've been in rag tag groups fighting and winning against big pre made teams. This never happened in the bad old days

I recall having a win/loss of winning about 1 in 10 early on and being absolutely excited when I got a kill. Then I started dropping with 3 friends as a 4man, suddenly we were rolling 80-90% wins and it was 3-5 kills a match. I didn't get better; lack of Elo and mixed pug/premade just made it a turkey shoot.

I'm in a group and I don't want that back.