15 replies to this topic

[asdbnmrty]

Respawn waves are within a 30 second period. Dying forces the defender to skip the next reinforcement wave multiplied by number of deaths.

Defender respawn time:
Initial spawn: Immediate
1st Death (2nd mech): 30 seconds + remaining time on reinforcement timer
2nd Death (3rd mech): 60 seconds + remaining time on reinforcement timer
3rd Death (4th mech): 90 seconds + remaining time on reinforcement timer

Attacker respawn time:
Initial spawn: Immediate
All after: remaining time on reinforcement timer

Why?

Rewards attackers for destroying enemy mechs, in which they now have a window of time to push when they destroy enemy mechs. Incentive to actually fight enemy mechs instead of ignoring defenders and suicide running generators.

Gives defenders incentive to play more carefully, as an ever increasing advantage is given to attackers (you're off the field for longer) the more you die.

This is a band aid fix that works with your current system. In reality, I desire more depth and complexity such as NPC attakers/defenders to help with flow of battle, more strategic objectives such as turret control centers or forward drop zones, and destructible environments to slowly strip defenders of their cover. But in reality, I know you don't have the infrastructure to do it nor the development power to create it in a reasonable time.

So at least do this for us. CW, the pinnacle of MWO game modes is a complete chicken shoot for defenders and a repeated banzai run for attackers. It's a joke. Is that what you envisioned it being? Is this what the players get after years of waiting?

[BourbonFaucet]

Yes. Most attack/defend modes in other games have large respawn times for the defender, not so for the attacker. See Team Fortress 2.

[keith]

Techorse, on 27 December 2014 - 03:44 PM, said:

Yes. Most attack/defend modes in other games have large respawn times for the defender, not so for the attacker. See Team Fortress 2.

yes a thousand times. pgi needs to dl tf2 and play their A/D maps for a day. see how their timers work, how there are choke points to open areas to choke points. valve has great map design, pgi not so great desgin

[Kinski Orlawisch]

Are you shure that this is a good idea? Sometimes the attacker already farms the dropships in the enemy base.

[BourbonFaucet]

keith, on 27 December 2014 - 03:48 PM, said:

yes a thousand times. pgi needs to dl tf2 and play their A/D maps for a day. see how their timers work, how there are choke points to open areas to choke points. valve has great map design, pgi not so great desgin

There are gates as chokepoints on the maps PGI has made. The chokepoints aren't the issue, as you can fake out the defenders. The biggest similarity between the two games is the fact that you must use coordinated pushes to win.

That being said, in Team Fortress 2, the way to win is to knock down a portion of the defense, then push hard against the remainder. You push after you've killed a number of the defenders, and usually, after blowing up their sentry guns.

To carry that over to MWO, we must increase the respawn time of the defenders to give the attackers time to break the objectives down while the defenders are dead. Zerg rushing with lights will still not be viable, because lights will have trouble killing the defenders whilst still managing to get the objectives. Now that we've nerfed the Zerg rush, we must buff what killing does for the attacker in order to favor a traditional fight and push model.

[Kanatta Jing]

Marc von der Heide, on 27 December 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

Are you shure that this is a good idea? Sometimes the attacker already farms the dropships in the enemy base.

If you can farm dropships you have already won and you're just doing it for the points.

[Kinski Orlawisch]

Correct. The fast respawn gives the Defender a Chance to recover. With a longer timer...this Chance would bee gone.

[Savage Wolf]

The fast respawn timer means that the defenders almost instantly recovers. There is no reason for attackers to kill defenders when they respawn so fast. It's simply a waste of time compared to just running for the objectives.

So that respawn timer for defenders need to go up. And what is this thing with respawn times. When I kill an enemy I don't want to roll a dice to see how long he's out. When someone dies, they should be out for a specific amount of time from the time of death so that the other team knows how long they have an advantage.

[luxebo]

Marc von der Heide, on 27 December 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

Are you shure that this is a good idea? Sometimes the attacker already farms the dropships in the enemy base.

I've never, ever seen an attacking group farm defending dropships. That is a first.

On the other hand I've seen lances of Dire Wolves camp attacking spawns. In fact if one could kill dropships then they probably would too.

I think simply put they should increase defenders respawn time a bit more, like 30 sec + reinforcement time per wave (no need for increasing time per wave. Sounds a bit too harsh due to time limit.)

Edited by luxebo, 27 December 2014 - 05:07 PM.

[Desolator]

asdbnmrty, on 27 December 2014 - 03:41 PM, said:

Defender respawn time:
Initial spawn: Immediate
1st Death (2nd mech): 30 seconds + remaining time on reinforcement timer
2nd Death (3rd mech): 60 seconds + remaining time on reinforcement timer
3rd Death (4th mech): 90 seconds + remaining time on reinforcement timer

Attacker respawn time:
Initial spawn: Immediate
All after: remaining time on reinforcement timer

Do all this and add 400 armor to all generators.

The game isn't supposed to be fair.

PvP is War, war is unfair, I suggest you make it unfair to your advantage.

[BourbonFaucet]

Desolator, on 27 December 2014 - 05:53 PM, said:

Do all this and add 400 armor to all generators.

The game isn't supposed to be fair.

PvP is War, war is unfair, I suggest you make it unfair to your advantage.

Good Game design =/= reality

War is unfair. A game about war shouldn't be unless you want to piss off the people who get the short end of the stick when it comes to the game's balance.

Edited by Techorse, 27 December 2014 - 06:21 PM.

[Fooooo]

Yeah most fps with similar game modes to invasion will generally have the defenders on a longer spawn.

ET was i think 20 sec for attackers and 30sec for defenders on most maps. Its generally like that tho because you want the attackers to "set a time" for the other team to beat in ET when playing stopwatch.....

Nobody wants 3 rounds of full holds meaning its a draw every game, so the attackers were given slight advantages to stop this. Doesn't really fit with MWO tho, but still can work.


The other thing to think about however is access to forward spawns / multiple spawns for both sides (IE def start at spawn 1 away from but near the gate, however the attacking team can cap this spawn and then use it as THEIR spawn etc) Forcing the defenders to now spawn WAYYYY back away from the gate etc.

Place a few of these cappable spawns around the map and let players (or lance leaders) choose where the lance drops in if and when they cap those other spawns.



Also not to forget is just the spawn locations themselves.

By just adjusting the distance attackers or defenders have to travel you can effect the way the games play.

IE give defenders more help on the first phase by moving their initial spawn closer, however their rear spawn is futher distance to the obj to defend etc etc...... Tons of ways of playing around with it

Edited by Fooooo, 27 December 2014 - 08:07 PM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Marc von der Heide, on 27 December 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

Are you shure that this is a good idea? Sometimes the attacker already farms the dropships in the enemy base.

The defense should come out of hangars some 300m behind the front lines. Delay the attacking force droptime and reinforce the objectives to make up for hte increase in defense getting to hte gate initially. But sure, longer defense spawn time would be good. Its almost impossible to attack Borreal cuz the defense drops fresh on the objective right beside a bunch of turrets.

Sulpher is alot more balanced...though id almost say its more in favor of offense there.

[Cementi]

For those quoting reality the fact is only the desparate would attack a fortified position with equal forces.

Whats the golden rule you should outnumber the defenders by at least a third, prefably half again as much I think.

So if we are going reality then keep the defenders as is and give the attackers 5 or 6 mechs to drop with.

It is a game, and sometimes for balance you have to suspend reality. I mean to gates that spring open when their power is cut make sense to you?

[Vassago Rain]

A better study is the old half-life OG mod Firearms. That's what PGI should have done for CW.

[Satan n stuff]

Techorse, on 27 December 2014 - 03:44 PM, said:

Yes. Most attack/defend modes in other games have large respawn times for the defender, not so for the attacker. See Team Fortress 2.

Teamfortress 2 is balanced the way it is to limit stalemates. We already have ways to limit those because we have limited or no respawns, no way to recover from damage and massive reductions in combat effectiveness for damaged mechs. This is why 11-12 matches are so rare in the other game modes, even in a very close fight the side that fights most effectively will grind down the enemy combat effectiveness faster than they lose their own so eventually the least effective team is crushed.

I do agree something should be done about the defender advantage and the baserushing, but there is a reason you get four mechs in this mode and my guess would be the idea is that you actually get to use most of them, regardless of what side you're on.

The vision of CW according to Russ is massive brawls inside the base, if this is going to be the main strategy taking out the cannon should not be possible unless most of the defenders are down. This strategy would however not be viable unless attackers get additional firepower to match what the defenders already have. This means adding vehicles to counter the turrets, and bringing spawn locations progressively closer to the cannon. Ideally there should be no easy win strategy for either side, and attackers should win about half the time on average.