97 replies to this topic

[Armando]

Davers, on 21 August 2015 - 01:54 PM, said:

Are you referring to a game where the attackers never left their deployment zone, or a game where they were beaten back to it?

Either way, they are getting crushed.

If PGI honestly wants to prevent spawn camping, they will give the players the tools and resources they need to play this game as it was designed....PvP game where a team or 12 real living people fights a team of 12 real living people.

As long as ANY team has players who have never heard of "Creating a Fine Line" , don't know what "Focus Fire" is let alone how to do it, etc....spawn camping will continue.

Edited by Armando, 21 August 2015 - 02:06 PM.

[Davers]

Armando, on 21 August 2015 - 02:05 PM, said:

Either way, they are getting crushed.

If PGI honestly wants to prevent spawn camping, they will give the players the tools and resources they need to play this game as it was designed....PvP game where a team or 12 real living people fights a team of 12 real living people.

As long as ANY team has players who have never heard of "Creating a Fine Line" , don't know what "Focus Fire" is let alone how to do it, etc....spawn camping will continue.

I believe the conversation I was having was quite the reverse of what you chimed in with. Vlad was complaining about players hiding in their spawns, unassailable due to drop ship protection, thus extending the game.

[Armando]

Davers, on 21 August 2015 - 02:11 PM, said:

I believe the conversation I was having was quite the reverse of what you chimed in with. Vlad was complaining about players hiding in their spawns, unassailable due to drop ship protection, thus extending the game.

My bad...I thought you were talking about how to fix / stop spawn camping, please continue uninterrupted with your conversation (even if that conversation, while related to spawn camping, is not relevant to "How to fix / stop spawn camping....also know as "the point of the thread").

Edited by Armando, 21 August 2015 - 02:31 PM.

[Vlad Ward]

Davers, on 21 August 2015 - 01:54 PM, said:

Are you referring to a game where the attackers never left their deployment zone, or a game where they were beaten back to it?

Is your complaint that dropships are too strong? Do you have a problem if the opponent hides behind turrets as well?

They lost their first two waves inside our base, then decided not to bother attacking again and just sat under the dropships for 20 minutes daring us to come at them. It was a complete waste of time.

My complaint was half tongue-in-cheek, but it's a more serious problem than whatever nonsense the OP was concerned about. Yes, the dropships are way too strong. The ability to core out 5-6 Mechs at a time while landing is absolutely ridiculous.

I don't mind if a defending team utilizes terrain and turrets: They're defending, and if they fall back too far the Attackers can just kill the objective to end the game. It's when Attackers refuse to leave their spawn point and Defenders have no other option for ending the match than killing all 48 of them that it becomes a problem. That's intentional griefing.

And for those who don't seem to notice the irony, this is spawn camping. Players are camping in their spawn and refusing to leave.

Down with spawn camping!

Edited by Vlad Ward, 21 August 2015 - 02:35 PM.

[Davers]

Vlad Ward, on 21 August 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

They lost their first two waves inside our base, then decided not to bother attacking again and just sat under the dropships for 20 minutes daring us to come at them. It was a complete waste of time.

My complaint was half tongue-in-cheek, but it's a more serious problem than whatever nonsense the OP was concerned about. Yes, the dropships are way too strong. The ability to core out 5-6 Mechs at a time while landing is absolutely ridiculous.

I don't mind if a defending team utilizes terrain and turrets: They're defending, and if they fall back too far the Attackers can just kill the objective to end the game. It's when Attackers refuse to leave their spawn point and Defenders have no other option for ending the match than killing all 48 of them that it becomes a problem. That's intentional griefing.

And for those who don't seem to notice the irony, this is spawn camping. Players are camping in their spawn and refusing to leave.

Down with spawn camping!

Well, each dropship has 4(5?) LLs, certainly not enough to kill 5-6 mechs at a time.

Personally, all these TDM modes for CW is what really turned me off. I had really hoped that it would have been 3 lances, multiple objectives, multiple ways of winning.

Their team lost, so they griefed you by making the match as unpleasant as they could. Maybe you had a large unit and they were pugs so they felt justified? I dunno. There is a lot of poor sportsman in this game. And in the year I have been away I have noticed it has gotten worse. Blame PGI for making uninspired game modes that allows people to to pull stunts like that.

I guess all that Fishing video game experience didn't prepare them for making game modes for internet trolls.

[Armando]

Davers, on 21 August 2015 - 02:45 PM, said:

Well, each dropship has 4(5?) LLs, certainly not enough to kill 5-6 mechs at a time.

Each drop ship has 12 ERLL, it is certainly enough to kill 5-6 mechs at a time. Vlad is right that an attacking team who sets up camp in their spawn is breaking the ToS agreement (or what ever it is called), regardless of the reason they are camping.

Edited by Armando, 21 August 2015 - 02:52 PM.

[Davers]

Armando, on 21 August 2015 - 02:52 PM, said:

Each drop ship has 12 ERLL, it is certainly enough to kill 5-6 mechs at a time. Vlad is right that an attacking team who sets up camp in their spawn is breaking the ToS agreement (or what ever it is called), regardless of the reason they are camping.

Geez, I didnt know they had that many! It's like a whole lance of Warhawks firing on you!

Oh well. This whole game is full of man children who try to exploit every loophole, game every mechanic, and feel totally justified regardless of what they do because their 'fun' trumps any idea of fair play or sportsmanship.

[Scorch454]

I have been in many matches where the enemy will sit in their drop zone and try to snipe and use the drop ships as a tactic. So in that situation we just let them sit in their drop zone and shoot the piss out of us?

Many people have already said it and if you get pushed back into your drop zone or let the enemy do that to you than you and your team have no one to blame but yourselves.

You guys want the enemy to basically pull back after they have secured your territory and let you guys reset up so you have a fighting chance? Is that what you really want them to do? That is just ridiculous the game already gave you a chance to do that and you obviously failed in fighting the enemy at that point.

I guess I just don't understand all the crying about spawn camping, if it happens to me, which it has, than I just press on to the next match and we do are best for that not to happen again.

As for attackers having drop ships with all that lazer vomit is just equally as ******** as crying about being spawn camped. Attacker ships should be nerfed big time, you are ATTACKING!!!! Go and fight, that is whole point of the game...kill the other big stompy robots!

[Leggin Ho]

I guess folks just really want to play waves then so they get to start over with 11 fresh team mates and it get's rid of the spawn camping issue, so get rid of turrents and gen's and just make it all about kills huh?

[IIIuminaughty]

What they really need to fix is these hacks these no lifers are buying and using for a monthly subscription.

[Vlad Ward]

wait wait wait what? what hax?

[50 50]

Spawn camping is a multi part problem.
While the moving of the drop zones and the change to the loadout of the dropships has changed the dynamic of it somewhat, it still seems to be quite an issue.

To start with, we need to ask ourselves why does it happen?
I would suggest that the primary reason is that eliminate of the enemy team is more profitable than achieving the objectives but also produces the same result in that you win the objective.
This means that teams are more likely to attack the drop zones as there is no consequence for not achieving the mission objectives and they can get more kills and a higher score eliminating mechs while they are vulnerable at little risk to themselves.

Tactically, spawn camping is something you would do. There are plenty of real life examples that could be considered spawn camping, but as this is a game it is considered griefing and we lack the appropriate dynamic and functionality within the matches to deal with it properly.

What we need is therefore also a multi part solution.
Firstly.
The match timer needs to be removed.
The timer we should have is an Objective Timer.
A team that fails to achieve it's objective at the expiry of this timer can no longer drop into the match while the team that has succeed can.
Failure to complete the mission objectives is considered a defeat for that team regardless of what happens afterwards.

Second.
Recognise that the drop zones are tactical objectives and we should be able to shut them down by capturing them.
This also involves some changes to the maps so we can spread out the drop zones.
We also need the game to be able to deploy remaining mechs to an alternate site once a dropzone is no longer secured.

Third.
Mechs don't drop solo. Who would bring in a Leopard dropship to a battlezone with only one mech on it?
Reinforcements do not arrive until there are 4 mechs to be brought in. While this may mean you wait around longer, it affects both teams and means you also get some safety in numbers.
It also means that regardless of which lance you are in, you get dropped randomly at one of the points that is still available.
We have the ability to change to a different lance and therefore a different drop location at the moment, but there is no indication in the preparation screen of which drop zones are being contested or are still available.

Fourth.
Better information to the players on the status of the battle while we are in the preparation screens and therefore some added functionality to control drops.

Fifth.
The map needs to have an area on the other side of the base to the attacker dropzone which is an equal distance away as the drop zone for the counter attack.
This is only to be used if the attacking team fails the primary objective by not completing it in time.
Once that timer has expired, these drop points become active there by allowing the defending team to use them as a drop location to bring in any remaining mechs. Once active, they can be captured.
This area could also serve as a retreat location for the defenders should they fail in their objective.
Some side areas should also be added so flanking becomes an option.

Sixth.
Instead of our current Counter Attack mode, it instead becomes dynamic and with the above conditions a fresh wave of new players enters the game at the activated counter attack drop zones. I think this would be a great opportunity to see a Union class dropship land.
I would suggest that at this point, because of the above conditions where it is only activated if the Objective for the attacking team is not completed and they therefore do not get any further drops (as per the above first point) that the Counter Attack reinforcements is only one wave.
From an attacker's perspective it is then about holding the base so the guns are not recaptured and reactivated and there should be a similar option in place for that scenario.

These changes will result in the dynamic shifting back to the base rush but this is more easily countered and with the other changes already proposed by PGI it's fairly heavily weighted in favour of the defender anyway.

Edited by 50 50, 21 August 2015 - 10:42 PM.

[Spare Parts Bin]

I have been on both sides of this one. I have seen teams open both doors only to see 3-6 actually push. Meanwhile the others mill around until those who tried are smoking wreakage. The survivors will be executed. It boils down to folks not working together. It maybe as ugly as a Warthog in a prom dress but that is what I see in CW.

[multisoul]

its not so easy to spawn camp with the recent changes. like said above - you really have failed miserably if it comes to spawn camping, on some maps its more easy, but hey, the ones that fail miserably should be farmed quickly so another, hopefully more competent game can start. the developers have improved the dropships greatly and i have been in teams that use this.

[MaxFool]

IIIuminaughty, on 21 August 2015 - 06:49 PM, said:

What they really need to fix is these hacks these no lifers are buying and using for a monthly subscription.

Vlad Ward, on 21 August 2015 - 06:58 PM, said:

wait wait wait what? what hax?

This is a symptom of playing under the protection of ELO and then exposed to harsh reality in CW where they face one of the good groups. People who can't handle the harsh reality call hacks. You don't get this in normal PUG games because they just don't meet the people who are too far above their level.

Btw, this whole thread is quite pointless now. Most of this was written in February. Something was done to spawn camping since then.

[Armando]

MaxFool, on 26 August 2015 - 09:25 AM, said:

This is a symptom of playing under the protection of ELO and then exposed to harsh reality in CW where they face one of the good groups. People who can't handle the harsh reality call hacks. You don't get this in normal PUG games because they just don't meet the people who are too far above their level.

Btw, this whole thread is quite pointless now. Most of this was written in February. Something was done to spawn camping since then.

And yet, game after game I see teams of players who are unwilling to leave their spawn if they die once. In Attack mode it really isn't an issue because if / when we go up 18-0 and the other team refuses to leave their spawn we can just 'dunk it' (kill GEN1, GEN2, GEN3, and down OMEGA), but in a defense...there is no dunk and the non-coward team HAS to eat drop ship (or wait the full 30 minutes).

That said, while we have lost many players to drop ships (In most matches the enemy team kills 4-6 of us, while enemy drop ships kill 12-18 or us) it has never once cost us a game.

[xX PUG Xx]

50 50, on 21 August 2015 - 08:34 PM, said:

Lots of words that come together to illustrate some rather good ideas

I agree with you on pretty much all of that and I would be especially interested to see what effect the dropship/respawn would have of game dynamics.

The idea of dynamic spawn points is not a new one but it is a good one, the question would be one of coding. Can PGI accomplish this and what level of resource draw would it require?

[Khereg]

MaxFool, on 26 August 2015 - 09:25 AM, said:

This is a symptom of playing under the protection of ELO and then exposed to harsh reality in CW where they face one of the good groups.

I'm eager to see PGI show us our PSR tiers. I don't think they need to be public (opt-in would be fine), but everyone definitely needs to see their own. Getting people to face the hard truth about themselves is ... well ... hard, but it's the only path to enlightenment.

I'm hopeful that at least some people will take their new found knowledge and adopt more productive attitudes towards self-improvement. Getting under 500 dmg in CW and see that you're a Tier 4/5 player? Time to go learn some new tricks instead of accusing the other team of hax.

Edited by Khereg, 26 August 2015 - 07:54 PM.