30 replies to this topic

[Rebas Kradd]

Mister Blastman, on 10 February 2015 - 07:42 AM, said:

Just copy Mechwarrior Living Legends and be done with it.

A game that died?

[pyrocomp]

Some simple modifications to existing game modes can add some interest to gameplay. Like "no sensors" mode that totaly disables those red doritos and do not show anything on minimap. Fight using eyes only (but streaks should then allow dumbrife).

The convoy/escort missions will be interesting, but big maps are needed. And a river/canyon needed for that convoy not to be a target practice.

"VIP-like missions"... Snipping is the what will make this mode not working.

I think "Brige/Run-through" missions will be won by ECM-lights in unerhive and by noone in high Elo bracket.

"Evac" missions are interestnig. But pickup location should be random and known only to evacing team for it either to defend that location or lure emeny far from it.

"Stock only" mode is interesting (and don't require to tackle the mech, for everything can be safely switch to what it is in stock variant, omnipods are reset also) and desirable.

Maybe for the sake of training and fun a "Same class" mode should be available (12 Lights vs 12 Lights, 12 Assaults vs 12 Assaults and so on) or even "Same chassis" (wiht total disregard of Elo to fill that mode).

Lance mode (4vs4) in skirmish also look as viable idea.

On HPG there can be drop inside of the walls with team lances mixed (clockwise 1 red, next blue, next red, next blue and so on). Should be a fast paced mode . On the same map siege can be played with one team spawning in the basement and another evenly spaces along the wall.

Well, anything goes that will dissolve monotonous skirmish (I haven't seen a sinble win via base cap for few solid months!) map cycle.

[Mister Blastman]

Rebas Kradd, on 10 February 2015 - 10:58 AM, said:

A game that died?

A game that was killed.

[Johnny Z]

Mister Blastman, on 10 February 2015 - 06:06 PM, said:

A game that was killed.

How did this end up in a topic about what players would like to see for game modes? Lighten up maybe. I never heard of the game you mentioned so maybe it wasnt going anywhere.

Oh and the graphics were third rate by todays standards and no one would pay for that game. So get real.

Edited by Johnny Z, 10 February 2015 - 06:29 PM.

[Mister Blastman]

Johnny Z, on 10 February 2015 - 06:26 PM, said:

How did this end up in a topic about what players would like to see for game modes? Lighten up maybe. I never heard of the game you mentioned so maybe it wasnt going anywhere.

How?

Let's see... because Mechwarrior Living Legends was so much better in many many ways versus MWO? I was just responding to the OP. He asked about new game modes. All he needs to do is check out MW:LL and see what this game could be.

I said many, however. Not all. What MWO DOES do better is 'mech movement and terrain interaction. Well, it did. It also has a mechlab. But MW:LL had one of those, too, that was about to be released... before it was "killed."

MW:LL is completely relevant to the OP. If you don't believe me, go check it out, watch some videos, see what it was all about. It was really well done by a bunch of guys in their spare time.

And yeah, it went somewhere... 40+ maps, 24+ 'mechs, lots of vehicles, hovercraft, aerospace you could fly/drive/infantry/elementals/entering and exiting vehicles and more.

I'll say it again... FORTY PLUS MAPS. All user made. With emergent gameplay that changed, varied and was different almost every single playthrough.

[Johnny Z]

Mister Blastman, on 10 February 2015 - 06:33 PM, said:

How?

Let's see... because Mechwarrior Living Legends was so much better in many many ways versus MWO? I was just responding to the OP. He asked about new game modes. All he needs to do is check out MW:LL and see what this game could be.

I said many, however. Not all. What MWO DOES do better is 'mech movement and terrain interaction. Well, it did. It also has a mechlab. But MW:LL had one of those, too, that was about to be released... before it was "killed."

MW:LL is completely relevant to the OP. If you don't believe me, go check it out, watch some videos, see what it was all about. It was really well done by a bunch of guys in their spare time.

And yeah, it went somewhere... 40+ maps, 24+ 'mechs, lots of vehicles, hovercraft, aerospace you could fly/drive/infantry/elementals/entering and exiting vehicles and more.

I'll say it again... FORTY PLUS MAPS. All user made. With emergent gameplay that changed, varied and was different almost every single playthrough.

Ok but isnt that game still payable if people want? I have heard these complaints before and I just dont see a valid reason why that game had to put a stop to the making of this game.

Edited by Johnny Z, 10 February 2015 - 06:38 PM.

[Mister Blastman]

Johnny Z, on 10 February 2015 - 06:38 PM, said:

Ok but isnt that game still payable if people want? I have heard these complaints before and I just dont see a valid reason why that game had to put a stop to the making of this game.

Like I said, it was killed. And you got this part backwards...

Quote

why that game had to put a stop to the making of this game.

The mod also had a paywall for the longest time that kept people out of it. They had to shell out 10 bucks for Crysis Warhead after buying Crysis before that.

Anyways, this all really isn't relevant. I was replying to another poster about that part. Anyways, the features are what the OP was talking about and it would behoove him or anyone to check out all the neat stuff MW:LL had in it.

Edited by Mister Blastman, 10 February 2015 - 06:42 PM.

[CocoaJin]

Drop Zone(secure and attack):
12v12, 8vs8, 48vs48 with multiple Dropships landing one at a tme.
Secure team picks from several possible DZs: Any player on the secure team drops a smoke signal at any one of the designated DZs. There is a "X" min count-down for which the secure team must defend the DZ from attack. The last minute or so would include the Dropship landing and preparing to deploy. Dropship defenses will aid the Securing team.

Attackers: Each lance except the light lance, has a designated AI Partisan contingent. They follow the Lance lead and each subsequent lance members as they die. Once all members of the Lance die, the Partisans hold position until the enemy DZ is determined, at which point the "path" to the DZ.

Win conditions:
Complete elimination of the other team
Destruction of the DropShip

Special conditions:
Attackers- can use artillery strike, but no air strike in the vicinity of the live DZ(has a Dropship inbound), due to AA capabilities of the Dropship.
Securing team- can't use artillery strike due to presumed lack of artillery support on the ground, but can use airstrike outside of the a specific radius of enemy Partisans(due to their inherent AA capability).
-------------------------------


VIP Pick-up:
4vs4, 8vs8
Search for VIP, defend location or kill VIP. Location will be a near the perimeter of map, VIP will approach location from outside perimeter.

The "Protect" team will be provided the VIP's rendezvous location, out several possible locations, 2-3 mins into the match. The Attacking team will be given the location 5mins into the match. The VIP will be detectable at about the 2min mark into the match.

Win condition:
Eliminate opposing team
Kill the VIP

Edited by CocoaJin, 10 February 2015 - 06:52 PM.

[Christof Romulus]

Reign of Champions:
Objective: Survive the assault from the Solaris champions!
Format: One team is matched in their custom mechs against the other team that is entirely comprised of stock champion loadouts.
Maps: Any current or future.
Win Conditions: Destroy all enemy mechs, both teams.
Lose Conditions: All mechs destroyed, both teams.
Balance issues: Players in the Champion mechs are spawned using 3/3/3/3, and each player using the champion mechs respawns 3 times, cycling through all four mech types. The custom mechs do not respawn.

Cut off!
Objective: You and your lance mates are now returning from a successful campaign and your base is just over the horizon. All there is left to do now is return unaccosted...
Format: One team has 12 heavy / assault mechs, The opposing team has 8 light / medium mechs.
Maps: Canyon / Alpine / Tormaline
Win Conditions: Team 1, win condition is to either destroy all attackers, or get 200 tons of mechs to the base. Team 2, Destroy enough mechs so that 200 tons can not return to the base.
Lose Conditions: Team 1, lose enough mechs that 200 tons can not be returned to the base. Team 2, lose all attacking mechs.
Balance Issues: Team 1 mechs (Assault /heavys) are all damaged to 50% randomly (potentially missing limbs, or even critical damage to weapons) and 50% ammunition. Team 2 is undamaged.

[Kiiyor]

I want battles that dynamically affect CW.

Supply line raids.

Smaller mech numbers, shorter battles.

There would be an option to attack planets deeper into enemy territory, in a radius around one enemy held world, but with a much smaller force - one or two lances. Each map would be quite large, with numerous supply depots.

Defenders have a larger tonnage allowance, attackers smaller. The allowed tonnage limit for attackers would decrease the further you wanted to penetrate enemy territory. Who dares wins!

The objective would be to destroy as many supply depots as possible, with a twist to respawning; defender respawn times start much slower at double the normal window, and drop dramatically as the match progresses and reinforcements arrive.

The attacker respawn times are initially much quicker, but will increase as more planetary defence resources arrive. This puts pressure on the attackers to inflict damage early, and forces the defenders to be cautious with their initial mechs.

These raids would directly affect the drop deck tonnage available to the primary world. Each successful raid would lower the total tonnage available to the defenders of the primary world by 5 tonnes, or raise it if the raids are being carried out from the force holding the world. They could also have other effects - for instance, shortening or lengthening dropship respawn times on the main planet, or decreasing/increasing the global cooldown on artillery and airstrikes.

These raids could be quite tactical - they could be used as feints, or to soften up a target for invasion. They could be used to harden a planet, making it a strong point.

[Rebas Kradd]

Mister Blastman, on 10 February 2015 - 06:42 PM, said:

Anyways, this all really isn't relevant. I was replying to another poster about that part. Anyways, the features are what the OP was talking about and it would behoove him or anyone to check out all the neat stuff MW:LL had in it.

I've watched MW:LL videos. You shouldn't assume that I haven't just because I don't agree with you.

What I saw was a conceptually admirable game that starved itself despite all the vehicles and aerotech. 90% of the emergent gameplay you described was down to map design. People don't want matches that take five minutes to find opponents and are over even faster. My favorite were the competitive matches that literally featured twenty minutes of scouting and two minutes of action. It gives a nerdgasm to the gaming snobs, but does anyone really think that would make money with the rank-and-file gamer?

PEOPLE WANT SHOOTING WITH BIG STOMPY ROBOTS.

PGI has obviously gone the route of "instant action" to start growing its player base. That's not to say that more complex gameplay can't emerge here later (and I'd like it to), but like it or not, PGI is just as reliant on new, curious, and casual players as they are on the devoted ivory-tower MW fans. They were reasonable to build a game that got people right into the action and skimmed off some of the more complex and confusing concepts, even if the result was somewhat confined gameplay.

The first time PGI created a truly team-oriented gamemode - Community Warfare - it tanked in two months because the pugs weren't interested. That should be enough to tell you how MWO would have performed had it listened to its core players in the beginning and created an esoteric, confusing gameplay just to satisfy the elitists. And no, CW wouldn't have done any better with the relative handful of disgruntled holdouts you're probably already thinking of. Many of them came back anyway.

And stop with the conspiracy theories about PGI shutting down LL. There was no proof and both sides denied it.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 11 February 2015 - 11:12 AM.