most everyone I meet thinks you deathball in it, still
1
Conquest Cap Times Still Too Long
Started by Goose, Mar 15 2015 09:52 PM
7 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 15 March 2015 - 09:52 PM
#2
Posted 16 March 2015 - 06:45 AM
Also you want more rollstomp against poor assauts in the bad team ?
False good idea.
False good idea.
#3
Posted 17 March 2015 - 02:56 PM
WTF are you babbling about, buckie?
#4
Posted 18 March 2015 - 04:48 AM
If you don't know how to play conquest - it's your own problem/
Cap and lose, kill mechs and win - what's you choice?
Cap and lose, kill mechs and win - what's you choice?
#5
Posted 18 March 2015 - 05:08 AM
DuoAngel, on 18 March 2015 - 04:48 AM, said:
If you don't know how to play conquest - it's your own problem/
Cap and lose, kill mechs and win - what's you choice?
Cap and lose, kill mechs and win - what's you choice?
No.
The point is, we have a game mode named "Conquest" that for all intents and purposes should be named "Skirmish 2" because it's played exactly the same as Skirmish over 90% of the time.
The Conquest mode needs a rework to incentivise people to play to the primary objective of the mode: gather maximum resources. If I want to kill mechs, I play Skirmish. Conquest should not be about ignoring caps and killing mechs.
#6
Posted 18 March 2015 - 05:31 AM
Didn't PGI boost cbills for capping at some point?
Either way, playing only the primary objective is dumb. The ideal way of playing this mode is to cap two points and then thin out the enemy herd so that your herd can cap the third and eventually take the fourth and fifth (while simultaneously thinning or eliminating the remainder of the enemy herd). Obviously this doesn't happen very often, but I feel like it has gotten a little bit better with the -attempt- at balancing weight classes in the queue.
I think conquest would probably benefit from having the team sizes scaled based on map size (4v4, 8v8, 12v12 depending on small, medium, large map). All game modes would, but I think conquest stands to benefit the most from it.
Either way, playing only the primary objective is dumb. The ideal way of playing this mode is to cap two points and then thin out the enemy herd so that your herd can cap the third and eventually take the fourth and fifth (while simultaneously thinning or eliminating the remainder of the enemy herd). Obviously this doesn't happen very often, but I feel like it has gotten a little bit better with the -attempt- at balancing weight classes in the queue.
I think conquest would probably benefit from having the team sizes scaled based on map size (4v4, 8v8, 12v12 depending on small, medium, large map). All game modes would, but I think conquest stands to benefit the most from it.
#7
Posted 18 March 2015 - 06:08 AM
1. The problem is the maps are way too small. For example, Forest Colony is so small that the two teams are going to collide head on 99.9% of the time regardless. Alpine would benefit more from capping the base/collecting resources.
2. You have to have an equal mix (more or less) of lights, mediums, heavies and assaults. 3 Assaults and 3 Heavies will get rolled by/left behind potentially by the team.
If maps are made larger, they will largely change heavies/assaults to resource point protection duty or a long walk to the enemy base. Light mech weapon platforms (made possible with quirks like the Firestarter via quirks) are organized for PvP combat instead of actual scouting.
The other issue is that dropzones are pretty much very similar. Once you play a map, you learn where dropzones are and the most likely locations to encounter. You'd have to really mix this up (let players pick their own drop zones) depending on the strategy they want to implement.
Edit: This may be more difficult, but right now, tonnage is basically unlimited for drops. If it was tonnage oriented with different maps having different tonnage requirements (for example, Forest Colony being 300 Tons total, and Alpine being 600 Tons total) but this would require a radical rework of the matchmaking system, but would give good value to taking the lighter heavies/assaults instead of 100 tonners like assaults.
Right now depending on mechs chosen, the total drop tonnage (in 3-3-3-3) can vary from 600 tons for a 12 man all the way up to 795 tons.
IS 600 Tons:
3x Locusts, 3x Cicadas, 3x Dragon/Quickdraw, 3x Victor/Awesome
IS 795 tons:
3x Raven/Jenner/Panther/Firestarter, 3x Treb/Grif/Kint/Wolv/Shadow Hawk, 3x Orion, 3x Atlas/King Crab
If it was tonnage oriented, and Alpine had a theoretical limit of 600 tons for Conquest up to a max of 12 players per side, you could have 6 100 ton mechs, or 12 50 ton mechs or a mix and match depending on strategy.
2. You have to have an equal mix (more or less) of lights, mediums, heavies and assaults. 3 Assaults and 3 Heavies will get rolled by/left behind potentially by the team.
If maps are made larger, they will largely change heavies/assaults to resource point protection duty or a long walk to the enemy base. Light mech weapon platforms (made possible with quirks like the Firestarter via quirks) are organized for PvP combat instead of actual scouting.
The other issue is that dropzones are pretty much very similar. Once you play a map, you learn where dropzones are and the most likely locations to encounter. You'd have to really mix this up (let players pick their own drop zones) depending on the strategy they want to implement.
Edit: This may be more difficult, but right now, tonnage is basically unlimited for drops. If it was tonnage oriented with different maps having different tonnage requirements (for example, Forest Colony being 300 Tons total, and Alpine being 600 Tons total) but this would require a radical rework of the matchmaking system, but would give good value to taking the lighter heavies/assaults instead of 100 tonners like assaults.
Right now depending on mechs chosen, the total drop tonnage (in 3-3-3-3) can vary from 600 tons for a 12 man all the way up to 795 tons.
IS 600 Tons:
3x Locusts, 3x Cicadas, 3x Dragon/Quickdraw, 3x Victor/Awesome
IS 795 tons:
3x Raven/Jenner/Panther/Firestarter, 3x Treb/Grif/Kint/Wolv/Shadow Hawk, 3x Orion, 3x Atlas/King Crab
If it was tonnage oriented, and Alpine had a theoretical limit of 600 tons for Conquest up to a max of 12 players per side, you could have 6 100 ton mechs, or 12 50 ton mechs or a mix and match depending on strategy.
Edited by Helaton, 18 March 2015 - 06:49 AM.
#8
Posted 18 March 2015 - 05:39 PM
ah yes this Conquest Vs. skirmish argument
where those that fulfill the main objective are sometimes made fun of even though they sometimes had managed to pull out a win from a losing fight.
seen it happen that way time and again.
While if people just fought it as another skirmish it would be easily won or lost.
remember it only takes a small unit of three or four mechs to capture the targets and pull out a win.
where those that fulfill the main objective are sometimes made fun of even though they sometimes had managed to pull out a win from a losing fight.
seen it happen that way time and again.
While if people just fought it as another skirmish it would be easily won or lost.
remember it only takes a small unit of three or four mechs to capture the targets and pull out a win.
3 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users