98 replies to this topic

[ApolloKaras]

Why does it happen? (This is mainly in reference to Attack scenarios, and I mean the attacking team is the one doing the farming) Instead of wiping all 48 mechs out, all we really have to do is wipe out Omega. I find it deplorable and I see units on all sides do it every chance we get. The only thing it really does is irritate the hell out of people and just causes them not to play CW at all.

Just came out of a group where we did it. Just isn't fun at all.

[Samurai Hanse Davion]

Wow! You Are Right. PGI Should Look Into Ways To Prevent Mechs From Dying In CW.

[ApolloKaras]

Samurai Hanse Davion, on 04 August 2015 - 04:52 PM, said:

Wow! You Are Right. PGI Should Look Into Ways To Prevent Mechs From Dying In CW.

Theres a difference between farming, and killing the mechs. Thanks for attempting to undermine the point.

[DarkMetalBlade]

If you want a straight answer, it's this:

Destroying objectives in CW pays you jack ^#$%, which is why they farm all 48 of the "opposition's" mechs.

Too bad that farm is going to end up going fallow sooner or later.

[ApolloKaras]

DarkMetalBlade, on 04 August 2015 - 05:23 PM, said:

If you want a straight answer, it's this:

Destroying objectives in CW pays you jack ^#$%, which is why they farm all 48 of the "opposition's" mechs.

Too bad that farm is going to end up going fallow sooner or later.

Whats really the difference between 40 kills and 48? If it means you get to ghost drop next round, why run the pugs out lol.


That ghost drop gets you nothing haha

Edited by Saxie, 04 August 2015 - 05:25 PM.

[Wild_Alaskan]

DarkMetalBlade, on 04 August 2015 - 05:23 PM, said:

If you want a straight answer, it's this:

Destroying objectives in CW pays you jack ^#$%, which is why they farm all 48 of the "opposition's" mechs.

Too bad that farm is going to end up going fallow sooner or later.

This guy hit the nail on the head. If the objective gave you say, 1m C-bills, farming *might* not happen because it would be more profitable in the long run to simply drop into the next match and not wait around farming.

[Tarl Cabot]

It is like Assault or Conquest. Your team can either cap and/or wipe out the other team for payment. ATM CW planets are simply points on the map, take out just Omega yields very little, ya know like light rushes.

For the side losing, it is up to them on HOW they lose. They can go out easy or make their opponents earn it.

One way would be for everyone to eject to their last mech. The other side will not be able to destroy all the mechs. Basically it is not about the destination itself, it is the journey to it. Or like a commercial, the destination is the journey.

[AlphaToaster]

@Tarl

I believe mass ejecting is against ToS under failing to engage, but your other points are spot on.

[BigBucket]

First let me say that I have been part of this activity on both sides, and I think pretty much everyone has at some point. That is not what this is about however.

What is important is that PGI (i.e. Russ) has explicitly stated that spawn camping is a fairly big problem (Town Hall 04/16/1025 ~40:55). I take this as meaning that this is not a way in that PGI intends for the game to be played.

I recall when one of the justifications for "spawn camping" was that the objectives were so close of the drop zones (on some maps) that "spawn camping" was forced by map design. Maps have since been redesigned so that is no longer the case. "Spawn camping" now is only achieved via a conscious choice by the aggressors, now with the justification of payout for kills/damage vs. objectives.

So perhaps if there was no payout/stat tracking (damage, kills, assists, etc.) from combat taking place around the drop zones the "spawn camping" would lessen? It would have to work both ways. No payout for kills into (or out of) the drop zone to avoid the defenders gaining too much benefit from using the drop ships to help kill enemies.

If no payout is not enough, perhaps negative payout?

Another option would be to remodel the drop zones yet again to be more in-line with maps like Vitric Forge so that it is much more difficult for the aggressor to enter the other teams drop zone.

Edited by BigBucket, 04 August 2015 - 07:51 PM.

[DoctorDetroit]

Saxie, on 04 August 2015 - 04:34 PM, said:

Why does it happen? (This is mainly in reference to Attack scenarios, and I mean the attacking team is the one doing the farming) Instead of wiping all 48 mechs out, all we really have to do is wipe out Omega. I find it deplorable and I see units on all sides do it every chance we get. The only thing it really does is irritate the hell out of people and just causes them not to play CW at all.

Just came out of a group where we did it. Just isn't fun at all.

Why does it annoy anyone? It gives the defenders a chance to make more c-bills and loyalty points with the help of drop ship guns.

Edited by DoctorDetroit, 04 August 2015 - 08:19 PM.

[KinLuu]

Winning by the objective should give a huge payout to the whole team. And said payout should scale with time played, so that the attacking team is motivated to finish the objectives as fast as possible.

This stops farming.

Sideeffects might include rushing.

[BSK]

Saxie, on 04 August 2015 - 04:34 PM, said:

Why does it happen?

There is no feed hopper for pugs like a mercenary hall or bandit kingdoms. This way its is ALWAYS the units who start the attack, and then pugs who rally as defenders ..

[Kin3ticX]

Saxie, on 04 August 2015 - 04:34 PM, said:

Why does it happen? (This is mainly in reference to Attack scenarios, and I mean the attacking team is the one doing the farming) Instead of wiping all 48 mechs out, all we really have to do is wipe out Omega. I find it deplorable and I see units on all sides do it every chance we get. The only thing it really does is irritate the hell out of people and just causes them not to play CW at all.

Just came out of a group where we did it. Just isn't fun at all.

Thank you for making this thread. CW is in serious trouble and this is an important topic to bring up.

I think a radical solution is in order. Gut most of the map down to Steiner vs Jade Falcon an put in a basic matchmaker. Once players are happier with better games and population comes back, it can be later expanded to Jade, Wolf, Steiner, FRR (or whatever 4 factions). Keep it IS vs Clan as to limit the attack lanes and maximize the MM.

The struggling players and units are not going to learn how to beat teams they cant possibly beat. The git gud thing will never work. Git gud or leave is what we have right now, and it shows. There has to be a basic matchmaker aspect.

This is why I call to have the community vote on consolidating the CW map down to size and request PGI introduces a basic MM to better facilitate new player retention and new unit creation.

Whether its Jade-Steiner, Kurita-CSJ, i could really care less. Just consolidate and slowly expand the pools as needed later on. Loyalists that cry about their stupid faction while CW is in trouble can honestly go pound sand. Not enough people to support 10 factions, period. Right now, i'd say we can support 4 or 5 tops, and if you want a MM then just 2.

I think we can all agree on one thing

Keeping CW alive, better games, quicker searches > rigidly following lore

Edited by Kin3ticX, 04 August 2015 - 11:21 PM.

[bad arcade kitty]

pug farming
pugs rule!

[Pat Kell]

FYI, I have found that when we do end the match prior to killing all 48, we get a lot of "Ah come on, let us fight!!" comments. Bottom line is that losing isn't fun and there are a lot of people who do it with very little class so I have stopped caring what the enemy feel when we beat them. I don't troll them or rub it in, I just win based on what I and my teammates want rather then what the enemy wants. Also, nice post Kinetix, I hate that it has come to this but I am not sure what else can be done at this point. It very well may be time to drop the factions to 2 or maybe 4 factions and see if a MM/ELO system would work. I would vote for it right now...may change my mind once I think more on it but for now, I agree.

[50 50]

@Kin3ticX
That doesn't really address the problem of farming the drop sites for either side though.
Might help to condense the population into a particular battlefront though. Don't really even need to eliminate the factions, only disable all the extra planets that are being contested.

The biggest reason is that the objective itself does not have value to make it a priority.
There is also no repercussions for failing to achieve the objectives.
At the moment, attacking the mechs nets you more points from damage, assists and kills making it more profitable.
Elimination of the enemy team also gives the same 'victory' as completing the objective.
So why complete the objective?

Giving the objective a massive c-bill incentive will have the opposite effect and make rush tactics the norm.
Probably don't want that either.

Personally I feel it needs to have a consequence:
1st - The match timer needs to change. It needs to be an Objective Timer. The match does not end if it runs out, it instead triggers other events within the match.
2nd - Failure to complete the objective within the time limit is considered a failure for that team. No objective bonus received.
3rd - Failure to achieve the objective at the expiry of the time limit means that team can no longer bring in any new mechs.
4th - The team that does achieve their objectives can still bring in more mechs. (Would actually be cool if a new set of players could join the match as reinforcements).
5th - The match ends when all of the mechs from one of the teams are eliminated and they can no longer bring in any more.

As a side note, the drop zones need to be capture points. By preventing the opposing team from landing any more mechs at a point you cut off the reinforcements by making the drop zones too dangerous to land at.
It stops the 'griefing' tactic of spawn camping and provides a tactical objective for players of either team.
Combine that with the above changes and the matches have more meaning and a better dynamic.

[Kin3ticX]

50 50, on 05 August 2015 - 12:33 AM, said:

@Kin3ticX
That doesn't really address the problem of farming the drop sites for either side though.
Might help to condense the population into a particular battlefront though. Don't really even need to eliminate the factions, only disable all the extra planets that are being contested.

The biggest reason is that the objective itself does not have value to make it a priority.
There is also no repercussions for failing to achieve the objectives.
At the moment, attacking the mechs nets you more points from damage, assists and kills making it more profitable.
Elimination of the enemy team also gives the same 'victory' as completing the objective.
So why complete the objective?

Giving the objective a massive c-bill incentive will have the opposite effect and make rush tactics the norm.
Probably don't want that either.

Personally I feel it needs to have a consequence:
1st - The match timer needs to change. It needs to be an Objective Timer. The match does not end if it runs out, it instead triggers other events within the match.
2nd - Failure to complete the objective within the time limit is considered a failure for that team. No objective bonus received.
3rd - Failure to achieve the objective at the expiry of the time limit means that team can no longer bring in any new mechs.
4th - The team that does achieve their objectives can still bring in more mechs. (Would actually be cool if a new set of players could join the match as reinforcements).
5th - The match ends when all of the mechs from one of the teams are eliminated and they can no longer bring in any more.

As a side note, the drop zones need to be capture points. By preventing the opposing team from landing any more mechs at a point you cut off the reinforcements by making the drop zones too dangerous to land at.
It stops the 'griefing' tactic of spawn camping and provides a tactical objective for players of either team.
Combine that with the above changes and the matches have more meaning and a better dynamic.

closer games means fewer lolstomp snowballed dropship camp games

only way to do that is with some form of a matchmaker. At the very least solos need to fight solos.

[Black Ivan]

Agreed, problem is that Russ stated in last town hall meeting that CW population is so low that making any form of match maker is not desirable/possible. That shows how much of a population problem CW has when no events are out.

@topic: Yes the poblem is that achieving objectives is not rewarded enough in anyway. Kills allthe things accompanying them is creating rewards. Yes, it feels wrong but it is how PGI made the game.

[Kin3ticX]

Black Ivan, on 05 August 2015 - 03:15 AM, said:

Agreed, problem is that Russ stated in last town hall meeting that CW population is so low that making any form of match maker is not desirable/possible. That shows how much of a population problem CW has when no events are out.

Launch a basic MM with an event and it should get things going fine.

[Saint Atlas and the Commando Elf]

There must be like a hundred threads about this in these forums. I thought that all has been said, but people still seem to bother and the problem seems to persist.

So my 2 cents:

-It's not the maps (well, not primarily at least)
-It's not the farming, nor any other tactic

-It's just the enormous disparity between premades and pugs. This is where PGI has to start, when they completly rethink CW. Which I hope they'll do.

Edited by Sthtopokeon, 05 August 2015 - 03:48 AM.