152 replies to this topic

[lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol]

Just what the title asks.

Does more mechs = more fun for you? Would less be better (back to 8 vs. 8 or the 4 vs. 4 skirmish idea)? Is the amount of mechs ok as it is?

[Bilbo]

I don't mind 12v12 but I preferred 8v8. The maps are probably too large for it now outside of private matches.

[Rizzelbizzeg]

Moar mechs

[Wrathful Scythe]

Would love to have the option. To have multiple gamemodes which offer a variety of rules bound to it. But seems we don't have the playerbase for such things. But forcing it back to 8v8 wouldn't be a good idea.

I played the game back when 8v8 was the norm but I can't remember if I liked 8v8 or 12v12 more. It didn't make a difference for me mostly.

[MeiSooHaityu]

12 v 12 is OK by me (especially since the maps are being expanded). 8 v 8 would be OK, but I don't have this strong desire to go back.

Don't see much of a point in 4 v 4 in public queues. If you want to go lance vs lance, I'd recommend just setting up a private match.

Overall, I like the count how we have it.

[Solahma]

I just wish we had the option. 4v4 games are completely different than 12v12, but that doesn't make one better or worse than the other. I'd rather have no choice of game-mode, and allow players to choose 4v4, 8v8, or 12v12 instead...

[GonaDie]

I would prefer to have 8v8.Less deathballing and more skill.

[masCh]

I would like 4v4v4v4v4v4

[KHETTI]

I'd like to see Pee Gee Eye run a weekend event in the solo queue where its 8v8, lets see how something like that goes first.
I suspect though that the new maps are simply to large for 8v8.

[Yellonet]

Most maps are too small for 12 vs 12. If all maps get to the size of Forest Colony or bigger 12 vs 12 would be fine.

[Dimento Graven]

00ohDstruct, on 24 August 2015 - 08:32 AM, said:

Just what the title asks.

Does more mechs = more fun for you? Would less be better (back to 8 vs. 8 or the 4 vs. 4 skirmish idea)? Is the amount of mechs ok as it is?

I love 12v12.

I'd like the elimination of 3/3/3/3.

I'd love to have 36v36, 72v72, etc...

[WatDo]

I was never around for 8v8 so i can't say objectively that was a better number but i do feel 12v12 is too many people in a match. Reduce the number of people per match and it should help with hitreg and wait times, whether they go 8v8, 9v9, 10v10 whatever. 12v12 just seems too high to me sometimes.

Edited by WatDo, 24 August 2015 - 08:54 AM.

[NephyrisX]

12v12 is OK, but 8v8 is preferable since it encourages less death-balling and stomps.

[Dimento Graven]

NephyrisX, on 24 August 2015 - 09:10 AM, said:

12v12 is OK, but 8v8 is preferable since it encourages less death-balling and stomps.

I don't know how you came up with that conclusion.

My recollection is just the opposite, ESPECIALLY since in the 8v8 mode, all 8 'mechs dropped together in the same location as a single unit. It made death balling MUCH easier as everyone STARTS OUT in the same location and there's no need to 'meet up' to move as a unit.

[BARBAR0SSA]

00ohDstruct, on 24 August 2015 - 08:32 AM, said:

Just what the title asks.

Does more mechs = more fun for you? Would less be better (back to 8 vs. 8 or the 4 vs. 4 skirmish idea)? Is the amount of mechs ok as it is?

More mechs are required, maps are getting nice and big. It's a little too easy to track 12 mechs. If we had all maps alpine sized with less hill climb I'd rather we have 24 v 24 and all weapon damage is halved.

Or... Maybe a persistant world with hundreds of mech warriors in their factions all battling it out for strategic locations with one final objective and then you own the planet and your faction gets some sort of reward as long as they own planet. Using resource management and supply chains to give your side an advantage. Voted in "leaders" to manage resources/troops/AI units in an nice overhead map of the planets to plan for next wave of attack

[Monkey Lover]

I am looking forward to cw 4v4. Smaller teams allow your actions to really matter.

[Nathan Foxbane]

8v8 would be unpleasant on the bigger maps. 36v36 or more would be epic, but would need game modes where it becomes an actual battle rather than a simple slugfest. A semi persistent CW where planetary battles are actual campaigns and require leadership running things and at least commanding the fight would be nice. Make Command Consoles an actual advantage for IS troops.

4v4 scouting is CW is fine, but as a normal mode.

[Duke ramulots]

I'd prefer something other than a matchmaker based on number of mechs. A tonnage based system or even a mech value based system would be a much better way to go.

[mogs01gt]

00ohDstruct, on 24 August 2015 - 08:32 AM, said:

Just what the title asks.

Does more mechs = more fun for you? Would less be better (back to 8 vs. 8 or the 4 vs. 4 skirmish idea)? Is the amount of mechs ok as it is?

12v12 should only be on a few maps IMO. Certain maps do not have enough combat lanes to support 12 players per side.

Edited by mogs01gt, 24 August 2015 - 09:36 AM.

[sycocys]

I vastly preferred 8v8. But as my unit mates say it's too easy for 1 person to completely dominate a match so long as the other 7 on his team aren't total buffons. With 12v12 it's extremely difficult for 1 person to be the deciding factor.

The matches used to be much better, now whether that was the single queue or just because of less mechs and very little deathball action is up for debate. Most matches took place all over the maps instead of central points, a variety of tactics were seen, and because there were less mechs there was a lot more space and the smaller maps didn't feel quite so much like crappy arena shooter maps.