Jump to content

Community Warfare Is Losing Its Appeal


52 replies to this topic

#21 Black Ivan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 1,698 posts

Posted 08 September 2015 - 10:04 PM

I like CptGier's idea, it could in PVP and PVE.

CW in it's current state is dying. The mode offers very little and is lacking in so many areas to make it an enjoyable experience. When PGI was first talking of "Community Warfare" I thought they would design something for the whole community, not just a part of it.

Edited by Black Ivan, 08 September 2015 - 10:05 PM.


#22 LordNothing

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 17,818 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 02:12 AM

i think that gates need to be supplemented by alternate routes into the enemy base. say a narrow cave with a couple turrets at the end. or perhaps have whole underground complexes within the base that can be used to outmanuver the enemy. current map design is too 2 dimensional. or maybe try other fortifications like bunkers or turret gauntlets.

Edited by LordNothing, 09 September 2015 - 02:13 AM.


#23 kesmai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Spear
  • The Spear
  • 2,429 posts
  • LocationPirate's Bay

Posted 09 September 2015 - 02:37 AM

I still play cw, but it feels like a test platform for the basic functions. Map design is nowhere like 'planetary conquest' it does not feel righT. All planeT Consist of the same maps, how feasible is that? I hoPe pgi finds some creativity. More open, non funnelled theme based maps could also be used for the non cw modes. We could have a map set for desert or icE planets etc. Just a dream though. Not to mentiNUNit /merc implementation or logistics, or a strategic universe map element or...

#24 CptGier

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 166 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 03:03 AM

View Postkesmai, on 09 September 2015 - 02:37 AM, said:

I still play cw, but it feels like a test platform for the basic functions. Map design is nowhere like 'planetary conquest' it does not feel righT. All planeT Consist of the same maps, how feasible is that? I hoPe pgi finds some creativity. More open, non funnelled theme based maps could also be used for the non cw modes. We could have a map set for desert or icE planets etc. Just a dream though. Not to mentiNUNit /merc implementation or logistics, or a strategic universe map element or...


I also almost wish Community Warfare became something more like Planetside 2.....where we get a couple of MASSIVE maps, and just endlessly play on them, vying for control of the different planets and the bases on it....

THen, each battle takes place over several days in massive, on going battles, the winner of the most base caps or score is the winner of the planet.

#25 Xaxius Colnier

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 59 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 04:21 AM

in my opinion one of the biggest issues with Community Warfare is that it doesn't matter, there are no vested interests by much of the community in the results of community warfare beyond any individual match rewards. this is mainly because battles have no real effect. besides "winning" a sector on the planet what is the point? and what does winning a sector do? nothing really the possession of a sector doesn't have any effect other than determining whether your faction will take/ lose the planet and even if that was the deciding sector and you did take/lose the planet what does that do? nothing really all you did was move a line on a map. the planets have no meaning therefore all CW is a different and extremely limited game mode with insane queue times, one sided pug vs 12 man play, and no real point.

that said what could fix this would be to make CW planetary assaults more interactive have the taking of a planet require a series of battles for control of strategic locations. I see this best done in a number of phases. phase 1 is about the initial landings and securing deployment zones, phase 2 would be meeting engagements designed to wear defending and attacking forces down to open the way to objective assaults, phase 3 would be battles for key objectives such as factories bases and population centers, and phase 4 would be the attackers or defenders last stand.

the Phase 1 deployment zone battles can be fought in a kind of one sided assault mode where the planets defenders must capture the attackers drop zone inside the time limit to prevent them from landing their large drop ships if the attackers fail to secure their landing zone then it should have an impact on the rest of the planetary assault. for example if the attackers lose in two of the drop zones then they wouldn't be able to stage assaults from the zones that they didn't take and wouldn't be able to launch the meeting engagement in phase 2 for that sector.

the phase 2 meeting engagements can be fought as large skirmish matches with the winning team being able to launch an attack on the next objective, if the defenders win then the attackers must defend their drop ship in Phase 3 if the attackers win they can move on to the strategic objectives in Phase 3.

in phase 3 if the defenders won phase 2 they can counter attack the enemy landing zone and attempt to destroy the enemy drop ship in the area I see this being similar to the current CW maps but instead of a base with turrets its a drop ship such as a Union or Union-C with their turrets. If the attackers won phase 2 then they move on to attacking strategic location such as military bases, star ports, industrial centers, and population centers. I see these as being the same as current CW matches but with a wider variety of terrain such as the cities and large factory of mining complexes in addition to the closed in bases we have now.

if after phase 3 the defenders control more than 70% of the planet (drop zones and strategic points) then the attackers must make a last stand if the attackers control more than 70% then the defenders must make a last stand if the forces are relatively even then more meeting engagements are made and the majority looser of the meeting engagements makes the last stand.

In phase 4 a last stand takes place this would again be a one sided assault where the objective is to either eliminate the enemy or capture/defend the MFB within the time limit.

at this point the fate of the planet has already been decided the forces making the last stand have already lost but if the last stand is successful the planet will stay open for attack or be available to take back on the next Community warfare Cycle where as if the last stand fails the planet is protected from attack for a cycle allowing the faction lines to be moved up and new territory secured.

(if anyone from PGI would like to contact me about this and other ideas I may have feel free to pm me or email me at this accounts registered email)

Edited by Xaxius Colnier, 09 September 2015 - 04:27 AM.


#26 Wildstreak

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 5,154 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 05:01 AM

Sees Sun-Tzu reference, stops reading, leaves to keep sanity.

#27 Tangent253

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 24 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 06:44 AM

Alot of good ideas.
Better insentives to play CW, would be nice.

As far maps go...why not do a random map generator?
It's CW, its supposed to be huge, any tactical advantage gained in one battle could be wiped in the next. One of the reasons CW has become so campy, is that everyone knows the maps, and knows all the good camp spots. A random map generator kills that, and gives special bounuses to the teams that scout and work together.

Just my 2 cents.

#28 Tasker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,056 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 08:49 AM

The only appeal of CW was trash talk, since there are no in-game incentives to play it and the CW maps / game modes are stupid garbage.

#29 Tom Sawyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Widow Maker
  • The Widow Maker
  • 1,384 posts
  • LocationOn your 6

Posted 09 September 2015 - 09:00 AM

So many of these threads yet the theme is still the same. CW has no long term value. Every battle is the same. Assault the wall, defend the wall. Assault the big gun, defend the big gun. Take planet Y then do the same for Z.

I myself even ponder how it is possible that planet Y somehow has the same blue giant STAR that Planet Z does yet the very next CW game said star wandered off toe be placed by a giant gas giant.

#30 WARCRACK

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 93 posts
  • LocationUnited States

Posted 09 September 2015 - 09:01 AM

Incorporate the Assault and Conquest modes into CW somehow. Skirmish is nice with the Counter-attack CW match. Incorporate all existing maps (Forest Colony, Frozen City, Caustic Valley, etc.) into CW.

That would make me excited about CW again.

#31 Lugh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Widow Maker
  • The Widow Maker
  • 3,910 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 09:12 AM

View PostWildstreak, on 09 September 2015 - 05:01 AM, said:

Sees Sun-Tzu reference, stops reading, leaves to keep sanity.

Posted Image

He even gave you a video. Sorry thinking is so hard and understanding so painful! Maybe one day you can put your head in the sand and not worry about it anymore.

#32 sycocys

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • Moderate Giver
  • 7,700 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 10:25 AM

My only question is - how in the world did it take you until now to realize that CW is a boring tactic-less mode?

#33 LordKnightFandragon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,239 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 04:08 PM

View Postsycocys, on 09 September 2015 - 10:25 AM, said:

My only question is - how in the world did it take you until now to realize that CW is a boring tactic-less mode?


Who did it take that long to realize? I realized it...maybe a month after it's release?

#34 Alan Hicks

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 414 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 04:52 PM

CW lost its appeal for so many MWO players months ago. Not my case, but for now there are plenty of things some people don´t like about it.

On the other hand in this thread and others you find very good ideas waiting to be implemented.

The question is, when and how will they be a new part of CW ?

Or do we just have to wait to see that part of the game completely disappear ?

#35 oldradagast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,833 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 06:08 PM

CW had appeal?

I basically quit it after the idiotic intro, where 90% of my games were drops on that stupid Boreal map, where the attacking team runs through a death gauntlet for no good reason in a way no sane attacker every would. Then, we have the seal-clubbing and total lack of matchmaking, the "ggclose" crew, the punishment for going after objectives vs. just killing enemy mechs, and on and on it went. Every now and then, you'd get a good game, but they were less frequent then in the Public queue, and took more time to play and find, so why bother?

How PGI thought "competitive seal clubbing" or "team run through a death trap and get shot while shooting at NPC Oooooooh!-generators" would be a long-last game mode is beyond me.

Edited by oldradagast, 09 September 2015 - 06:09 PM.


#36 Spare Parts Bin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wild Dog
  • Wild Dog
  • 1,745 posts
  • LocationSearching alternate universes via temporal wormhole generator.

Posted 09 September 2015 - 07:50 PM

I like many of the ideas in this thread. After playing CW in Beta 2. I realized there are many more great map combinations and missions to be played.

Case In Point: Crimson Straits or the new River City to be used in conjunction with Canyon Network. 8 fortified positions complete with turrets 4 per map represent weapons caches,fuel dumps,etc on a tactically important Sea/Spaceport and the drier less temperature hinterlands.

#37 Triordinant

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,495 posts
  • LocationThe Dark Side of the Moon

Posted 09 September 2015 - 08:03 PM

View PostLordKnightFandragon, on 09 September 2015 - 04:08 PM, said:

Who did it take that long to realize? I realized it...maybe a month after it's release?

I realized a couple of weeks before its release when PGI described it in detail and in writing.

#38 LordKnightFandragon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,239 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 08:15 PM

View PostTriordinant, on 09 September 2015 - 08:03 PM, said:

I realized a couple of weeks before its release when PGI described it in detail and in writing.


I did not read about all that.

And my 28 days with CW seems to have expired...might have to go re click it just because a CW icon looks better then that.../random.

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 09 September 2015 - 08:15 PM.


#39 MechWarrior3671771

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,021 posts
  • LocationGermantown, MD

Posted 09 September 2015 - 08:24 PM

I'd still like to chat with the base designers

"We're going to build these really strong and tall gates"

"And place the power source up high so the enemy can disable them from outside..."

#40 Novakaine

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 5,750 posts
  • LocationThe Republic of Texas

Posted 09 September 2015 - 08:52 PM

Enlarge the maps and spread the objectives all over the map.
This all the eggs in one location killed CW for me.
Yeah sure you can put all your forces at the main base, but you risk losing the planet.
Because you lost all the other planetary objectives.
No tactical flexibility is what's killing CW.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users