12 replies to this topic

[Homeskilit]

I think new, experimental game modes should be added to the que/match list more often so we can play and test them. Make them playable for short periods, say 1-2 days at a time and then remove them for study. Once a mode has been through a cycle of test,study, and change and change it can be added again for longer and longer periods until it becomes part of the match list or if it did not work, simply removed.

I would like to brain storm and discuss new ideas for game modes. Please refrain from simply positive or negative remarks, I want this to be a critical discussion of ideas.

This came about because I enjoy company v company fights but the death ball gets old after a while. It seems this is the only viable tactic in the poorly communicated games that make up solo que. I would like to see more small group skirmishes.

So, my first idea: Clan Batchall (name subject to change)

The object of the game is for each company to attack three points. This is accomplished by each lance attacking a different point individually. An equivalent lance also attacks said point (assault vs assault, light vs light). Each area is blocked off such that it prevents the lances from joining each other until their immediate opponents have been defeated, at which point the gate opens and you can either A) enter a middle field and wait for others to finish their fights or proceed to influence those other fights (not sure which would be better). Players would still be able to communicate. Ideally you would want each small battle to end around the same time.

Pros
-You get lance vs lance fighting and sometimes mixed company level fighting at the end.
-It could get people to learn small group tactics that could in turn translate to other game modes.

Cons
-Game could be decided by a fight that is out of your control (happens sometimes anyway).
-Map and area size could heavily favor brawler load outs (first area would have to be smaller but should be big enough to promote maneuvering).


Now, toss out your own ideas for game modes to be discussed or dissect this one with the idea of making it better (if possible).

*removed random smiley face

Edited by Homeskilit, 23 September 2015 - 09:30 PM.

[Slambert]

Good topic. I was just reading a thread where someone stated that you should always ball up. It's true I'm afraid. I see very few games (Pug) where splitting forces is successful.

Your suggestion would introduce some much needed variety. I like the Clan Batchall idea.

Putting forth another idea that isnt as well thought out but might still be good:

Introduce 3 types of capturable points in the games modes (can start with skirmish).
1) Airfields will autospawn airstrikes every (minute) for every commander on the team (1-3)
2) Artillery sites (same as airfields)
3) Sensor towers - either spawn UAV's or give fixed radar cover in a given radius from the tower.

This can be used in existing maps - but will probably work best on the larger ones.

[Grayson Sortek]

Homeskilit, on 23 September 2015 - 09:29 PM, said:

... say 1-2 days at a time and then remove them for study....
...
So, my first idea: Clan Batchall (name subject to change)
...

Good idea sir, although I don't think I would agree with 1-2 days. I don't think they would be able to collect enough data in that time. You would need at least a week to see the different patterns that arise at different times in the week.

Slambert, on 24 September 2015 - 12:09 AM, said:

...
Introduce 3 types of capturable points in the games modes (can start with skirmish).
1) Airfields will autospawn airstrikes every (minute) for every commander on the team (1-3)
2) Artillery sites (same as airfields)
3) Sensor towers - either spawn UAV's or give fixed radar cover in a given radius from the tower.

This can be used in existing maps - but will probably work best on the larger ones.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought of the airfield idea. This universe lends itself to so many new and interesting ideas for gameplay modes. Or even new mixes of old gameplay modes.

For example; capture the flag could be capture the intel like the intro to MW2 Mercenaries. You have to not only capture the intel, but you have to get onto a dropship and it has to escape (rather than just reaching a specific point).

Another example that is similar to a game mode in BF2142: You have to actually take down a dropship. I don't mean the kinds that we have in game right now, no I'm talking about those big egg mother frakers that can take out entire lances. I think having to complete an objective to gain access to the dropships before you can assault them would prevent base rushes that we see today (plus the dropship would kill those lights) and encourage more strategic play from both teams.

Homeskilit, I think that as you receive more replies to this topic you are going to find that people want more objective based gameplay that is steeped in lore and not just the deathmatches that we have today.

Here is another thought: After small battles in matches there are usually graveyards of Battlemechs. What about a game mode where you have to try to salvage as much of those as possible, with the commander calling in the salvage vehicles, and you have to protect them. Wow, an actual reason to have a commander!

I hope to see a lot more on this thread, and some actual interaction from PGI.

[Homeskilit]

Slambert, on 24 September 2015 - 12:09 AM, said:

Introduce 3 types of capturable points in the games modes (can start with skirmish).
1) Airfields will autospawn airstrikes every (minute) for every commander on the team (1-3)
2) Artillery sites (same as airfields)
3) Sensor towers - either spawn UAV's or give fixed radar cover in a given radius from the tower.

This can be used in existing maps - but will probably work best on the larger ones.

Awesome idea, with this your team can communicate and decide which ones they want to fight for. You could even have multiple sites for each across the map with limited range so holding different positions becomes key. Death ball would only get one site at a time while splitting into lances or small scout teams (with a semi death ball) could net you multiple sites. Also with so many strikes coming in death ball would be vulnerable.

Grayson Sortek, on 24 September 2015 - 06:20 AM, said:

Good idea sir, although I don't think I would agree with 1-2 days. I don't think they would be able to collect enough data in that time. You would need at least a week to see the different patterns that arise at different times in the week.

This was only really for the first time it was used and should be out whenever their peak days are. Any new mode is going to have problems and following that, a public outcry. By limiting its available time early you give people a taste and then you can work out some of the kinks and get a better version back out there. If they nail it on the first try, then by all means, leave it out there longer.

Grayson Sortek, on 24 September 2015 - 06:20 AM, said:

For example; capture the flag could be capture the intel like the intro to MW2 Mercenaries. You have to not only capture the intel, but you have to get onto a dropship and it has to escape (rather than just reaching a specific point).

Another example that is similar to a game mode in BF2142: You have to actually take down a dropship. I don't mean the kinds that we have in game right now, no I'm talking about those big egg mother frakers that can take out entire lances. I think having to complete an objective to gain access to the dropships before you can assault them would prevent base rushes that we see today (plus the dropship would kill those lights) and encourage more strategic play from both teams.

I initially thought this was a bad idea, but the more I thought about it the more it grew on me. I figured many slower mechs would hate capture the flag, especially IS mechwarriors, but by needing the dropship to escape you can have assault mechs go and assault the dropship. That would in turn force the attacking team to leave mechs to defend the dropship which makes for strategic game play.

Grayson Sortek, on 24 September 2015 - 06:20 AM, said:

I think that as you receive more replies to this topic you are going to find that people want more objective based gameplay that is steeped in lore and not just the deathmatches that we have today.

I hope to see a lot more on this thread, and some actual interaction from PGI.

That is why I named my game mode Clan Batchall. When the Clans attacked IS worlds they would issue the batchall for entire worlds, but before the invasion when the clans would issue batchalls against each other it was always for parts of worlds (they do not have very much real estate back home). So you are fighting for a mech production facility or resource production or a strategic point on a world. That is how the Clans developed their fighting style, when fighting a capture and hold batchall it was important to get there FAST and do as much damage as possible as fast as possible.

*Something I forgot to add. I think it would be extremely helpful to be able to see teammates loadouts during the pre-drop sequence. Knowing three of your four assault mechs are geared for poke rather then brawling could inform brawlers they need to be defensive this match rather then finding out once they are dead. I almost never see this communicated and the pre-drop sequence should be for discussing battle plans anyway, not telling each other loadouts.

Edited by Homeskilit, 24 September 2015 - 11:33 AM.

[Anachronda]

Any game mode option we have is going to have to have some way of overcoming the problem with current game modes. Essentially it seems like even though on paper we have game modes that involve or encourage strategy in reality most players treat every game the same - skirmish. Find the mechs, kill them, who cares about defending the base or capturing points. And in talking to people it's obvious there are two reasons for it. The biggest reason is that killing every mech always wins, and the second is that some people simply dislike anything else. It's sad that probably 7/10 of the time when I ask people to help capture resource points or defend the base I get shouted down and told to ignore it.

[BlackHeroe]

Anachronda, you are right, this is simply cause of the fact, that DMG and killing lead to c-Bills, XP and macth score.
Capturing does this as well, but way less then anything else. Thats the cause why people normally dislike this.

They also normally not waitet and moved 3 mins to then have a bas rush.

[Grayson Sortek]

Anachronda, on 25 September 2015 - 02:16 AM, said:

Any game mode option we have is going to have to have some way of overcoming the problem with current game modes. Essentially it seems like even though on paper we have game modes that involve or encourage strategy in reality most players treat every game the same - skirmish. Find the mechs, kill them, who cares about defending the base or capturing points. And in talking to people it's obvious there are two reasons for it. The biggest reason is that killing every mech always wins, and the second is that some people simply dislike anything else. It's sad that probably 7/10 of the time when I ask people to help capture resource points or defend the base I get shouted down and told to ignore it.

BlackHeroe, on 25 September 2015 - 02:51 AM, said:

Anachronda, you are right, this is simply cause of the fact, that DMG and killing lead to c-Bills, XP and macth score.
Capturing does this as well, but way less then anything else. Thats the cause why people normally dislike this.

They also normally not waitet and moved 3 mins to then have a bas rush.

I know what this is like. If we are down to hunting 1 opponent and there are a few of us left I will base cap right up to the sliver so that we force the 1 guy back, but I don't cap because I want me or at least my teammates to actually get some c-bills and XP out of it.

For these game modes obviously they would have to up the rewards for completing objectives. Not just to those individual players who complete the objectives... No, because then people would be fighting each other over who gets to complete them.
No, reward the entire team that completes the objective.

[Homeskilit]

Anachronda, on 25 September 2015 - 02:16 AM, said:

Any game mode option we have is going to have to have some way of overcoming the problem with current game modes. Essentially it seems like even though on paper we have game modes that involve or encourage strategy in reality most players treat every game the same - skirmish. Find the mechs, kill them, who cares about defending the base or capturing points.

This is why my game mode was designed the way it was. In order to capture your designated point you have to kill the enemy mechs. Please go reread my ideas on "Clan Batchall" and tell me what you think, what do you like/dislike?

[Riologos]

Tell me what you think for this new game mode..
Alamo.

1 team - the defenders may get any mechs they want and have them modifide in any way that they what as is current also they get to call down artillary strikes as in FW They have a center area to defend (like in domination but a larger area) in a fort on a hill. Each defender only gets a single mech per match.
2 team - the attackes may only have unmodifide IS mechs but they get 4 each as in a FW drop. Their drop zones are not next to each other but are split (think triangle) on the map as for away from each other as is possible. The only may have consumables but no modules or other modificatins.

and yet another game mode

Historical senarios

Preset mechs on a preset map. This would mostly involve IS wars and pre-clan tech. every month the senario would change. It could be something as odd ball as a company/lance of lights that needed to take a company of assalts where the assults are trying to get patrol an area in a time frame. In fact Patrol could be a new type of game where one group needs to "capture" (like in conquest) several points (3-5) but in order (not like in conquest) once they do capture it they can go to the next area . they win win all areas (3-5) have been captured once. The other team just needs to stop them from doing so.

[Ultramega1988]

Well i have 2 mode ideas one example is a hardcore mode might be scary cause well u wont have a map or know who is who lol.

Second Update the Skirmish add to it the pick up ship from the scout macth for the last 4 or 1 mechs from the losing team cause it makes sense in actual military ops and also give a major credit boost to whoever kills the last mech and if the mech escapes in the ship then he or she must get a credit boost.


but if u want a brand new mode MWO must have a ROCK n SOCK EM duel mode take all the weapons out from that mode and left click is a left Jab and Right click a straight Right and bring back for just that mode the fall animation.

Who wouldn't want this mode.

Edited by Ultramega1988, 13 December 2016 - 12:23 PM.

[Conorfus]

I was thinking base attack. Have a base where defenders spawn in a mech bay facility and attackers drop in via drop ship. Every building is destructible and major buildings must be destroyed.

[Garran Tana]

Hi! I created 5 game mode ideas with some goals in mind. I was aiming to create game modes that offer the players a different playstyle other than a brawl + minor variable condition of win; that also do not take a lot of PGI resources to be made. In my opinion the only game mode that does that currently is the Conquest game mode. Just to be clear: The game mode I designed offer a lot of opportunities for combat, however the combat alone does not bring victory in those game modes. All numbers are subject to change, but that would need tests and that could only happen if PGI would be interested.

Also keep in mind that english is not my first language.


Here are two of my game mode ideas:
Transmission

Description:

Crucial data must be transmitted off planet but we only got a scarce satellite net over this world. Use the satellites whenever possible and transmit data by the short range communication antennas in the area.

Game mechanics:

There are 6 short range communication antennas on the map.

Every one of them can be captured by any mech just like a beacon in Escort game mode, once captured it doesn't need any mech presence to generate points for the team who captured it.

Every minute from the start of the match the satellite is in position and every captured antenna generates a point for the team that controls it. There should be a voice reminder that satellite will be on position in X seconds.

The team that gathers 20 points first wins.

Optional changes and tweaks:

Short range communication antennas flip time.

Pause between the satellite flybys.

Number of points gathered needed to win.

Rewards:

First short range communication antenna capture 10.000 / 300

Capture the short range communication antenna again 1.000 / 10

Data transmission 2.000 / 5 for every antenna each time the satellite flies by, for everybody.in the team.



And something that would need a bit more work from the PGI side.

Firebase

Description:

Take control over artillery positions and send coordinates via control station to drop hell on enemy base.

I see a lot of potential for voice acting as the base under fire is the one that communicates with the players at the start of every game. As it is getting pounded with artillery shells the voice should let the players know how bad and dramatic the situation is, and announce the evacuation of what’s left from the base for the team that loses. One thing I’m not sure of is this: Should the guns hurt mechs that troll and jump into shell path, or should the ground shaking blasts be only a visual treat.

Other than the dramatic aspect the gameplay offers a centre point to cumulate the fighting but also gives a job for skirmishers and potential to last second saves by capturing enemy artillery.

Game mechanics:

There are 6 artillery positions on the map with one control station in the middle.

You can take control (flip) over the artillery position like you do with beacons in the Escort game mode.

Once controlled artillery positions are marked blue on the map, enemy artillery positions are marked blue, neutral are pale yellow as usual.

Enemy can flip the point back and takes control over it.

When you activate the control station, all friendly guns open fire resetting all those artillery positions to a neutral state. They can be captured immediately after this.

You can activate the control station the same way (it remains neutral), but the control station can be activated again after 15 second delay.

Only artillery positions that belong to the team activating the control station will fire and reset to neutral state. All enemy artillery positions remain captured until are re-captured by opposing forces or they fire via activating the control station..

The team that will fire to the enemy base X times (10 for example) wins.

Optional changes and tweaks:

Two control stations close to the middle instead of one

Time needed to flip the artillery position

TIme needed to activate the control station

Delay on the control station

Rewards:

Capturing artillery position 3.500 / 35

Activating the control station 3.500 / 35



Remember that every number is an untested estimate.

Edited by Garran Tana, 03 October 2017 - 01:06 PM.

[Kalimaster]

Data capture.

Data capture uses the pylons found in scouting. There are 20 per match. A team must capture as many as possible before the timer runs out. Defeating the other team will not trigger an auto win of the unclaimed pylons. You have to go out and get them. Once a pylon is captured it remains part of that teams points and does not switch sides.