69 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Veev, on 03 October 2015 - 07:42 PM, said:

Theoretically if you have 4+ mechs firing weapons and moving near each other would not the ambient temperature be raised in the immediate area thus decreasing heat sink efficiency?

Great way to fix the deathball is to create a decrease in heat sink efficiency scaled based on how many mechs are within a certain area.

No. If it were a confined area (ie a room) then probably, but in the great out doors... The heat from a Group of Mechs is a negligible change in ambient temp.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 05 October 2015 - 02:13 AM.

[Totem1]

The Op has opened an interesting topic in my view and a few suggestions have been discussed that would stop the deathball. Something else came to mind and that would be damage from exploding mechs?
And I would be interested from those that know why modern armoured formations don't "deathball" apart from the danger from area denial/effect weapons.

[GreyNovember]

Totem1, on 05 October 2015 - 02:25 AM, said:

The Op has opened an interesting topic in my view and a few suggestions have been discussed that would stop the deathball. Something else came to mind and that would be damage from exploding mechs?
And I would be interested from those that know why modern armoured formations don't "deathball" apart from the danger from area denial/effect weapons.

They don't explode.

MW4 used to have every fusion engine ever go critical.

Letting mechs here explode turns your Locust into a 190XL, 169KPH Bomb that has 6 lasers strapped to it's arms.

I'd call it a great trade if I sacrifice one locust to slam it into the assault lance who stuck together, severely damaging them and opening up their components. Not to mention the effect this will have on Brawling mechs.

[TexAce]

In a simple ego-shooter, there are GRENADES.

Give me a BT equivalient of a grenade with strong but low-radius splash damage.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

TexAce, on 05 October 2015 - 04:51 AM, said:

In a simple ego-shooter, there are GRENADES.

Give me a BT equivalient of a grenade with strong but low-radius splash damage.

and mortars/artilery ? or HOWITZER type....

[Old-dirty B]

MWO should have electromagnetic boms, aka en "E-Bomb". An e-bomb (electromagnetic bomb) is a weapon that uses an intense electromagnetic field to create a brief pulse of energy that affects electronic circuitry without harming humans or buildings. You drop one in a group of mechs, and they all shutdown temporarily.

Also, MWO should have smoke grenades / screens, to screen movements or to temporarily blind the enemy. This is very effective against group of mechs, bunch up and the effects of an area weapon or equipment are far more effective then when the group has spread out.

Edited by Klauwhamer, 05 October 2015 - 05:05 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Totem1, on 05 October 2015 - 02:25 AM, said:

The Op has opened an interesting topic in my view and a few suggestions have been discussed that would stop the deathball. Something else came to mind and that would be damage from exploding mechs?
And I would be interested from those that know why modern armoured formations don't "deathball" apart from the danger from area denial/effect weapons.

You have to let the deathball evolve. killing it is stupid.

[Khobai]

Quote

You have to let the deathball evolve. killing it is stupid.

100% disagree. deathballs are a cancer on the game right now. They cause stagnant gameplay as well as pathetically low TTK.

deathballing is caused as a direct result of permadeath. Because dying is so crippling to your team in MWO, players are forced into deathballing in order to maximize survival. the fear of permadeath paralyzes players into deathballing and prevents them from playing the game in any other way. And thats why gameplay has become so stagnant.

thats why the game needs a ticket-based gamemode with spread out objectives. a ticket based gamemode would remove the fear of permadeath. players could play the game how they want without constantly resorting to deathballing. it would also prioritize completing the objectives above killing the enemy team.

basically each team would get like 8000 tickets which would represent the resources theyre willing to commit to the battle. every time a mech dies its team would lose tickets equal to the mech's tonnage and then the player that died could choose to respawn in any of their 4 dropdeck mechs. Thered be no limit on how many times you could respawn other than running out of tickets. Then thered be 3-5 objectives spread out across the map and controlling the objectives would cause the enemy team to slowly bleed tickets at a rate of about 1 per second. the team that runs out of tickets first would lose. But also you could have a destructible mobile HQ for each team, and if the mobile HQ is destroyed, that team immediately loses... that way a losing team would always still have a chance of winning by destroying the other teams mobile HQ.

by implementing a ticket-based gamemode, the fear of permadeath would be removed, dying would hurt your team, but no longer be completely crippling to your team, and youd be able to play the game how you want rather than being forced into deathballing and stagnant repetitive battles that always occur on the same part of the map. Also completing the objectives would become a crucial part of winning rather than just being a secondary win condition after killing the enemy team.

This new gamemode would simply be an alternative for those that dont like deathballing and stagnant play thats a direct result of having finite lives. The permadeath gamemodes would still be available for anyone whos masochistic enough to enjoy them.

Edited by Khobai, 05 October 2015 - 06:54 AM.

[Sadist Cain]

Joseph Mallan, on 05 October 2015 - 05:17 AM, said:

You have to let the deathball evolve. killing it is stupid.

The evolution of the deathball is for it to die.

It's existence highlights the poor state of balance, the lack of tactical thinking and gameplay, the poorness of the gamemodes which are all the same as each other and just stands up as outright ridiculous in a game of giant battlemechs which are fighting over the territory of entire planets.

[nehebkau]

Veev, on 03 October 2015 - 08:08 PM, said:

Try leaving the price where it is, but more deadly is a must.

Then the timer on the artillery should be MUCH larger -- at least 5 minutes before another artillery salvo could be fired again -- and artillery damage would then NOT count towards your damage totals in game.

[Davers]

nehebkau, on 05 October 2015 - 07:24 AM, said:

Then the timer on the artillery should be MUCH larger -- at least 5 minutes before another artillery salvo could be fired again -- and artillery damage would then NOT count towards your damage totals in game.

Isn't 3 Arty per game a bit low? I guess everyone could just take Coolshot instead...


Rather than increasing damage I would like them to to finish adding indirect fire using the Battlemap.



There needs to be game modes where the objectives are really important, and not some afterthought that only comes up 2/3 through the game after you lost the big teamfight.

[Khobai]

Quote

There needs to be game modes where the objectives are really important, and not some afterthought that only comes up 2/3 through the game after you lost the big teamfight.

how do you do that thought?

in order to prevent deathballing the objective would not only have to be easier to complete than killing the enemy team but it would also have to force teams to spread out.

the only way I can think of to make a gamemode like that enjoyable is if you implemented a ticket system like I suggested above.

[Davers]

Khobai, on 05 October 2015 - 07:37 AM, said:

how do you do that thought?

in order to prevent deathballing the objective would not only have to be easier to complete than killing the enemy team but it would also have to force teams to spread out.

the only way I can think of to make a gamemode like that enjoyable is if you implemented a ticket system like I suggested above.

Well, maybe if you could flip capture points instantly on Conquest. Then you would actually have to defend them a bit more (as was initially described by PGI)? I would love to see secondary objectives that spawned AI units, but that seems a long way off.

[Lykaon]

Khobai, on 05 October 2015 - 07:37 AM, said:

how do you do that thought?

in order to prevent deathballing the objective would not only have to be easier to complete than killing the enemy team but it would also have to force teams to spread out.

the only way I can think of to make a gamemode like that enjoyable is if you implemented a ticket system like I suggested above.

Ticket systems are not neccissary at all to create the type of game play desired.In fact I foresee several issues with your suggested ticket system.

Imagine the player who wrecks their Direwolf in the first seconds of a battle.His team would flip out on him for wasting tickets.If there is a currency players will bicker about it. So don't do it with tickets.


Here is a possible format.

Attack/Defend mode: One team is attacking the other team's base.Timed match,unlimited or multiple respawn.

Win conditions: Defenders win if the primary base is intact at the match end Attackers win if the base is destroyed in the alotted time.

Bonus payouts for each surviving mech on the winning team including any unused mechs (if a drop deck is used) Or if unlimited spawns in use payout is deducted my a small value per casualty sustained.

Much larger maps that have an advancing front mechanic.At intervels along the map length between the begining attacker's spawn and the defending team's base are forward landing zones.

Capturing forward landing zones allows your respawns to begin there (closer to the main objective) The defenders can uncap the advanced landing zones so defending them is in your best intrests.

In addition to forward landing zone objectives there will be tactical objectives to capture and destroy.Tactical objectives add or subtract time from the match (defenders will want to shorten the match time to prevent the enemy from having the time to capture the main base while attackers will want to exstend the timer to grant their team more time to attack) Each tactical objective held effects the rate the match timer ticks off to zero.

So with this sort of mechanic in play each team will have several objectives and simply can not afford to death ball because death balls will lose this sort of match.

Too many mechs in one spot and you lack the ability to hold enough tactical objectives or forward landing zones to win in the allotted time.

Death balling to attack the base will fail on account of the long supply lines.Without holding forward landing zones your reenforcment respawns will be running from all the way across the map.Meanwhile the defenders respawn close to the base.

No tickets and no bickering on who wasted tickets by crashing exspencive mechs and such.

[Khobai]

Quote

Imagine the player who wrecks their Direwolf in the first seconds of a battle.His team would flip out on him for wasting tickets.If there is a currency players will bicker about it. So don't do it with tickets.

and thats different from the current gamemodes how? In fact its MUCH worse if someone suicides a direwolf in the current one-life only gamemodes. With a ticket system they would at least have to suicide multiple times in a direwolf to have the same impact as suiciding ONCE in a direwolf in the current gamemodes.

Kindve ridiculous to point that out as a flaw of a ticket system when the same problem is a MUCH WORSE flaw of the current gamemodes we have now. Some guy suicides a direwolf in the current gamemodes and it completely ruins the game.

With a ticket system your team can afford the one-off loss of a direwolf. As long as the guy doesnt keep suiciding over and over its not gonna effect your teams ability to win very much.

Quote

Death balling to attack the base will fail on account of the long supply lines.Without holding forward landing zones your reenforcment respawns will be running from all the way across the map.Meanwhile the defenders respawn close to the base.

And the defenders will just deathball. You still havent solved the problem with deathballing at all. the only objective the defenders have is to defend the base so theyll just deathball at the base to win.

As long as players have finite lives the game will always deteriorate into deathballing. because killing the enemy team will always be the easiest way to win. And the easiest way to kill the enemy team is to deathball.

Also what prevents someone from suiciding their direwolf in your gamemode? You point that out as a flaw of a ticket system but then fail to address the problem in your own suggestion. Especially since its a worse flaw in your system since youre limited to a finite number of lives.

Not only does a ticket system solve nearly all the games problems like deathballing but it can it can be incorporated easily and seamlessly into the existing gamemodes/maps. PGI doesnt have to design special maps with lanes and forward dropzones like with your idea. A ticket system much simpler to implement and far less convoluted.

Edited by Khobai, 05 October 2015 - 09:46 AM.

[Burktross]

Sadist Cain, on 05 October 2015 - 02:09 AM, said:

Intuitive Gameplay Mechanics > Mindnumbingly Boring Gameplay and tactics brought about by crap systems built with spit, kleenex and Plasters.

I don't find friendly AOE lockdowns particularly intuitive.

[Rebas Kradd]

El Bandito, on 03 October 2015 - 09:31 PM, said:

Nope. We had 40 damage strikes and it was not healthy for the game.

The reason it wasn't healthy for the game is because it wasn't strong enough to have its intended effect: splitting mechs up.

Don't buff its strength all that much; just buff its area of effect. That way we achieve mechs keeping distance from each other in order to discourage their opponents from using it.

Honestly, though, the best way to prevent deathballing is to create gamemodes with objectives that force separate lances, such as the one linked to by my signature.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 05 October 2015 - 11:10 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Don't buff its strength all that much; just buff its area of effect. That way we achieve mechs keeping distance from each other in order to discourage their opponents from using it.

I agree with this.

Reduce the damage to 30 so artillery can no longer headshot mechs.

But then increase the number of shells from 10 to 15 and increase the radius from 50m to 75m.

That would massively buff the area of effect for artillery.


However the main cause of deathballing is still the gamemodes and the fact we have finite respawns which encourages deathballing.

Edited by Khobai, 05 October 2015 - 11:21 AM.

[Sadist Cain]

Burktross, on 05 October 2015 - 10:59 AM, said:

I don't find friendly AOE lockdowns particularly intuitive.

Consider that you can see roughly how hot a mech is with thermal vision, chuck in an ambient temperature gauge and bobs your uncle, fanny's your Aunt all is good there are already hot points on some maps where it only takes a little bit of common sense to realise that standing in lava = hot

To me it makes perfectly good sense that when that huge mech in front of me is dumping out its weapons like no tomorrow, itd be rather toasty within a certain radius.

Even the board game had a one mech per hex rule to avoid the ridiculousness of stacking your entire team in one area. Other FPS games often come with grenades or something similar which will kill however many players unfortunately get caught in its radius.

Should a single Dire going full tilt cook a friendly mech? Probably not.

Should 12 building sized walking nuclear reactors equipped with high powered weapons feel the same temperature when standing within a 200m radius of each other as when theyre far apart? Probably not...

Even when you have a few cars running close to each other you can certainly feel the temperature difference compared to the ambient temperature elsewhere.

[Burktross]

Sadist Cain, on 05 October 2015 - 11:21 AM, said:

Consider that you can see roughly how hot a mech is with thermal vision, chuck in an ambient temperature gauge and bobs your uncle, fanny's your Aunt all is good there are already hot points on some maps where it only takes a little bit of common sense to realise that standing in lava = hot

To me it makes perfectly good sense that when that huge mech in front of me is dumping out its weapons like no tomorrow, itd be rather toasty within a certain radius.

Even the board game had a one mech per hex rule to avoid the ridiculousness of stacking your entire team in one area. Other FPS games often come with grenades or something similar which will kill however many players unfortunately get caught in its radius.

Should a single Dire going full tilt cook a friendly mech? Probably not.

Should 12 building sized walking nuclear reactors equipped with high powered weapons feel the same temperature when standing within a 200m radius of each other as when theyre far apart? Probably not...

Even when you have a few cars running close to each other you can certainly feel the temperature difference compared to the ambient temperature elsewhere.

If you're going off TT, then that'd be 30 meters.

Even in these confines, any ambient heat greater than 10% is going to just be plain annoying. At that point, we might aswell start having your own heat interfere with Thermal Sensors.
(read: not fun)