227 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

Barantor, on 23 December 2015 - 10:14 AM, said:

I'm fine with my slow mech I take my lumps.

Handicap on some maps because you are more than a quadrant away from any of the team and putting it on an exposed flank.

Caustic skirmish has one spawn area raised on a hill with little cover and a large open field between you and any allies. Literally dumb to drop there with an assault mech, but you don't get to pick drop points so I consider it a handicap to being able to play anything that isn't fast.

Let's be honest, a lot of the quick play could change dramatically if they let us pick which mech and which drop location after seeing the map. Assaults would want a lot more cover and lights would want to be closer to the enemy team to spot, harass, snipe and cause chaos.

I want it to be better, not have folks just saying "don't play that then" because that is a failure of the game system, not a failure of the player.

I like when there isn't a brawl in the first 5 minutes, but the lore nerd/simulation nerd in me screams internally when half our team has short range weapons and we have to deal with alpine. Nobody would do that, it's like dropping Abrams tanks into a swamp and expecting victory.

As far as OP though, you end up having to take your lumps when piloting an assault, as frustrating as it currently is.

let's be REALLY honest

I'm not (along with MANY others I'd assume) changing my builds (that do REALLY well mind you) because some anxious CoD player thinks they should be in a firefight in the first 30 seconds of a 15 minute long match.

It's not a handicap. Period.

So again, the whole argument is completely moot.

The few matches I get with players like th OP usually wind up in a lopsided loss, the MAJORITY of my matchs (you know, when I get put on a team that understands we're team) are either very close losses or wins. SO I"ll keep building MY mechs how I want, and I'll keep choosing MY mechs based on how well they perform.

If you want dedicated builds, teams, synergy, etc. join a unit and/or CW. I don't run "whatever" in CW because it's based VERY heavily around teamwork. SO much so, that you simply cannot play it as casually as PUB drops. Want a little mroe coordination and teammates that don't "handicap" you, drop there instead

TL;DR
I'm not changing my builds (which factually perform better than many others according to leaderboards, w/l record, KRD, etc.) because you or anyont else thinks my 90 ton assault mech that provides tons of long range firepower, should be faster so I can rae up to the front of the line and play Rambo with derps like the OP

[Sandpit]

RussianWolf, on 23 December 2015 - 03:07 PM, said:

When I was leveling my stock urbies, I announced at the beginning of each match my best speed. In all but I think 2 cases, the team sped off away from me. The couple times they moderated their speed to include me, we had great matches where the urbie was able to deal large amounts of damage. One match in particular, I wound up being the last mech on my side and killed the last two mechs on their side (one was a disco so don't get too excited). They didn't protect me , but they did make sure that they didn't leave a man behind that might be able to help overall.

most of the teams in higher tiers aren't going to run off and leave you. I'm willing to bet that the majority of ones really complaining about "slow" mechs are tier 3 and (more than likely) below.

Read that statement carefully before any neckbeards decide to jump on that and start in with their "elitist" BS propaganda. Tier is less about "skill", and more about teamwork. In other words, higher tiers tend to get the whole "teamwork thing" better than lower tiers. That's WHY they climb the tiers so much faster and some others find themselves locked into lower tiers.

You cannot and will not succeed on a regular basis Tier 3 and up if you don't work as a team. Period.

Players like the OP? They'll be stuck in 1, 2, lower levels of 3 because of their attitude towards this entire issue. You don't run off and leave your team behind. Period. No other words shoudl really need to be said. The ones wailing and flailing about this will continue on until they get bored or acknowledge that they'll never advance without changing THEIR mentality.

It's really just another "This game should cater to me exclusively" complaint when you boil it down.

But I dont' wanna wait 30 seeeeecoooooonds! It's been 2 minutes and the match isn't over yet!

No offense guys who fall into the above statement, but this isn't the game for you, you'd be MUCH better playing one of the hundreds of other generic FPS games out there that DO play like that.

[Bishop Steiner]

Barantor, on 23 December 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

You like to shove everyone in the same boat on that one... geez.

Have you ever played BF2 Bishop? It was a great game that they simplified with the more recent titles IMO. It had a series of ticket counters that went down faster unless you maintained control of certain points, it makes conquest look like a joke and it had respawns. You only had as many respawns as you had tickets though and if you ran out of tickets you lost, period. It promoted teamplay and careful tactics. You couldn't hole up or you lost, but charging in over and over without much thought didn't do anything for you either. There were 'normal' tactics for some maps, but if you did something unexpected the risk and reward could be great.

Instant respawns are stupid, no disputing that, but painting any respawn system with a very broad brush doesn't promote any sort of change either. They did ok with the dropship mechanic and I love they incorporated it into some of the quickplay maps, but I think it can be used just as easily for normal assault/skirmish as well with respawns

I would rather play longer than have quick matches over and over. Faction Play doesn't even do that for me because it usually comes down to attrition of 12 rather than any other system.

"ADHD Kiddies" ... CS:GO does that just as well lol. I'll call you "Grumpy Grognard" Bishop .

P.S. We still need to have that match sometime.

and.... Insisting every game has a respawn system of any type is not equally stupid?

[Satan n stuff]

Khobai, on 23 December 2015 - 01:35 PM, said:

That seems to be the problem exactly. They dont fully understand what im talking about with a ticket-based respawn system. They just see the word respawn and associate it with CoD or TF2. When in reality the ticket-based respawn system ive proposed is nothing like either of those games. Its more like what MWLL had, which was MWO's predecessor.

MWLL had a ticket based system where each team got a finite number of tickets. When you died your team lost tickets and then you respawned. If your team ran out of tickets you lost. Death still had consequences since it cost your team tickets (in MWO's case, to help balance light vs heavy mechs, youd lose tickets equal to the mech's tonnage)

But there would also be an odd number of capture objectives (either 3 or 5), and controlling a capture objective would bleed the enemy team of tickets at a fixed rate of 1 per second or so. The capture objectives are what force action on the part of both teams (because theres an odd number, one team always has to be behind). In MWLL the capture objectives also doubled as forward bases and let you respawn closer to the frontline, which meant less downtime.

So itd mostly be an objective based gamemode, where the primary objective is running the enemy team out of tickets, and theres multiple ways of doing that: by capturing bases to bleed them or by killing enemy mechs. Its considerably different from conquest because you cant afford to ignore the objectives. In conquest you can just focus entirely on killing the enemy team, effectively making it skirmish. Actually every single gamemode in MWO is effectively skirmish, because the easiest and most rewarding way to win is to kill the enemy team, and winning other ways is frowned upon because the payouts are less.

Again, I just want to play something that isnt skirmish. So why are you being d*cks about it? I dont want to take your skirmish gamemode away... All I want is a new gamemode where the primary goal isnt to deathball in the same spot and kill all enemy mechs. Ive explained why that **** gets boring real fast. Its not fun at all because every single game plays out exactly the same.

This is just Team Deathmatch with some objective based gameplay thrown in, poorly implemented objective based gameplay at that.

[Barantor]

Bishop Steiner, on 23 December 2015 - 03:23 PM, said:

and.... Insisting every game has a respawn system of any type is not equally stupid?

This one already does so... why not make use of what they already made in all modes or at least more of them? :S

I don't insist, I just think it would make the gameplay better. You have a different opinion which is fine, but I'm not going to agree with it as I think it is faster to play longer for a bigger reward than waiting on matchmaker to try and fit folks together. I want to play more, so sue me?

[AztecD]

meh, sometimes you get left behind, sometimes you steamroll half of the enemy team

[Bishop Steiner]

Barantor, on 23 December 2015 - 04:26 PM, said:

This one already does so... why not make use of what they already made in all modes or at least more of them? :S

I don't insist, I just think it would make the gameplay better. You have a different opinion which is fine, but I'm not going to agree with it as I think it is faster to play longer for a bigger reward than waiting on matchmaker to try and fit folks together. I want to play more, so sue me?

Since voting went in, wait times in quick play have been next to non existent. I think I have waited a whole 30 seconds...once?

And no, all it would do is change the dynamics and lessen any potential future implementation of infowar, roles, etc.

[Aramoro999]

Mergatroid Skittle, on 22 December 2015 - 07:10 AM, said:

Say something in chat or voice before you get left behind.

Yes...unless solo drop, no1 cares about u...