34 replies to this topic

[Aresye]

I'll make this thread short and straight to the point:

The introduction of more powerful weaponry, better accuracy, and longer lingering times has done NOTHING to stop a more powerful team from overtaking a less powerful one by camping near their spawn points.

It has however, allowed teams the option of having extremely powerful, indestructible turrets to hide behind when a game is close.

Had a game earlier in which my team of pugs was up against a 10man. We were on counter attack. We successfully destroyed 12 of them and took out Omega, however they tied the game 12-12 when their 2nd wave cleaned up our first.

They then retreated to the far back of their dropzone and proceeded to stay there for the foreseeable future. Eventually we organized a push into their DZ to take out all of their hurt mechs, but the dropships came pretty much immediately, and continued to come...and continued to come. We'd get the lead in the attrition and try to pull out, but nope: Dropship has killed ____. All this time the enemy team continuously getting a supply of perfectly fresh mechs.

I'm sorry, but that is complete and utter BS.

I wouldn't mind if there was some way to disable and/or take out the turrets on the dropships, but there isn't. They are an indestructible element that basically adds the power of an entire lance of ERLL snipers with perfect accuracy.

On the other hand, it's just as stupid for an attacking team to take out Omega, gain the kill advantage, and pull back to the dropships. There's scumbagging on both sides.

My recommendation? Either remove the dropship weapons entirely from the counter-attack/hold territory game mode, or make the weapons/accuracy less punishing.

[kesmai]

I do think that those dropships could be more colorful and maybe have camos.
they also should have other weapons like lrms, ppcs, ac's... .

and for sure i want one of those pilots in my unit, hell yeah!

[Chagatay]

kesmai, on 24 December 2015 - 01:22 AM, said:

I do think that those dropships could be more colorful and maybe have camos.
they also should have other weapons like lrms, ppcs, ac's... .

and for sure i want one of those pilots in my unit, hell yeah!

Indeed, I think they should have a plethora of death dealing options (Missiles, PPCs, MGs, Autocannons) with the same head seeking uncanny accuracy. Heck, if you get close enough they should unleash a doz...er 30 or so flamers of shame and cook you into a fine roast. But you do have to get really, really close.....

Edited by Chagatay, 24 December 2015 - 01:40 AM.

[Deathlike]

Aresye Kerensky, on 24 December 2015 - 12:56 AM, said:

My recommendation? Either remove the dropship weapons entirely from the counter-attack/hold territory game mode, or make the weapons/accuracy less punishing.

I would do "progressively aggressive" dropships.

Simply put, basically the dropships fire ONLY medium lasers (or Clan ERMED/IS Large Lasers) initially within a ~400m radius. If something is within the radius after the lasers have fired for 3 seconds, then escalate with ERLL (probably has to be quirked/altered from default) firing at every 3 seconds until a certain distance is met (something like 600m) from the dropship campers where they stop firing.

This allows for the dropzone to be cleared within a reasonable period... and if people decide camp the spawn (due to losing badly), they are "warned" by the initial laser volley.

What annoys me to no end is the ERLL that they use when arriving expands their firing radius to places where it shouldn't (like the spawn zones of Vitric Forge for the team inside the base - mostly the side where a generator resides)... so it should only be an escalation tool.. not a "aimbot assistant".

Edited by Deathlike, 24 December 2015 - 01:59 AM.

[GenAce2010]

Random spawn locations would be better. Prevents the enemy team from camping enforce and it prevents deadlock as in described in this post.

[Willard Phule]

Well, technically......a Leopard (or Leopard C for the Clans) carries a LOT more than just 12 ERLLs, dude. If they rigged the dropships up the way the technical readout has them, they'd be a lot more punishing. Which is kind of the point.

CW isn't what everyone thought it was going to be. The whole "competing for planets" thing has simply become a quicker, easier way for new players to grind cbills. They can choose 4 trial mechs, rush in and get killed, disconnect and then pick another 4 trial mechs. Rinse, lather repeat as necessary.

There is no matchmaking in CW. No PSR, no nothing. Having to deal with organized groups as well as dropships is a bit much to expect of new players, you know?

All I can tell you is that if you go into a CW match as a solo player, it would be best if you don't expect to win. Just try to get as many cbills as you can....learn about how to maximize the bonuses...and drive on. Until they figure out how to separate the elementary school from the high school, it's going to be like this.

[Kjudoon]

Some people won't be happy till they can steamroll the first wave, spawn camp the enemy and kill them by shooting down the dropships and win in 10 minutes with 48 kills with 36 mechs never reaching ground.

This will then be relabeled as "skill" by players who manage this feat when it will really be an exploitive shortcut of never having to play the enemy on equal footing.

Essentially, this seems to be more a complaint with using castling as a valid defensive tactic on counter-attack hold actions because players get overaggressive and die to the dropships often eliminating their gains if they can't retreat in time. Sorry, but I have no sympathy and think dropships should remain indestructable beasts that easily trash and kill enemy spawn campers.

[Aresye]

Kjudoon, on 24 December 2015 - 05:36 AM, said:

Essentially, this seems to be more a complaint with using castling as a valid defensive tactic on counter-attack hold actions because players get overaggressive and die to the dropships often eliminating their gains if they can't retreat in time. Sorry, but I have no sympathy and think dropships should remain indestructable beasts that easily trash and kill enemy spawn campers.

If castling is to be a valid defensive tactic, then there needs to be the ability to remove the defenses. Until then, it is a clear cut advantage that upsets the intended balance of the game mode.

The proof this is an unintended strategy lies in the Vitric Forge map. If this was an intended feature for teams to utilize to fall back to, then the spawn points on Vitric Forge would not have been made impassable to mechs without jump jets, both enemy AND friendly.

The simplest solution would be to utilize a sensor based system that detects enemy mechs within a certain range of the DZ. If enemy mechs are occupying that area, the dropships go to a secondary dropoff location. Dropships get to keep their weapons to ward off potential spawn campers, but it lessens the advantage of castling.

I think the concept of castling is salvageable and should still be an option for teams. Most spawn points have advantageous terrain and choke points that make it a suitable defensive location. All I'm saying is, the combination of advantageous terrain, indestructible turrets of mass doom, and steady flow of fresh mechs, is too much of an advantage, and is definitely NOT within what the devs were intending with these changes.

Guess I'll have to tweet Russ about it.

[Deathlike]

GenAce2010, on 24 December 2015 - 04:09 AM, said:

Random spawn locations would be better. Prevents the enemy team from camping enforce and it prevents deadlock as in described in this post.

We have yet to see PGI adding a 4th dropzone yet, let alone randomized spawn points on regular maps (and when I mean randomized, I mean more than the 3 designated spawn points).

[Kjudoon]

Quote

If castling is to be a valid defensive tactic, then there needs to be the ability to remove the defenses. Until then, it is a clear cut advantage that upsets the intended balance of the game mode.

You are absolutely right. I knew that when I wrote my previous post. But I wrote it the way I did for a reason, because there are many MANY players that think using an exploit is ethical/moral because it's legal.

It also represents just how broken CW maps are right now, and that a broken mechanic is needed to prevent the horror of seal clubbing going on right now. Right now, my unit has taken the policy of "No Spawn Camping". If you drive the enemy back into their spawns, unless it's the last fraction of a wave or a disco, you back off and let them have a chance because it's unethical.

Quote

The simplest solution would be to utilize a sensor based system that detects enemy mechs within a certain range of the DZ. If enemy mechs are occupying that area, the dropships go to a secondary dropoff location. Dropships get to keep their weapons to ward off potential spawn campers, but it lessens the advantage of castling.

This IS a valid solution except for one severe problem... mapsize is so small (come on now smaller than tourmaline with worse use of space) that spawn camping is a breeze, plus mismatches are so severe at times that it doesn't matter if they do drop 2000m away, the team could not mount a good defense even if they tried. I wished for maps to be 4-10 times bigger than Alpine Peaks without chokepoints and funnels and actually feel 'real' when CW was announced and pre-release. Something that would force a unit outside their walls to hunt them down leaving the turrets to defend if they ranged out too far, making stealth and planning on how to draw the defender out or make them have choices.

We got none of that much to my bitter disappointment. We got worse maps than the PQ maps despite the fact that they are beautiful artistically.

Quote

I think the concept of castling is salvageable and should still be an option for teams. Most spawn points have advantageous terrain and choke points that make it a suitable defensive location. All I'm saying is, the combination of advantageous terrain, indestructible turrets of mass doom, and steady flow of fresh mechs, is too much of an advantage, and is definitely NOT within what the devs were intending with these changes.

If you want the most minimum change to this, but it will not solve the problem of spawn camping? Orbital strikes that drop on all mechs inside the dropzone if occupied by enemy forces, combined with zero mech reinforcement if the dropzone isn't cleared. The problem is that will still be a gambit for time for some teams. Of course, you can use Betty to warn of impending dropzone clearing by Long Tom just like a "Daisycutter" bomb was used in Vietnam to clear out an LZ.

Use of dropships currently is the CW version of using turrets in Assault... but on steroids.

Quote

Guess I'll have to tweet Russ about it.

"Backchannel" communications.... love it. Not that I'll every use Twit-ter.

Edited by Kjudoon, 24 December 2015 - 10:48 AM.

[cSand]

They should let you shoot down drop ships, and when it crashes doing huge damage to any defenders in the blast radius

with a giant glorious explosion

[maniacos]

The lasers should be disturbed by ECM so when there is ECM cover, thy would miss much more, be less successful in hitting moving targets and/or wont always hit center torso point accurate. This would add a tactical element when raiding a dropzone, a mech with ECM could be picked by the raiding team but the other team could use counter ECM to disturb this tactic again and so on...

[Kjudoon]

Jherek C, on 24 December 2015 - 11:05 AM, said:

The lasers should be disturbed by ECM so when there is ECM cover, thy would miss much more, be less successful in hitting moving targets and/or wont always hit center torso point accurate. This would add a tactical element when raiding a dropzone, a mech with ECM could be picked by the raiding team but the other team could use counter ECM to disturb this tactic again and so on...

The freakout of direct fire weapons being treated like LRMs would implode this community.

Edited by Kjudoon, 24 December 2015 - 11:08 AM.

[maniacos]

Well I was thinking there must be some kind of a targetting computer and that could be disturbed by ECM.

Otherwise one should be able to target DS laser turrets like ground turrets and destroy them likewise.

[Kjudoon]

Jherek C, on 24 December 2015 - 11:22 AM, said:

Well I was thinking there must be some kind of a targetting computer and that could be disturbed by ECM.

Otherwise one should be able to target DS laser turrets like ground turrets and destroy them likewise.

Oh trust me, about a year and a half ago I had something happen and got the devs to clarify (and contradict) something going on. I've been a firm believer that even DF weapons need to be 'lock on to fire' weapons OR, some other disruption. like JJ Jitter because ECM knocks out targeting on the launching computer in your mech according to the old PGI stance.

But the above video would be valid if you did that to DF weaponry, and the little Jebus Box would become invincible on the battlefield. You'd never see a mech that didn't carry it again, or if all mechs got to carry it, no one would be without it. See the howls of outrage and fear when you say these words:

Cone of Fire.

Edited by Kjudoon, 24 December 2015 - 11:26 AM.

[old man odin]

I just think all maps need the easily defended walled drop zones and no dropship lasers.

My main grievance with dropships at the moment is the range. They often shoot in attackers in areas they obviously should be.

[Aresye]

Kjudoon, on 24 December 2015 - 10:46 AM, said:

You are absolutely right. I knew that when I wrote my previous post. But I wrote it the way I did for a reason, because there are many MANY players that think using an exploit is ethical/moral because it's legal.

It also represents just how broken CW maps are right now, and that a broken mechanic is needed to prevent the horror of seal clubbing going on right now. Right now, my unit has taken the policy of "No Spawn Camping". If you drive the enemy back into their spawns, unless it's the last fraction of a wave or a disco, you back off and let them have a chance because it's unethical.



This IS a valid solution except for one severe problem... mapsize is so small (come on now smaller than tourmaline with worse use of space) that spawn camping is a breeze, plus mismatches are so severe at times that it doesn't matter if they do drop 2000m away, the team could not mount a good defense even if they tried. I wished for maps to be 4-10 times bigger than Alpine Peaks without chokepoints and funnels and actually feel 'real' when CW was announced and pre-release. Something that would force a unit outside their walls to hunt them down leaving the turrets to defend if they ranged out too far, making stealth and planning on how to draw the defender out or make them have choices.

We got none of that much to my bitter disappointment. We got worse maps than the PQ maps despite the fact that they are beautiful artistically.

If you want the most minimum change to this, but it will not solve the problem of spawn camping? Orbital strikes that drop on all mechs inside the dropzone if occupied by enemy forces, combined with zero mech reinforcement if the dropzone isn't cleared. The problem is that will still be a gambit for time for some teams. Of course, you can use Betty to warn of impending dropzone clearing by Long Tom just like a "Daisycutter" bomb was used in Vietnam to clear out an LZ.

I understand where you're coming from, and how you don't want to make spawn camping any easier than it already is.

But that's the problem. It does nothing to prevent spawn camping. At best enemy mechs wait until they hear the dropships leave, charge in, and wipe everybody out. At worst an organized team just ignores the dropships shooting them entirely and stands around them. To fully prevent spawn camping and give the spawning team a chance to group and push out, the dropships would have to wait in the DZ nearly a full minute.

I have seen 0 spawn camps successfully prevented by the dropships. I have however, seen countless teams utilize the dropship areas to give them an edge, or sometimes solely just to grief the other team.

[Kjudoon]

Really? I have seen easily 40-60% of spawncamping ended by dropships in my drops when castling. I don't know if I have the match recorded, but we got hammered on one drop on Emerald Taiga in the dropzone, the dropships rolled in as we slowed their escape and they blew up like 6 of their entire wave with the one survivor in a catapult running for it. I put the Pain Train up on the protective ridge and did to him just as he did to us earlier, and nuked him as he ran, unable to outrun or hide from my missiles. He was so mad from not getting away with it, he charged me every wave after that only to get gunned down by my teammates and then ragequit.

So, on one hand, it does work, but on the other, not so much.

[maniacos]

Odins Steed, on 24 December 2015 - 11:40 AM, said:

I just think all maps need the easily defended walled drop zones and no dropship lasers.

Then counter attack defenders would just hide there until time is up because the attackers need Omega and kill lead.

Quote

My main grievance with dropships at the moment is the range. They often shoot in attackers in areas they obviously should be.

Vitric Forge. Dropships hit you at the area near Omega and the generators which is really a pain in the *** occasionally especially when you just had a hard fight getting the area clear and the damn ship kills you.

Edited by Jherek C, 24 December 2015 - 12:37 PM.

[Philadelphia Collins]

I've adjusted my calling to be a little bit less aggressive at pushing dropship zones. Forming a line at the bottom of the ramps that lead to drop zones is usually sufficient, eventually they push down, at least when attacking. Defending is different, to be fair in counter attack defense if you lose objective and kill lead then you have lost and using the dropships to secure victory (while pretty scummy to be sure) is a legit play. Especially if the enemy commander didn't like his odds at a straight fight.

I've been on the giving end of rushing the drop zone between dropships drops too many times. I really wish there was a way for an enemy team to just abdicate and let us move on to the next drop. It can't be something that the winning team chooses to do though because lets face it given the choice between easy c-bills and finishing the match but getting paid less is a easy choice. If the losing side could give up some how and end the match that would be best I think. Maybe 75% of team staying inside the dropezone for more than 5-10 minutes or something and your team loses. Idk seems exploitable but so are other things like shooting omega from outside the gate when attacking counter attack.

Doesn't seem like as much of a problem in regular invasion mode, if its a close match most teams will just take omega and be done with it.

Also I think some of the frustration from this comes from needing a minimum match score for the current event forcing teams that want their grab bags to fight when they normally might not and teams that just want to win to take actions accordingly. Theoretically some day we will care more about the win on the match than the amount of c-bills we can get out of it. Hope that day comes soon.