32 replies to this topic

[Hades Trooper]

crashlogic, on 27 December 2015 - 04:12 PM, said:

I am tired of playing conquest four out of five games. When I do play conquest its with teams who scatter in an effort to cap, and then get killed off piecemeal by a well coordinated team that sticks together. So if you can't work with the team and come up with a plan, or a least go long with someone else's plan, please don't vote for conquest.
Oh yeah, and voting sucks. I liked it better when I did not have to play conquest at all.

salty much?

[Sandpit]

SeaLabCaptn, on 27 December 2015 - 08:20 PM, said:

This thread is a perfect example of why match score and rewards need a rework. Capping gets the win but pays less, which is why players adopt the incorrect strategy in this game type, more so when event score is at risk. Winning pays more and a divided team is more efficient at capping points than a death ball. Correct strategy should be to cap the points, but who wants to do that if it pays less?

Ideally there should be one mech capping a point with cover support. There isn't much room to hide multiple mechs behind the cap building, and most cap points are exposed. This requires good communication and emphasizes scout roles. See a problem?

Conquest favors the speed of light pilots, which serves little purpose in a death ball that moves as fast as it's slowest member. Forget about damage, match score, and event qualification, I play to win and I feel if you're balling up you're playing it wrong.

players "adopt" that strategy because that's what they've done since the mode was implemented years ago. It has less to do with rewards and more to do with "nascar it and get the match over in the fastest time possible"

[Tarogato]

I wish Conquest was for capping. If only PGI gave your team 10,000 C-Bills (instead of 2,500) every time your team captured a point, and gave you 50,000 C-Bills for winning the match via cap resources (instead of the current... zero, because it literally is listed as... zero). Then we might see some very interesting gameplay in solo and group queue. I would love to see that.

We need bloody incentive to do interesting things, and we've got nothing but "kill mechs and deal damage for rewards!"

[Sandpit]

Tarogato, on 27 December 2015 - 11:11 PM, said:

I wish Conquest was for capping. If only PGI gave your team 10,000 C-Bills (instead of 2,500) every time your team captured a point, and gave you 50,000 C-Bills for winning the match via cap resources (instead of the current... zero, because it literally is listed as... zero). Then we might see some very interesting gameplay in solo and group queue. I would love to see that.

We need bloody incentive to do interesting things, and we've got nothing but "kill mechs and deal damage for rewards!"

why do you need "incentive" to play how you think would be fun?
If you prefer capping, then do it.

I dont' understand this argument. You need "incentive" to play how you're already able to play? As I pointed out above, the rewards have very little to do with anything. It's the same reason most don't bother base capping even in Assault.

[Rokuzachi]

Conquest still my favorite mode because I like having to not only be aware of the fighting that's happening but also the capping and what needs to be capped/decapped in order to win by points.

Wish it came up more in the voting system though. I'd prefer it if I could just opt out of Skirmish and Assault like the old system allowed =/

[sneeking]

I never pick it i do get forced to play it though...

And im no happier about that than you are about my actions when it happens...

Deal with it these are pgi's new terms of service.

Edited by sneeking, 28 December 2015 - 01:12 AM.

[Sandpit]

sneeking, on 28 December 2015 - 01:10 AM, said:

I never pick it i do get forced to play it though...

And im no happier about that than you are about my actions when it happens...

Deal with it these are pgi's new terms of service.

not happy with your actions?

[sneeking]

Haha well i don't play conquest even when forced to....

So those are my actions....

[Spr1ggan]

Jman5, on 27 December 2015 - 06:49 PM, said:

In my experience it's often the non-cappers who are at fault for losing a conquest game. While 4 guys are out capping, they try to take on the enemy's 12-man deathball head on. So they get obliterated and the folks who were playing the long game are now screwed because it's suddenly 12 vs 4.

When you drop in a pug conquest it's important to be aware of what your team is doing. If they are sticking together, you want to be aggressive. If they are out capping, you want to play conservatively until you're up in caps, you can regroup, and the other team is now panicking to uncap everywhere at once.

I like Conquest mode because it's dynamic, but you need good map awareness.

Maybe on Alpine or Therma but any other map and that doesn't really work out too well. If you've got guys focusing caps from the start and the other team get into a deathball and work out what you're doing they will rush you and gg.

[sneeking]

Then maybe its a mistake to use votes to force non cap players into a capping mode ay...

Who would of fkn thought that would happen ?

[Lykaon]

Accused, on 27 December 2015 - 04:13 PM, said:

For some reason people love playing Terra Therma Conquest a lot these days too.

Terra Therma Conquest is super easy.

Step one your two fastest mechs (preferably ones with jumpjets) grab Theta.Only cap until it goes blue do not linger.

One lance moves to grab the closest cap to your spawn location again only get it to blue do not worry about filling the cap bar.immediatley rally with the rest of your team that should be moving to Epsilon.

On Terra Therma the fight always goes down at Epsilon if you don't do the stupid thing and flood into theta. The opposition will likely have one lance going to epsilon and if you move quickly you can get that enemy lance outnumbered and elliminated early.

Now your two light mechs that capped theta early will go and grab the enemy free starting cap and finish capping the ones you left bearly blue. During this time the enemy will probably get theta but who cares you have everything else and a 4 kill lead if you did everything correctly.

Late game strategy is have your fastest mechs search for enemy mechs and respond to enemy cap attempts to observe and report these fast mechs should be in a single pack so they can handle solo enemy lights. If they spot a concentration of enemy heavyer slower mechs your deathball (all the heavies and assaults on your team ) rolls in a squashes them.

[JC Daxion]

sneeking, on 28 December 2015 - 05:07 AM, said:

Then maybe its a mistake to use votes to force non cap players into a capping mode ay...

Who would of fkn thought that would happen ?

and how is this any different than forcing people that want conquest, to play the others?

It's funny... 10% of the time i get the mode i wan't and have to deal with people bitching about it.. 90% of the time i just suck it up and play...

[Ultimax]

Jman5, on 27 December 2015 - 06:49 PM, said:

In my experience it's often the non-cappers who are at fault for losing a conquest game. While 4 guys are out capping, they try to take on the enemy's 12-man deathball head on. So they get obliterated and the folks who were playing the long game are now screwed because it's suddenly 12 vs 4.

When you drop in a pug conquest it's important to be aware of what your team is doing. If they are sticking together, you want to be aggressive. If they are out capping, you want to play conservatively until you're up in caps, you can regroup, and the other team is now panicking to uncap everywhere at once.

I like Conquest mode because it's dynamic, but you need good map awareness.

You're contradicting yourself.

If 8 guys stuck together, that's what the team is doing and those 4 guys out capping are the ones not reading the situation - not the other way around.

Those guys screw themselves, those 4 guys are the ones who aren't aware of what the team is doing.