31 replies to this topic

[RussianWolf]

xTrident, on 29 February 2016 - 08:34 AM, said:

I've played games where the respawn point would change depending on where the enemy was. I can't imagine it would be that difficult to incorporate.

This is PGI we are talking about. What about this game suggest that they can code anything with any complexity?

Quote

To the OP - It's simple... Don't play CW. I tried it one time. It was as bad as everyone that's had bad experiences has told me. First I dropped with randoms - no problem, except we were going up again an organized unit. So we got destroyed and by the end of the match the spawn camping was heavily going on. I won't play that mode again.

yep, played the first week. Then got talked into a few drops with my unit. Even winning isn't fun when you have to use tired tactics and game the systems in place.

[xTrident]

RussianWolf, on 29 February 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

This is PGI we are talking about. What about this game suggest that they can code anything with any complexity?

yep, played the first week. Then got talked into a few drops with my unit. Even winning isn't fun when you have to use tired tactics and game the systems in place.

Well... You got me. I like to try and give PGI the benefit of the doubt every now and then.

[Sandpit]

It's only common on counter attack. It's the mode design that creates this a a viable tactic. None of the other modes in CW have this issue. Update counter-attack and the problem goes away.

[RussianWolf]

xTrident, on 29 February 2016 - 08:41 AM, said:

Well... You got me. I like to try and give PGI the benefit of the doubt every now and then.

I used to, but been disappointed too many times. Now they have to EARN any compliments.

[Sandpit]

RussianWolf, on 29 February 2016 - 08:46 AM, said:

I used to, but been disappointed too many times. Now they have to EARN any compliments.

^^^^^

same here

[Tarogato]

ReemusX, on 29 February 2016 - 03:37 AM, said:

Getting to where this is the most common tactic in CW if the enemy 1st wave is beaten down somewhat. After about 35 matches this weekend maybe 4-5 did not have this. I have been on both ends of it ... We either push or get pushed.

Entire teams literally sit up right at the drop zone and even with 4 drop ships landing there isn't enough damage to worry about by the campers..... The result of course is your mech being cored out before it even finishes the drop cycle.

It really takes away from the game to have your next 3 drops camped so hard that there is no chance for a push back. It would seem that if your first wave fails.... It is game over (especially in pug teams) and there is no chance regroup well enough to make it a good game.

Honestly I think this exploit of nearly no consequence for drop-****** needs a good revamp. I of course hate being on the bad end of it....and I really don't like being on the good end of it. For new players trying to get a feel of the game...this is one thing can can def drive them away....and retention of newcomers is what keeps a game alive.

Not really a rant or whining....but it is a legit gripe... Some will say "you won't get drop-***** if your team doesn't suck"... Well, I can say that there are some units that have perfected this tactic...and for a pug team which is most common... They almost never stand a chance.

Just my .02... needs some serious fixing. I watch 3-4 drop ships firing perma LL at these guys and see MAYBE 1-2 drop ship kills. On a fresh assault he can stand there and take 4 drop ships of fire no prob. Even worse is that the ships fire through their own team lol. It's a mess...

Okay, so here's the deal. The problem here is that one team lost so bad that the enemy could afford to just push out and spawncamp their opposition. Why do you let them do this? Why do you let them slaughter you so hard in the first wave that they are even able to do this? The problem isn't dropships, or landing zones, or anything like that. The problem is the imbalance between the two teams. I don't care if you buff dropships to the point of achieving one-shot kills with 100% certainty, the enemy is going to continue to walk right up to the limit of the dropship's range and just sit there. And wait for you to come and die to them. Because the skill gap between the teams is that great.

The solution is to allow the aggressing team an auto-win scenario. Allow us to shoot the dropships out of the sky to end the match with a flurry of C-Bills and LP, that way we don't have to sit there and wait for every scrub to spawn and get farmed. If a team can't even win a fight with the assistance of 36 ERLL with aimbot from the sky, then they deserve to be kicked out of the match outright. It's embarrassing.

[Gamuray]

xTrident, on 29 February 2016 - 08:34 AM, said:

I've played games where the respawn point would change depending on where the enemy was. I can't imagine it would be that difficult to incorporate.

To the OP - It's simple... Don't play CW. I tried it one time. It was as bad as everyone that's had bad experiences has told me. First I dropped with randoms - no problem, except we were going up against an organized unit. So we got destroyed and by the end of the match the spawn camping was heavily going on. I won't play that mode again.

It wouldn't be that difficult to implement.... If they hadn't made EVERY CW MAP MADE OF LANES THAT ALL LEAD TO A SINGLE SPOT.

The would have to update every map to have lanes coming from every direction in order to accomplish this. And given PGI's quality of work on CW thus far, I would take a far shot that they would still not get it done right. What they needed FROM THE BEGINNING was maps with dozens of attack lanes (like a palace in the middle of a city or a large, fortified spaceport) where you could attack from any angle and your team's drop zone would be one of two:
a. closest to where to bulk of your forces are located, while out of sightlines.
b. furthest from the enemy bulk of forces.

[CDLord HHGD]

At first I was like "You misspelled "Rampage"....

Then I was like...

Ohhhhhhh........

[sycocys]

To have random drop points the maps would have to be 3-4 times as large as they currently are. There's just no way that it would work on the current maps when you can shoot from side to side and after about 1000-1500m in still with great cover from there to the backs of the maps.

Then you run into the part where it nullifies the current game modes (which would be far better suited to 1 attempt anyhow) because neither team would ever be able to recover in time to have an effective second wave.

Most people still don't want to admit it, but respawns are a problem not because of spawn killing - but because they are a bad mechanic for this game. They decimate tactics and reduce game play to 1 objective. You won't ever see any depth to the gameplay so long as they are still a base mechanic of the mode.

[adamts01]

sycocys, on 29 February 2016 - 03:42 AM, said:

Well that's what happens when you put respawns in an FPS. Works that way in literally every single other FPS I've played with a respawn system.

If only there were a franchise built around campaigns that would allow you to play multiple scenarios against your opponent you could solve this issue and make something more interesting for the players to draw into.

sycocys, on 29 February 2016 - 07:50 PM, said:

don't want to admit it, but respawns are a problem not because of spawn killing - but because they are a bad mechanic for this game. They decimate tactics and reduce game play to 1 objective. You won't ever see any depth to the gameplay so long as they are still a base mechanic of the mode.

I mention this in most of my posts, but I haven't played MWO for a month, not since I started playing Squad. They have a thing where enemy fire can't penetrate the opposing spawn. So they have to keep back or they get fired upon with no recourse. Then, with close reinforcements and enough room to maneuver around, it's easy enough to mount a counter assault. The servers are all player owned, and most have self imposed rules against spawn camping, because it sucks for both teams. I freakin love that game. It's in Alpha and the mechanics aren't up to speed, but their version of conquest which absolutely requires many smaller engagements around the map is awesome. It's like what many of us want lance v lance combat to be, plus it has a much better community as teamwork is absolutely essential, here it's a bunch of solos. But it doesn't have big stompy robots. I'll always come back to Mechwarrior, I'll check back when the next version of CW comes out.

[SkaerKrow]

I agree with the OP. I don't CW often, but when I do, it's always a Dropzone Rampage at the end. Hoping that they make it better, because I'd like to drop with a bunch of other Draconis pilots.

[Sandpit]

sycocys, on 29 February 2016 - 07:50 PM, said:

To have random drop points the maps would have to be 3-4 times as large as they currently are. There's just no way that it would work on the current maps when you can shoot from side to side and after about 1000-1500m in still with great cover from there to the backs of the maps. Then you run into the part where it nullifies the current game modes (which would be far better suited to 1 attempt anyhow) because neither team would ever be able to recover in time to have an effective second wave. Most people still don't want to admit it, but respawns are a problem not because of spawn killing - but because they are a bad mechanic for this game. They decimate tactics and reduce game play to 1 objective. You won't ever see any depth to the gameplay so long as they are still a base mechanic of the mode.

Polar could handle that no problem