Jump to content

Sader Explains Domination To Hans Davion.


39 replies to this topic

#21 TexAce

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,861 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 04 March 2016 - 04:58 AM

View PostShalune, on 04 March 2016 - 04:52 AM, said:

It's on their official Twitch page Posted Image
http://www.twitch.tv...ames/v/52189164

Look, I'm usually one of the more optimistic people to jump in and play devil's advocate on PGI's behalf. I think a lot of people in this community have clear biases and like to jump to conclusions.

That said, what I saw on stream is probably the single worst execution of a shooter/action game mode I've seen for a major release.

All of the flaws people are shouting about appear very real and blatant. There appears to be no way to win on the objective without killing the entire enemy team. Once this is done there is literally no way the exterminated team can win through the objective, but the victorious team still needs to spend a sum total of 5 minutes in the circle. And since damage taken disables your ability to cap for 5 seconds there will be little to no cap built up before one team is dead.

If you want an example of a good king of the hill mode in a similar format, look to Star Conflict. Here's how it works there:
- cap point appears, teams fight over it
- capping can be done under fire
- at set intervals the cap position instantly changes to a distant location

The changing location thing is great because it means one team can recognize and accept they've lost one engagement and choose to preempt their opponents in moving to the next location. The team that's ahead could also do this, but they risk either splitting their forces or leaving the current node undefended. I think something along these lines could suit MWO well as it'd give a clear role to mobility while not excluding traditionally slow heavy hitters.


Perhaps you could change your OP to make it more open for a real discussion, by first presenting their twitch stream.
The way it is now, it just doesnt allow a reasonable objective discussion about it, but covers it in bad taste instead.
You still can post your own youtube video later in the OP. Change the title to "PGI demonstrates Domination gamemode on stream" or something alike.


About the gamemode: They need to change the timings. 3 minutes max to capture it. Getting shot pauses it for one second only. Getting the omega "thingy" destroyed adds another 90 or 120 seconds.
And of course, if the enemy is dead, the match is won.

Edited by TexAce, 04 March 2016 - 05:00 AM.


#22 Sader325

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,181 posts

Posted 04 March 2016 - 05:01 AM

View PostTexAce, on 04 March 2016 - 04:58 AM, said:


Perhaps you could change your OP to make it more open for a real discussion, by first presenting their twitch stream.
The way it is now, it just doesnt allow a reasonable objective discussion about it, but covers it in bad taste instead.
You still can post your own youtube video later in the OP.


About the gamemode: They need to change the timings. 3 minutes max to capture it. Getting shot pauses it for one second only. Getting the omega "thingy" destroyed adds another 90 or 120 seconds.
And of course, if the enemy is dead, the match is won.


First off:

Shalune is not Sader and Sader is not Shalune.


Also: I don't have to type anything, the video says everything that needs to be said.

I didn't misrepresent the game mode, I explained the game mode to someone who hadn't experienced it. I gave him all the mechanics, Hans Davion is a SMART GUY.

It took him all of 3 seconds to realize what he was hearing was an abomination.

#23 TexAce

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,861 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 04 March 2016 - 05:04 AM

View PostSader325, on 04 March 2016 - 05:01 AM, said:


First off:

Shalune is not Sader and Sader is not Shalune.


Also: I don't have to type anything, the video says everything that needs to be said.

I didn't misrepresent the game mode, I explained the game mode to someone who hadn't experienced it. I gave him all the mechanics, Hans Davion is a SMART GUY.

It took him all of 3 seconds to realize what he was hearing was an abomination.


You clams all look the same to me, sorry Posted Image

Are you going to alter the OP, since its the first about the stream or should I just make another thread which doesn't start off with anyone's subjective opinion? Since no matter how bad the current implementation is, it doesn't mean we want to it to change the same way.

Edited by TexAce, 04 March 2016 - 05:05 AM.


#24 Shalune

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 647 posts
  • LocationCombination Pizza Hut and Taco Bell

Posted 04 March 2016 - 05:04 AM

View PostSader325, on 04 March 2016 - 04:58 AM, said:


Oooo i don't remember much about my time in star conflic. But i DO remember this game mode, and it WAS actually quite fun to play.

Technically star conflict also allowed you to bring a "dropdeck" a system we have in place already in this game. Look at that, we already have a game mode in this thread thats more fun than PGI's "domination" gamemode.

Good call out. Forgot to mention that in there even though I was thinking it at the time.

For those that haven't played it, I think it might still work in MWO without needing to implement drop decks or respawns (pending testing of course). A big thing in Star Conflict is that by virtue of being in space there was often less in the way of physical cover. So I think there's at least a good chance the ability to disengage with cover and just generally avoid hard engages through skirmishing might allow MWO's single life model to function in that mode.

#25 Sader325

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,181 posts

Posted 04 March 2016 - 05:17 AM

View PostTexAce, on 04 March 2016 - 05:04 AM, said:


You clams all look the same to me, sorry Posted Image

Are you going to alter the OP, since its the first about the stream or should I just make another thread which doesn't start off with anyone's subjective opinion? Since no matter how bad the current implementation is, it doesn't mean we want to it to change the same way.


You're free to do whatever you want.

#26 Jables McBarty

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,035 posts
  • LocationIn the backfield.

Posted 04 March 2016 - 08:58 AM

View PostShalune, on 04 March 2016 - 04:52 AM, said:

If you want an example of a good king of the hill mode in a similar format, look to Star Conflict. Here's how it works there:
- cap point appears, teams fight over it
- capping can be done under fire
- at set intervals the cap position instantly changes to a distant location

The changing location thing is great because it means one team can recognize and accept they've lost one engagement and choose to preempt their opponents in moving to the next location. The team that's ahead could also do this, but they risk either splitting their forces or leaving the current node undefended. I think something along these lines could suit MWO well as it'd give a clear role to mobility while not excluding traditionally slow heavy hitters.


This is what they did in Halo 2...possibly even in Halo 1...and that was a decade ago. It's a pretty obvious fix to this.

Destroying MFBs though. At least they're on track to some interesting objectives.

#27 CainenEX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 398 posts

Posted 04 March 2016 - 01:57 PM

This feels like a worse version of skirmish, now we have an 800m grind zone to fight over with no incentives to do anything but "death ball" into the enemy team's death ball. How did they think this mode would actually change the way we play the game from the other modes?

This mode is epic FAIL. No respawns, long *** timer objective, typical meatgrinder zone paluzza, useless objective design, the **** PGI!?
Man... You know it's bad when the Devs SPED UP THEIR OWN GAME! *implants face in desk*. At least I had a good laugh XD Thanks for the video.

Edited by CainenEX, 04 March 2016 - 01:58 PM.


#28 Soulstrom

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood Bound
  • The Blood Bound
  • 844 posts

Posted 04 March 2016 - 02:12 PM

Sader this is amazing! My reaction was exactly what Hans's was!

So I am not usually one to go all salty. I have enjoyed the last 6 months worth of releases and was expecting the new DOMINATION [say it in a deep masculine voice] game mode to be incredible. I watch the video released by PGI. I then subsequently laughed and laughed because it makes no sense. Not even in a 12 v 12 situation. The game mode is really just the way the community played conquest in 2014 and most of 2015. I hope I am wrong and they tweak it a bit before release but this video pretty much sums it up:

The countdown timer needs to be removed if the entire enemy team is destroyed.

So forum-warriors...

1. Was yours the same?
2. How do you think this game mode could be improved?
3. How do think this game mode will play out?
4. What are the long term effect of this mode on MWO?

Hopefully with enough of these thread PGI will reevaluate their maps.

#29 wanderer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 11,152 posts
  • LocationStomping around in a giant robot, of course.

Posted 04 March 2016 - 02:27 PM

I expect more out any game mode called Domination than this.



#30 Kodyn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Pest
  • The Pest
  • 1,444 posts
  • LocationNY, USA

Posted 04 March 2016 - 02:40 PM

After seeing this, I'm really questioning why some of PGI's people actually get paid to do what they do...

Why design features for games that are fun for no one whatsoever? Why pay someone to have that duty, then allow them to continue to have a job after we get our current iteration of Assault, and then this piece of crap?

Maybe I'm just having a salty day, but damn PGI, if I had put so little thought into everything I did in my life, I would have lost every job I ever had. Must be nice to have mech packs that whales will continuously buy, no matter the mistakes, so you don't actually have to have any accountability for quality.

Oh look, free Premium Time! I'll go grind some more for more mechs, because that's the only content there really ever will be...

#31 cazidin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 4,259 posts

Posted 04 March 2016 - 02:50 PM

So. If everybody hates this game mode then one of two things will happen. We simply won't vote for it after playing and hating it or PGI will fix it. Actually, both of those things will happen and in that order.

#32 wanderer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 11,152 posts
  • LocationStomping around in a giant robot, of course.

Posted 04 March 2016 - 03:05 PM

Honestly, there's one change to caps that'd make things more interesting.

A cap reverts to neutral if not maintained by occupying the spot. Contested points (both teams in the cap) mean the cap moves towards neutral as if it was unoccupied. Apply it to Conquest, for that matter.

#33 Zordicron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 2,547 posts

Posted 04 March 2016 - 03:16 PM

View PostShalune, on 04 March 2016 - 04:52 AM, said:

It's on their official Twitch page Posted Image
http://www.twitch.tv...ames/v/52189164

Look, I'm usually one of the more optimistic people to jump in and play devil's advocate on PGI's behalf. I think a lot of people in this community have clear biases and like to jump to conclusions.

That said, what I saw on stream is probably the single worst execution of a shooter/action game mode I've seen for a major release.

All of the flaws people are shouting about appear very real and blatant. There appears to be no way to win on the objective without killing the entire enemy team. Once this is done there is literally no way the exterminated team can win through the objective, but the victorious team still needs to spend a sum total of 5 minutes in the circle. And since damage taken disables your ability to cap for 5 seconds there will be little to no cap built up before one team is dead.

If you want an example of a good king of the hill mode in a similar format, look to Star Conflict. Here's how it works there:
- cap point appears, teams fight over it
- capping can be done under fire
- at set intervals the cap position instantly changes to a distant location

The changing location thing is great because it means one team can recognize and accept they've lost one engagement and choose to preempt their opponents in moving to the next location. The team that's ahead could also do this, but they risk either splitting their forces or leaving the current node undefended. I think something along these lines could suit MWO well as it'd give a clear role to mobility while not excluding traditionally slow heavy hitters.

Have you sent this to Russ or Paul? I would really enjoy a mode like that actually. +1 if the cap point moves but you have to actually find it(you know, for scouting to actually matter) but if it is on a set pattern, would be fine too as you state, because there are tactics involved that way also.

#34 GernMiester

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 169 posts

Posted 04 March 2016 - 04:36 PM

View PostSader325, on 04 March 2016 - 04:09 AM, said:


I imagine they realized this when they realized mid stream how boring it was to sit there after they won.


I imagine them drooling all over themselves waiting for the timer to run out thinking how great of a job they did.

You are dreaming.

#35 Troutmonkey

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • Moderate Giver
  • 3,776 posts
  • LocationAdelaide, Australia

Posted 04 March 2016 - 10:13 PM

The way the cap needs to work is the team with the most mechs in the cap zone own it, the greater the difference in mechs the faster the other team caps.

The cap point should also change position every couple of minutes as other have suggested

#36 Timuroslav

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Gunsho-ni
  • Gunsho-ni
  • 672 posts
  • Location米国のネバダ州のリノで住んでいます。

Posted 04 March 2016 - 10:40 PM

View PostTroutmonkey, on 04 March 2016 - 10:13 PM, said:

The way the cap needs to work is the team with the most mechs in the cap zone own it, the greater the difference in mechs the faster the other team caps.

The cap point should also change position every couple of minutes as other have suggested

There's still the dilemma of; ' All I have to do is wipe out the enemy team' . Gonna need respawn or something a kin to it in order to prevent Skirmish syndrome.

I'd pilot a helicopter/tank >_>

Edited by Timuroslav, 04 March 2016 - 10:40 PM.


#37 Meathook

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 116 posts

Posted 05 March 2016 - 03:02 AM

So they tucked a ghost drop to the end of a skirmish match? Sounds legit. Actually more effort invested than I expected.

Edited by Meathook, 05 March 2016 - 03:02 AM.


#38 vocifer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 284 posts
  • LocationMordor borderlands

Posted 05 March 2016 - 06:09 AM

Well, I'm pretty sure, they'll just put a win trigger of "destroying all enemy mechs" back for this mode. This is just what happens when thoughts come after the deeds. No big deal.

#39 B0oN

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,870 posts

Posted 05 March 2016 - 06:20 AM

View PostTexAce, on 04 March 2016 - 05:04 AM, said:

*inane blabbering*
You clams all look the same to me, sorry Posted Image
*some more inane bullizzle*


Says the german that drowns a perfectly good Schnitzel with effing sauce .
And now be a bit less obnoxious or I need to send some good ´ole Austrian over to you guys to lead a bit ...

#40 Zibmo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Stone Cold
  • 488 posts

Posted 05 March 2016 - 06:22 AM

View PostShalune, on 04 March 2016 - 04:52 AM, said:

It's on their official Twitch page Posted Image
http://www.twitch.tv...ames/v/52189164

Look, I'm usually one of the more optimistic people to jump in and play devil's advocate on PGI's behalf. I think a lot of people in this community have clear biases and like to jump to conclusions.

That said, what I saw on stream is probably the single worst execution of a shooter/action game mode I've seen for a major release.

All of the flaws people are shouting about appear very real and blatant. There appears to be no way to win on the objective without killing the entire enemy team. Once this is done there is literally no way the exterminated team can win through the objective, but the victorious team still needs to spend a sum total of 5 minutes in the circle. And since damage taken disables your ability to cap for 5 seconds there will be little to no cap built up before one team is dead.

If you want an example of a good king of the hill mode in a similar format, look to Star Conflict. Here's how it works there:
- cap point appears, teams fight over it
- capping can be done under fire
- at set intervals the cap position instantly changes to a distant location

The changing location thing is great because it means one team can recognize and accept they've lost one engagement and choose to preempt their opponents in moving to the next location. The team that's ahead could also do this, but they risk either splitting their forces or leaving the current node undefended. I think something along these lines could suit MWO well as it'd give a clear role to mobility while not excluding traditionally slow heavy hitters.


You don't think that would turn into a Mexican standoff?





4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users