13 replies to this topic

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Make it an ammo dump, make it a mobile command post, anything except a fracking box people stand in.

I demand more sim, more immersion, and less placeholder low effort garbage.

[Triordinant]

During the last Town Hall, Russ said Assault was going to be totally revamped. Actual bases with ECM fields, UAV towers, turrets, etc.

[Percimes]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 27 March 2016 - 07:38 AM, said:

Make it an ammo dump, make it a mobile command post, anything except a fracking box people stand in.

I demand more sim, more immersion, and less placeholder low effort garbage.

Let see, destroying a base now... No need to get close and stay there. Everyone snipe at the enemy base and they can't do anything to prevent it. Matches become a who can get close fast enough to destroy the base, best strategy is to avoid fighting the enemy team. Kill them before they destroy your base? Hope one doesn't slip past your defence or is sniping under ECM. Boost the health of bases to HUUUUGE levels? Ammo builds because much less useful.

In short, not a good idea.

[Pariah Devalis]

Percimes, on 27 March 2016 - 08:06 AM, said:

Let see, destroying a base now... No need to get close and stay there. Everyone snipe at the enemy base and they can't do anything to prevent it. Matches become a who can get close fast enough to destroy the base, best strategy is to avoid fighting the enemy team. Kill them before they destroy your base? Hope one doesn't slip past your defence or is sniping under ECM. Boost the health of bases to HUUUUGE levels? Ammo builds because much less useful.

In short, not a good idea.

Easily avoidable. Put up those walls made of adamantium like they have in CW around the outer facing of the structures. That way the only place you can actually knock the buildings out from would be inside the base.

[Percimes]

Pariah Devalis, on 27 March 2016 - 08:08 AM, said:

Easily avoidable. Put up those walls made of adamantium like they have in CW around the outer facing of the structures. That way the only place you can actually knock the buildings out from would be inside the base.

So you have to get into a box...

[Pariah Devalis]

Percimes, on 27 March 2016 - 08:12 AM, said:

So you have to get into a box...

Eh. Yes and no? Just within the base's walls. Those walls don't need to be confined to a square or rectangular pattern, nor do they need to be solid, unbroken lines.

[Tristan Winter]

Let's just wait for Assault 2.0

If the goal is immersion, then I'm not sure how a base with the Adamantium walls from CW is going to help things. At the end of the day, I think PGI needs to replace static game modes with dynamic game modes, which would be a far more significant improvement than anything else.

Remember how people thought blowing up turrets would make capping more fun for light mechs in Assault and promote role warfare?

It didn't.

[FupDup]

Tristan Winter, on 27 March 2016 - 08:33 AM, said:

Remember how people thought blowing up turrets would make capping more fun for light mechs in Assault and promote role warfare?

It didn't.

I think that the reason people wanted turrets in Assault wasn't for RW, it was because of Salty Pug Lords (usually in slow, fat mechs) who didn't want to have to protect their base from enemies. So basically, the opposite of RW.

[Tristan Winter]

FupDup, on 27 March 2016 - 08:43 AM, said:

I think that the reason people wanted turrets in Assault wasn't for RW, it was because of Salty Pug Lords (usually in slow, fat mechs) who didn't want to have to protect their base from enemies. So basically, the opposite of RW.

That was definitely part of it, but you will find hundreds or thousands of posts from 2013 where people fantasized about the ultimate fantasy for light mechs. "Imagine if you actually had to sneak up on enemy bases and destroy turrets and stuff instead of just standing on a square. Finally, light mechs would have something to do!"

I don't know if it was the Salty Pug Lords or the Bright-Eyed Light Jockeys who convinced PGI, but there was much optimism about the immersion-factor of actually having to destroy turrets, and there was much disappointment in the end. It may have been partially because the rewards for destroying turrets were rather insignificant. It may have been because the turrets were in fact the ultimate light mech killers (supporting the Salty Pug Lords argument). And it may have been because it's more fun to kill players than to kill stationary AI controlled turrets.

I'm just here to say that we shouldn't overestimate the fun to be had from destroying bases.

[Ultimax]

FupDup, on 27 March 2016 - 08:43 AM, said:

I think that the reason people wanted turrets in Assault wasn't for RW, it was because of Salty Pug Lords (usually in slow, fat mechs) who didn't want to have to protect their base from enemies. So basically, the opposite of RW.

The problem with protecting your base is that a lot of bases in the game aren't located in the dominant map positions.

This game is often won based on stronger positioning, so expecting people to try and hold crappy areas is dumb.


Not to mention that a mode that theoretically promotes camping is also dumb on its own, the matches we see played out where no one camps is because most people find that to be boring and unfun.



Its a poorly designed mode, no excuses should be made for it.

[FupDup]

Ultimax, on 27 March 2016 - 08:51 AM, said:

The problem with protecting your base is that a lot of bases in the game aren't located in the dominant map positions.

This game is often won based on stronger positioning, so expecting people to try and hold crappy areas is dumb.


Not to mention that a mode that theoretically promotes camping is also dumb on its own, the matches we see played out where no one camps is because most people find that to be boring and unfun.



Its a poorly designed mode, no excuses should be made for it.

Mind you that I'm not saying either variation of Assault was good, I'm just saying that it was salty assaultwarriors who got the turret variation of that mode created.

Both versions usually play out as Skirmish With A Twist™ anyways.

[Zordicron]

Turrets and assault in general failed because of:

Maps too small to support this method of play.

The turrets could not be too wimpy, because the fatties would cry about not being able to get back to base fast enough.
The turrets can not be too strong, because there was basically a limited set of time before the fatties gort back and ganked whoever was trying to assault the base.


Basically, even though it sounds contradictory, the map was too small to allow a base defense grid design that would allow for methodical base assault style play. In previous MW games, you could use the map to pick positions to asault the fixed defenses, choose an angle, work the base to crack it open. This is what light pilots wanted back then, and what the role players were hoping for.

The map is too small. There was no time for that type play, because as soon as you open fire on a turret, the enemy team sent a squad to chase you away within a minute, or sent a whole 12 man deathball back within 2. On top of this, methodical approach to attacking fixed defense turrets etc basically preempts taking a defensable position vs the returning mechs. So not only did you have limited time to attack a base, you were 9/10 doing it from a position that left you wide open to lolgank from the returning enemy.

What I am getting at is if the map was significantly sized, it would allow one of two things, or possibly both:
-The team would have to split forces to defend and assault, or at the least scout for the enemy to see what their tactic was to react to it.
- An actual sizable base defense could be created to make that methodical approach valid because the enemy would be too far out to simply return in full force and roflstomp the attackers. Provided they added some actual rewards to busting open the base and taking it, engaging the whole enemy team could theoretically then become a true alternative tactic instead of the only one to get a decent match score.


Currently, the only map big enough in game to remotely come close to theoretically pulling this off is the new Polar one, and IMO it would need a little work near the base areas to accomplish this anyway. Everything else is simply too small, even alpine(well, could possibly work if put at the extreme ends of the widest part of map, rather then current locations)

Russ supposedly is revamping assault mode, and sounds like a proper base might be on the table. Not sure it will turn out any better though if it still remains 12 vs 12 on our current set of maps, it will jsut be a more fancy presentation of the previous turret version IMO.

[Zordicron]

FupDup, on 27 March 2016 - 08:43 AM, said:

I think that the reason people wanted turrets in Assault wasn't for RW, it was because of Salty Pug Lords (usually in slow, fat mechs) who didn't want to have to protect their base from enemies. So basically, the opposite of RW.

It was some of both, but the original lack of skirmish mode was a great amplifier to the tears, and given what the comp meta was at the time and where IGP was directing the game to go, the tears probably held more sway by far to the decisions then the daydreams of mechwarriors did.

[Novakaine]

Bright-Eyed Light Jockeys yup these gitz.
​I remember the arguments.
"No fairs the turret only shoot at me, I can't pilot my bicycle waaaaaaaah."

Edited by Novakaine, 27 March 2016 - 10:08 AM.