27 replies to this topic

[Impyrium]

Domination, king of the hill, it's a game mode that focuses around a singular point on the map. I think domination gets that bit right. It was always going to be skirmish focused around a singular point, that's the effect of having single-life permadeath.

So PGI got that bit right.

Fortunately what they also started to get right was the idea of having those external objectives.

Unfortunately their timid approach to objective making means that the importance of those objectives just isn't enough to warrant your team doing anything about them. Having your opponents time jump up is... sort of useful, but since it's capped at 1:00 there's no reason to pay them any attention, and by the time the enemy might have capped a little you're well engaged and have better things to do.

Point being- they're just not important enough for a team to say "Hey, someone should flank around and take out those field bases".

Solution- take timid hat off and give them meaningful effects that ensure that if a team decides to go for them they can really, really affect the match. And defending them, or at least being aware of them, is more important for a team.

Some ideas for effects, all separate from each other:

• At the very least, remove the cap! Why shouldn't they push the enemy timer above 1:00?
  
• Detract from your own timer, like a good 25 seconds or something. So that if a team lets both their bases be taken out, the enemy is very close to a cap win.
  
• On destruction, add ~20 seconds of 'capture' time to a team. During this 'capture' time, a team is able to bring down their timer even if an enemy mech is in the capture zone or a friendly is shot.
  
• Spawn a small squadron of attack choppers... oh wait.

Any other ideas? Thoughts? I can only see it being a positive to have something to vary up the game mode, but I've been very wrong before.

[TLBFestus]

I have a simpler solution.

Make the "Green Circle of Victory" move around the map during the battle, forcing teams to continually adapt the the change in position.

Done.

[sycocys]

3 green bubbles - need 2/3 to win
actually make spawn points that are for the mode - put lances opposing each other somewhat near each bubble
mix the lances - or let it be up to the commander -- both add some actual variation to the way the matches play out.
don't need silly generators if you just split up the teams from the start.

------------

At the very least don't use the crappiest spot on each map for the bubble with the stock skirmish spawn points....
Believe it or not people get f'n tired of every match ending up in the same exact spot regardless of mode of play.

[LordNothing]

i was mulling around in my head ideas about how to make those useful. my favorite solution was to put 6 turrets around the the dish. these are initially neutral and equipped with medium and short range weaponry (medium lasers, ac10s, srms, whatever), and have heavy armor (2x more armored than cw turrets).

the field bases are trying to hack the dish to control the turrets. if you have more bases than the enemy does, then you can hack the turrets and use them to help defend the objective. the enemy then can blow up one of theirs to make them neutral again, or both and take them over. you can also blow up the turrets to remove them from play or deny the enemy use of them. there might be a secondary turret activation mechanic where you can activate the turrets if you have a 10 second lead.

[Gamuray]

Wait, why not make it so in order to cap, you must take out the enemy field bases? You then must both defend your bases, and attack the enemy's at the same time, then attempt a capture of the point. I'd drop the health of the bases/ cap time of the objective a bit to make it less time comsuming.

I think that would make it very tactical and a bad idea to death ball in some cases.

[Seal Farmer]

Gamuray, on 06 April 2016 - 08:14 PM, said:

Wait, why not make it so in order to cap, you must take out the enemy field bases? You then must both defend your bases, and attack the enemy's at the same time, then attempt a capture of the point. I'd drop the health of the bases/ cap time of the objective a bit to make it less time comsuming.

I think that would make it very tactical and a bad idea to death ball in some cases.

One team decides to defend one spot and kill any of enemy team that splits up ?

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Dingo Red, on 06 April 2016 - 05:39 PM, said:

Domination, king of the hill, it's a game mode that focuses around a singular point on the map. I think domination gets that bit right. It was always going to be skirmish focused around a singular point, that's the effect of having single-life permadeath.

So PGI got that bit right.

Fortunately what they also started to get right was the idea of having those external objectives.

Unfortunately their timid approach to objective making means that the importance of those objectives just isn't enough to warrant your team doing anything about them. Having your opponents time jump up is... sort of useful, but since it's capped at 1:00 there's no reason to pay them any attention, and by the time the enemy might have capped a little you're well engaged and have better things to do.

Point being- they're just not important enough for a team to say "Hey, someone should flank around and take out those field bases".

Solution- take timid hat off and give them meaningful effects that ensure that if a team decides to go for them they can really, really affect the match. And defending them, or at least being aware of them, is more important for a team.

Some ideas for effects, all separate from each other:

• At the very least, remove the cap! Why shouldn't they push the enemy timer above 1:00?
  
• Detract from your own timer, like a good 25 seconds or something. So that if a team lets both their bases be taken out, the enemy is very close to a cap win.
  
• On destruction, add ~20 seconds of 'capture' time to a team. During this 'capture' time, a team is able to bring down their timer even if an enemy mech is in the capture zone or a friendly is shot.
  
• Spawn a small squadron of attack choppers... oh wait.

Any other ideas? Thoughts? I can only see it being a positive to have something to vary up the game mode, but I've been very wrong before.

Good ideas.

Gamuray, on 06 April 2016 - 08:14 PM, said:

Wait, why not make it so in order to cap, you must take out the enemy field bases? You then must both defend your bases, and attack the enemy's at the same time, then attempt a capture of the point. I'd drop the health of the bases/ cap time of the objective a bit to make it less time comsuming.

I think that would make it very tactical and a bad idea to death ball in some cases.

Good idea too, IMHO the team with more field bases standing should be able to cap even if the enemy is within the circle, only slower (like 1 point per 3 seconds with one field base more, 1 point per 2 seconds with two field bases more).

Seal Farmer, on 06 April 2016 - 11:21 PM, said:

One team decides to defend one spot and kill any of enemy team that splits up ?

Have you played CW? You know how hard it is to defend an immovable object against lights? On pug maps, without corridors, turrets, high HP objectives (mobile bases have like 30-50hp), immovable objectives are as hard to kill as a light mech of a player that disconnected mid-match.
Firstly, you cannot stand in one spot, because there are 2 separate field bases. Secondly, even if you stand in one spot that somehow coveres both, one ERLL/gauss/ppc sniper will destroy your field bases from the safe distance and force you to rush into enemy positions or loose. As in CW, you have to intercept the attacking enemy BEFORE he reaches the objectives, and in open pug maps that enemy can come out from anywhere. Thirdly, standing in one spot makes your team get ripped apart in any pug match.

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 06 April 2016 - 11:48 PM.

[Seal Farmer]

Prof RJ Gumby, on 06 April 2016 - 11:47 PM, said:

Good ideas.



Good idea too, IMHO the team with more field bases standing should be able to cap even if the enemy is within the circle, only slower (like 1 point per 3 seconds with one field base more, 1 point per 2 seconds with two field bases more).


Have you played CW? You know how hard it is to defend an immovable object against lights? On pug maps, without corridors, turrets, high HP objectives (mobile bases have like 30-50hp), immovable objectives are as hard to kill as a light mech of a player that disconnected mid-match.
Firstly, you cannot stand in one spot, because there are 2 separate field bases. Secondly, even if you stand in one spot that somehow coveres both, one ERLL/gauss/ppc sniper will destroy your field bases from the safe distance and force you to rush into enemy positions or loose. As in CW, you have to intercept the attacking enemy BEFORE he reaches the objectives, and in open pug maps that enemy can come out from anywhere. Thirdly, standing in one spot makes your team get ripped apart in any pug match.

Happens in conquest but yes destroying from range is easier than capping something. But saying you will defend one point dot mean you need to have 12 mechs within 10 metres of it. Team stay together have spotters and when 4 enemy come to kill from range, lights intercept hold them until other friends come and kill them then its 8 v 12

Edited by Seal Farmer, 06 April 2016 - 11:52 PM.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Seal Farmer, on 06 April 2016 - 11:50 PM, said:

Happens in conquest but yes destroying from range is easier than capping something. But saying you will defend one point dot mean you need to have 12 mechs within 10 metres of it. Team stay together have spotters and when 4 enemy come to kill from range, lights intercept hold them until other friends come and kill them then its 8 v 12

OK then. But if you're so organised to pull it off, we can assume the enemy can be equally organised. What if the enemy lights decoy your lights into a firing line trap? Then it will be 8vs12 too, but in reds' favour. What if they spot your position without being spotted and adjust accordingly? What if they will boom-and-zoom your spotters with a wolfpack before the main force could react? Or just snipe the objectives from half the map with some poptart nova that has about 1800 meters of range?

I'm not trying to say your strategy would not be valid. It certainly would. But it could also be countered by a counter strategy (especially that it is easy to notice the enemy plays defensively and playing defensively gives the enemy time to rethink they plans and adapt them to the battlefield situation). Of course you could then have plan B, but again, the enemy could have plan C. Isn't that what we want? A thinking man's shooter with enough objectives and variables that prevent one strategy to win over all others?

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 07 April 2016 - 12:28 AM.

[Seal Farmer]

Dont get me wrong i like the ideas, i would want more immersion and depth, just adding thoughts to make it different from conquest is all.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Seal Farmer, on 07 April 2016 - 12:48 AM, said:

Dont get me wrong i like the ideas, i would want more immersion and depth, just adding thoughts to make it different from conquest is all.

Me too. Let's settle at me believing these will improve the mode for sure, and you having some doubts

IMHO the problem with conquest is usually too small maps and/or center spawn that lures people into deathballing in the middle of the map. Polar and Plexus are not middle-centered in conquest and make this mode much more interesting.

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 07 April 2016 - 01:37 AM.

[MTier Slayed Up]

Even a better solution.

Turn it into a free for all, every man for himself.
Pugs will never know what hit 'em
That'll lighten things up, pretty sure.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

TLBFestus, on 06 April 2016 - 05:48 PM, said:

I have a simpler solution.

Make the "Green Circle of Victory" move around the map during the battle, forcing teams to continually adapt the the change in position.

Done.

That'll go over well. remember how alpine conquest used to have its cap points spread out and people (mostly heavy and assault pilots) bitched endlessly until it got changed to the current mess it is now?

[Jman5]

Agree that the 1 minute cap needs to go. As it is now, it's mostly just a stalemate as both teams sit at 1 minute.

The whole destructible truck concept is something that should really be expanded in all sorts of ways. Why not create a destructible artillery and airbase that if destroyed disables the enemy air/arty strikes? Or an enemy radar installation that if captured (ala conquest square) provides periodic seismic sensor pings across the map until the enemy recaptures it?

This create new strategic depth to the game, it would it enhance role warfare, it would this encourage people to split up and move more instead of deathballing, it could be copy/pasted into all game modes including faction warfare, AND it would also provide more matchscore/cbill reward opportunities for smaller mechs that can't do as much raw damage as a heavy or assault.

PGI, you're so close to this really awesome stuff. You just have to take that next step of making secondary objectives impact the fight. Once you do that everyone really starts to care about capping and killing buildings.

Edited by Jman5, 07 April 2016 - 09:18 AM.

[Tordin]

Ah solution! Add some artillery capture points around the map, getting all of them cp would rain heavenly death on those camping the domination circle

[Felicitatem Parco]

Idea:

If both of your field bases are destroyed, then you cannot stop the enemy cap timer by shooting them; you'd have to be present in the circle to stop the enemy from capping.

This links the field bases into the objective well enough, and gives people a reason to shoot them at all.


The current implementation suggests that you should divert forces away from the cap zone when the enemy is already capping so you can add to their cap timer... But why would you divert forces away from the cap zone when the enemy is currently capping and winning?!

Edited by Prosperity Park, 07 April 2016 - 09:53 AM.

[Khobai]

heres how to make domination more interesting: delete it.

[DAYLEET]

It should be a true King of the Hill, everything else add nothing nor depth or strategies. Get in there and earn points for your team ,no blocking by shooting, no nothing, each member in there earn a point every second for the team and you need 200 points. Lets see whos the strongest and the best, aka the King of the Hill, not the "let the other team expose themselves and shoot them guys we dont need to be in there"

[Felicitatem Parco]

Khobai, on 07 April 2016 - 11:18 AM, said:

heres how to make domination more interesting: delete it.

So, are you the MortonSalt girl now, or something? This game needs more variety, and you want to delete game modes. No, it's okay. We can just do skirmish all the time.

Alright, back on topic:

Domination has much potential, and the fact that simply shooting your enemy is enough to temporarily stop a capture adds a great dynamic to the game mode. Yo don't actually have to countercap in many circumstances because a lone Raven3L with a ERLL can hold the cap zone from 1200m away by repeatedly scratching the enemy.

This is where I think the mobile bases should be tied into the capture mechanism. If losing both bases meant you could no longer defend from a range, it puts a big damper on your team. You now have to physically be in the cap zone to stop the enemy from winning. This is especially relevant on maps where there is little cover in the cap zone. TBH, it would have little effect on maps where there is plenty of cover in the cap zone, like HPG Manifold, but it can have a very big impact on maps like Alpine, Polar, and Grim where the cap zone can be a death zone.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 07 April 2016 - 11:54 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

This game needs more variety, and you want to delete game modes.

domination does not represent variety though. its just another take on skirmish.

deleting skirmish and all skirmish related gamemodes and replacing them with a ticket based respawn gamemode is the best thing that could happen for MWO.

Edited by Khobai, 07 April 2016 - 02:32 PM.