60 replies to this topic

[DarthHias]

Douglas grizzly, on 26 June 2016 - 07:55 AM, said:

Why Conquest?

Why not?

[C E Dwyer]

Mystere, on 26 June 2016 - 10:45 AM, said:

Tell me something new. This has gone on since the very beginning, event or no event.

Besides, it does not need to be applied to all game modes, just some (with of course the requisite change of removing game mode voting).

The same thing applies to maps. Not all maps should have the same proportion, or even variety, of terrain -- unlike what some posters on this thread are demanding.

Yes well, that come from people that demanded map voting or worse, the right to chose what map they drop on, for their builds, because they're to neanderthal to adapt to a range map with a brawler or a closed in map with a lurmboat.

Sadly there will always be people that want everything on a plate, and any randomness to increase the difficulty, or realism is unwanted

[Davegt27]

Most players hate conquest but are forced to play it

So they end up not trying their best when they play conquest

Really nothing you can do about it

I find I can take whatever stupid maneuver PGI comes up with as long as it’s not over and over and over
Again

[Druarc]

I like conquest. But I'd like to see more xp and score for actually capping.

[Escef]

Davegt27, on 26 June 2016 - 02:25 PM, said:

Most players hate conquest but are forced to play it

"Most" players in this game love Skirmish, which is the most brain dead mode in the game. Let's face it, any game mode that isn't "HurrDurr Shoot Mechs Hurr Durr lolz" is hated by the community because it might actually force them to do something more tactically involved than pressing the left mouse button.

When someone tries to cap a base? No end of salt. "y are you capping?" "only noobz cap" "lights go defend base" (That's one of my personal favorites, because it's often spoken after all the lights are dead.) "we lost because of noob cap" "y no1 defend base" (Also some of my favorites. We lost because the other team is bad? WTF? Are you stupid? And if you were so concerned about base defense, why did you do nothing about it yourself?)

Conquest? Not nearly as bad, but the problem comes in when the entire team either bogs down trying to defend a single cap point, or lumbers around circling the entire map as a group thinking that owning 1 cap at a time will somehow win the game.

Domination? Not usually bad, but I've seen teams camp in cover just outside the circle, too afraid to even attempt something that resembles working towards a wincon.

Overall, however, my biggest complaint is really about the timidity of the userbase. Freakin' Tetris Fever, I swear. What's "Tetris Fever"? It's when players are so afraid of shooting or being shot at that the game they should be playing is Tetris.

[AnTi90d]

They should invent Capture the Flag and shove Conquest and Domination with it into a separate QP queue.

Then, there'd be a Mechwarrior queue to shoot things and a Mechwarrior queue to run around and deal with arbitrary objectives.

CQ is garbage. I hate it. I hate everything about it. It's the equivalent of forcing people to play CTF when they just want to blow **** up. If I'm in the solo queue, I absolutely will not cap. I'd rather lose shooting than win playing boring CQ objectives.

[Gotham by Knight]

QuantumButler, on 26 June 2016 - 08:11 AM, said:

Because teams tend to break up the most in conquest to snag objectives so there is less deathballing AND you make by far the most cash in conquest.

So I ask, why choose anything BUT conquest?

exactly. why choose derpmish?

Mystere, on 26 June 2016 - 08:14 AM, said:

Objectives? Much of the player base hates them.

Precisely why FW has failed and the game is so anti teamwork.

[wanderer]

AnTi90d, on 26 June 2016 - 02:48 PM, said:

They should invent Capture the Flag and shove Conquest and Domination with it into a separate QP queue.

Then, there'd be a Mechwarrior queue to shoot things and a Mechwarrior queue to run around and deal with arbitrary objectives.

CQ is garbage. I hate it. I hate everything about it. It's the equivalent of forcing people to play CTF when they just want to blow **** up. If I'm in the solo queue, I absolutely will not cap. I'd rather lose shooting than win playing boring CQ objectives.

If you're doing Conquest right, it's generally:

1) Take two nearest points, go head for the third knowing there's going to be enemies doing the same.
2) Blow up robots.
3) Winner trots off to cap a few more squares, gets the bonus, game ends immediately.
3b) And if there's a random chucklehead hiding, you win anyway, slightly slower.
3c) If it drags into a stalemate, there's a nice timer that'll mean you don't have to sit there watching the remainder of a boring 15 min match- it'll end sooner no matter what, how much so depending on how who got 3-4 of the "hurry up and play" caps.
4) Either way, get more money than Skirmish for doing the same thing.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Conquest pays best. It's not hard to win, and even a loss can get you more c-bills than otherwise. Therefore I always vote for it when it's an option.

[AnTi90d]

So, the only reason people vote for Conquest isn't because it's fun, it's because PGI pays you more Cbills to play their crappy game mode.

I'd just like a blacklist so I can untick Conquest from my queues, have longer wait times and never have to deal with that dreck.

[Druarc]

oh know the pain of a democracy. We could always make it more like the current electoral system for every MCBills you stump up you get an extra vote.

[Escef]

AnTi90d, on 26 June 2016 - 06:02 PM, said:

So, the only reason people vote for Conquest isn't because it's fun, it's because PGI pays you more Cbills to play their crappy game mode.

I'd just like a blacklist so I can untick Conquest from my queues, have longer wait times and never have to deal with that dreck.

I enjoy Conquest. It frequently offers things you don't see as much, like a mixed lance of heavies and assaults vs a similar group while the other 16 guys in the drop are skirmishing a couple grids over (sometimes doing so more to see who helps their big boys than over a cap point).

I'd love to blacklist Skirmish to lessen the chances of dropping with the crowd that can't deal with anything more complex than click-click, boom-boom.

[Kadreal]

QuantumButler, on 26 June 2016 - 08:15 AM, said:

I usually do too because actually doing objectives gives you no rewards at all whereas killing everything does.

Except Conquest, SURPRISE, if you actually reward doing objectives they aren't awful, who would have thought?

Too bad playing objectives in other modes is basically penalizing you for not playing deathmatch, except I guess you could argue that playing the objective in say assault maybe ends the match faster, that's your reward.

This is so true. I was surprised how little I got for capping an enemy base on assault. I capped about 75% of an enemy base. And got 1,900 credits for the capture. about 10,000 for capture assist and about 15,000 for successful capture. If I was after money and experience I'd be better served shooting enemy mechs. 26,900 credits for winning the game seems very much lack luster.

[chucklesMuch]

I often vote conquest

Always for Alpine (dislike all other game types on this map) and Polar, though seldom for Therma... and not for Cbills but because I tend to enjoy this game type more.
I like that sometimes the objective actually has some bearing on the game. Whether winning by caps (rare), or holding more caps and pressuring the enemy to take some... or even if its just taking advantage of team red thinking capping is more important than destroying mechs!

[meteorol]

The problem with conquest is that there is a certain amount of guys who are playing it like they wish the game was and not like the game MWO actually is. They fail to take the fact that we are playing 12v12 without respawns on maps with limited size into consideration. The team with more of those guys usually loses if the enemy team doesn't fail to execute terribly.

Edited by meteorol, 26 June 2016 - 11:26 PM.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Conquest is less of a run-and-hide mode at the end, unlike skirmish.

Its geared more towards closure.

[Chagatay]

1. Best payout
2. Isn't skirmish and forces some movement
3. Still plays out deathmatch on most* maps (as PGI greatly decreased the time to cap points)

*some maps like Therma and Tundra it sorta matters a little bit.

[Thorqemada]

Conq. is still the most diverse gamemode and a small number of Conq. wins happen actually by having fullfilled the main objective.

[Red Shrike]

I like it because it breaks up deathballing and discourages camping.

[Galenit]

Davegt27, on 26 June 2016 - 02:25 PM, said:

Most players hate conquest but are forced to play it

If most players hate conquest, why does it get voted then?