Why Conquest?
#1
Posted 26 June 2016 - 07:55 AM
#2
Posted 26 June 2016 - 07:58 AM
#3
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:11 AM
So I ask, why choose anything BUT conquest?
#4
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:14 AM
QuantumButler, on 26 June 2016 - 08:11 AM, said:
So I ask, why choose anything BUT conquest?
Objectives? Much of the player base hates them.
#5
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:15 AM
Mystere, on 26 June 2016 - 08:14 AM, said:
Objectives? Much of the player base hates them.
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.
Except when the "reward" in a game is "you don't have to play the game as much" then, well, you have ****ed your game up really badly.
Edited by QuantumButler, 26 June 2016 - 08:17 AM.
#6
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:19 AM
#7
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:19 AM
QuantumButler, on 26 June 2016 - 08:15 AM, said:
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.
Rewards are abysmal on the objective-based game modes because a significant and vocal section of the player base loudly and incessantly demanded that they be so.
And so again, I will dare say that at least half of the problems with this game can be traced back to its player base.
Edited by Mystere, 26 June 2016 - 08:20 AM.
#8
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:22 AM
Mystere, on 26 June 2016 - 08:19 AM, said:
Rewards are abysmal on the objective-based game modes because a significant and vocal section of the player base loudly and incessantly demanded that they be so.
And so again, I will dare say that at least have of the problems with this game can be traced back to its player base.
They should really give assault at least a 100k cbill "completed objective" bonus on an objective win and let people farm out 11 kills and then go cap if they really want to maximize earnings, who really cares if they maybe make 100k extra cbills in one game mode? If you really must avoid cbill farming at all cost have the oejbective bonus decrease by 10k per enemy mech killed or something, to a minimum of 20k with 8+ kills.
Edited by QuantumButler, 26 June 2016 - 08:23 AM.
#9
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:32 AM
Douglas grizzly, on 26 June 2016 - 07:55 AM, said:
Because you hope your opponent's stupid enough to think it's about standing in squares, giving your deathball nice small bites to devour and win (getting the Conquest bonus for good measure).
And every Conquest win now IS a bonus thanks to the ticker hitting 750 automatically + instantly if you kill everyone and control enough points to get there before your opponent will. So yeah. Generally Conquest > Skirmish for the money.
#10
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:35 AM
Douglas grizzly, on 26 June 2016 - 07:55 AM, said:
Ah this is one of those blame everyone else posts
#11
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:35 AM
QuantumButler, on 26 June 2016 - 08:22 AM, said:
I have a more radical alternative. Let's move to a winner-takes-all losers-get-nothing reward system. If you get capped, you get nothing, nada, nil, zilch.
Are you afraid players will just camp their bases? Well, that's what ninjas are for. Killing one of the enemy -- or getting one of yours killed -- will put the onus on one side to attack or otherwise lose.
#12
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:55 AM
#13
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:58 AM
Douglas grizzly, on 26 June 2016 - 07:55 AM, said:
I could say same with skirmish ... so many campers team are rolled in skirmish lol
#14
Posted 26 June 2016 - 08:58 AM
Mystere, on 26 June 2016 - 08:35 AM, said:
I have a more radical alternative. Let's move to a winner-takes-all losers-get-nothing reward system. If you get capped, you get nothing, nada, nil, zilch.
Are you afraid players will just camp their bases? Well, that's what ninjas are for. Killing one of the enemy -- or getting one of yours killed -- will put the onus on one side to attack or otherwise lose.
I see you favor nonsensical and completely stupid ideas, that's fine, just know that that's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
Edited by QuantumButler, 26 June 2016 - 09:00 AM.
#15
Posted 26 June 2016 - 09:52 AM
QuantumButler, on 26 June 2016 - 08:58 AM, said:
Actually, if you think about it long and hard enough, it solves a lot of player behavioral problems and their side-effects:
- playing for points, not wins
- c-bill farming
- NASCAR
- lack of PUG willingness for coordination
- moronic players during events
- KDR whoring
- ignoring game mode objectives
Edited by Mystere, 26 June 2016 - 09:55 AM.
#16
Posted 26 June 2016 - 10:22 AM
Mystere, on 26 June 2016 - 09:52 AM, said:
Actually, if you think about it long and hard enough, it solves a lot of player behavioral problems and their side-effects:
- playing for points, not wins
- c-bill farming
- NASCAR
- lack of PUG willingness for coordination
- moronic players during events
- KDR whoring
- ignoring game mode objectives
So what happens is that the raging on chat and voip gets even more abusive and toxic, P.G.I get either snowed under with complaints to support, along with the auto system getting snarled up.
Yes it will happen, there have been at least two whine posts about the game not being to peoples liking in the last 24 hours, once people on endless losing streaks get nothing the F U scrubs will fly, and it will have a very negative effect on the game, plus of course people crying oh woe, the games to hard a grind even more.
#17
Posted 26 June 2016 - 10:24 AM
Douglas grizzly, on 26 June 2016 - 07:55 AM, said:
Given that each match has 12 winners and 12 losers, why play at all knowing that most likely you will get bug stomped?
Gawds, the stupid, it burns...
#18
Posted 26 June 2016 - 10:26 AM
People vote for Conquest because it provides variation in where the action takes place and provides more lance vs lance engagement, and they can leave the actual capping to the 1 or 2 light mechs on their team. Win-win!
#19
Posted 26 June 2016 - 10:45 AM
Cathy, on 26 June 2016 - 10:22 AM, said:
Yes it will happen, there have been at least two whine posts about the game not being to peoples liking in the last 24 hours, once people on endless losing streaks get nothing the F U scrubs will fly, and it will have a very negative effect on the game, plus of course people crying oh woe, the games to hard a grind even more.
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.
#20
Posted 26 June 2016 - 11:16 AM
Second are spawns and how people generally move a bit different on conquest. I prefer it to the other modes. Conquest also is the only mode that sometimes is not pure deathmatch so thats a bit of variation there.
12 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 12 guests, 0 anonymous users