7 replies to this topic

[Dawnstealer]

So MWO currently has seven different game modes:

• Skirmish: Team Deathmatch
  
• Assault: Team Deathmatch with a base
  
• Conquest: Team Deathmatch with five neutral bases
  
• Domination: Team Deathmatch around a central base
  
• Invasion: Team Deathmatch with a base (and gates!)
  
• Counter Attack: Team Deathmatch with a base (and no gates!)
  
• Scout: Team Deathmatch with mini-bases

You see the pattern?

I don't really blame PGI here: coming up with gamemodes that aren't Team Deathmatch are kind of hard to come up with, and most require working AI. So my goal here is to work WITH THE ELEMENTS PGI HAS RIGHT NOW to come up with new game modes that might break the deathmatch monotony.

The goal would be to make game modes requiring teams to do something other than deathball and kill all the opposition.

So here goes:

• DROPSHIPS: one team has to defend three dropships that are taking off at three random points across the map. They are destructible, but do have the usual Dropship weapons (ie - not much, currently - I really wish they had the ACTUAL weapons of a Leopard Class Dropship, but not the never-miss targeting). Attackers have to destroy at least two dropships to win, at least two have to get away for the defenders to win.
  
• LONGTOM ESCORT: There are two Long Tom IIIs (big, train-like mobile guns) making their way randomly across the map - attackers have to destroy them, defenders have to defend them. Either one living is a victory for the defenders to win. These don't have weapons, so I would hope the pathfinding AI wouldn't be too difficult on this one.
  
• BASE DEFENSE: defenders would literally have to defend a base - not like in Invasion - the buildings would be destructible objects. If more than 50% of the buildings are destroyed, the attackers win. This...okay, deathballing would still win this one...

Other ideas?

[Rhaythe]

There have been a couple threads about this already, but I'm always happy to hammer home the point that MWO needs to completely rip off the Rush game mode from Battlefield Bad Company 2. Advancing objective sets with optional objectives; advancing drop-zones. Basically what Community Faction Warfare should have been.

[SuomiWarder]

Ultimately the problem is that in all cases, destroying the other 12 players should logically end their ability to stop your side from accomplishing any game objectives. So by default, destroying the enemy is going to be a viable option without respawn. (And I do not want respawn by the way).

[DAYLEET]

SuomiWarder, on 06 July 2016 - 12:27 PM, said:

Ultimately the problem is that in all cases, destroying the other 12 players should logically end their ability to stop your side from accomplishing any game objectives. So by default, destroying the enemy is going to be a viable option without respawn. (And I do not want respawn by the way).

Which is why any gamemode worth it's salt will have a respawning system. The most likely for mwo would be factories to repair you. rearm you and allow new players to join the game. Lets stop thinking small.

[Impyrium]

Ah, the MWO community. Will constantly wonder why each and every game mode is just another deathmatch but at the same time they champion the biggest factor to making everything deathmatchy- lack of respawns.

And of course PGI will never even attempt to bring better game modes in, since the kiddy tantrum that will follow them trying something with respawn will dwarf that of 3PV. Because god forbid we expand the way we can play this game.

I gave up trying to sell the idea of respawn enabled modes because apparently too many people are stuck in 2D thinking. You say the word 'respawn' and they immediately recoil, thinking CoD without fully grasping exactly why CoD is CoD. Respawns enable other objectives to become actually important because they become required. Otherwise, for an objective in our current game state to be just as or more important than killing your opposing team, said objective has to be quicker, easier and more effective. As is, it's already too damn quick, easy and effective to kill off an opposing team.

Edited by Dingo Red, 06 July 2016 - 03:40 PM.

[adamts01]

Dingo Red, on 06 July 2016 - 03:13 PM, said:

for an objective in our current game state to be just as or more important than killing your opposing team, said objective has to be quicker, easier and more effective. As is, it's already too damn quick, easy and effective to kill off an opposing team.

Pretty much summed it up. With all the buildup, I was hoping we'd see something grand with CW3. This "thinking man's shooter" has turned in to lemmings just going through the motions. It's so sad.

[ScarecrowES]

I've been a major advocate of Rush as well, and honestly that's a nearly perfect mode type for FP. Ads variety, unpredictability, and strategy. Also forces teams to have to deal with changing conditions.

Also, yeah... unless you make the objective faster and easier to end a match than killing the enemy outright, you'll never have a mode that doesn't play like deathmatch.

This is a common theme in any multiplayer game. Any successful objective game mode with difficult-to-secure objectives requires respawns. Any successful non-respawn game more will have objectives that can be achieved easily and are very punishing to mistakes.

I once suggested that if we're going to have Conquest and NO respawns, then the cap points should be super easy to cap and should turn over automatically, forcing teams to give them constant attention. I was voted down based on the idea, they said, that the community doesn't want to babysit caps while playing conquest. WTF.

Ironically, PGI is about to make it even harder to cap bases in Assault. As if there is currently a very serious rash of base-rushing going on that needs curbing.

Edited by ScarecrowES, 06 July 2016 - 06:19 PM.

[Mole]

Dingo Red, on 06 July 2016 - 03:13 PM, said:

Otherwise, for an objective in our current game state to be just as or more important than killing your opposing team, said objective has to be quicker, easier and more effective. As is, it's already too damn quick, easy and effective to kill off an opposing team.

That, and the CBill and XP rewards have to be just as good if not greater. As it stands, only kills make bills.