6 replies to this topic

[justcallme A S H]

Ok so moving the spawn points closer together was good, but closer to the gates?

It now takes IS defenders longer to get from Drop Zone to Omega than it does for Clan attackers to open the gate and reach Omega due to the speed differential between the mechs.

The secondary issue of putting them so close to the gates is you can now farm the drop zone even easier given 2 of them are closer together/so close to the gates. You can just reinforce at will and let the slaughter begin with zero chance the opposition can regroup as you've farmed an entire 2 waves of people in seconds (if you get into that position of course).

It would've been a far smarter idea to flatten some hills a tad around F9 and have the DZs all along the 9 line, one square apart. Leaving enough distance so that a gate/omega can't be rushed as easily and also the DZ cannot be farmed because it's just outside the gates.


Come on, seriously, who thought this was a good idea? It's going to make PUG players dislike the mode even further with such a shortsighted "fix" like this. It would be better off going back to the OLD map and just turning Gen2 around until a proper DZ fix (as per above) is put in place.


The secondary issue of putting them so close to the gates is you can now farm the drop zone even easier given 2 of them are closer together/so close to the gates. You can just reinforce at will and let the slaughter begin with zero chance the opposition can regroup as you've farmed an entire 2 waves of people in seconds (if you get into that position of course).

Edited by justcallme A S H, 22 September 2016 - 01:44 PM.

[Dyhalto]

I did some rough work and came up with these spawns. The key to this map keeping the spawn balance near the gate but slightly bias to the defenders and allowing the side that wins the first exchange to be able to use that advantage.



This setup roughly allows for balance at the gate while still providing good cover and support between attackers spawns. The paths that swing out from the attackers spawns towards G7 and C7 are useful for pushing against defenders that move outside of the gate at the cost of extra time. The paths that lead out to E6 and D6 allow for quick pushes to either gate. The defenders spawn would be moved closer to the gates and require sacrificing the small valley in D2, E2. The southern most defender spawn would need some mild cover but also something that could easily be past over even for mechs with restricted movement.



The Dropship laser cover range is also a key thing that needs to be limited by terrain. Defenders need to be able to push out to to ridge line between the 5 and 6 column to contest teams that might gen rush. The attackers need to be able to control space in the 2 column while still being discouraged from pushing defenders spawns. Without anyway to really test or estimate dropships coverage these lines are mostly a guideline for gameplay and less about what areas should have cover. The defender spawn also assumes that the terrain would block dropship coverage.

[Dee Eight]

justcallme A S H, on 22 September 2016 - 12:50 AM, said:

It now takes IS defenders longer to get from Drop Zone to Omega than it does for Clan attackers to open the gate and reach Omega due to the speed differential between the mechs.

This is only a problem for players who undersize engines to put in bigger weapons. There are very few IS mechs that I leave in their stock "slow" setups. I've seen some players undersize the engines even smaller and then bring them to FP games.

[Ano]

Dee Eight, on 25 September 2016 - 08:05 PM, said:

This is only a problem for players who undersize engines to put in bigger weapons. There are very few IS mechs that I leave in their stock "slow" setups. I've seen some players undersize the engines even smaller and then bring them to FP games.

I flipped over to IS for the first time in a good while during the recent long FP event and certainly the people leading the FRR groups and organised PUGs I was dropping with were big on minimum speeds, encouraging the group to tweak their dropdeck as required.

[justcallme A S H]

Dyhalto - Spot on with locations. That is the exact change that needed to happen.

Dee Eight, on 25 September 2016 - 08:05 PM, said:

This is only a problem for players who undersize engines to put in bigger weapons. There are very few IS mechs that I leave in their stock "slow" setups. I've seen some players undersize the engines even smaller and then bring them to FP games.

No it's not. You tell me a IS assault, non XL, that moves as fast as a KDK/WHK/EXE etc. Given XL Assault, for the majority of players, is suicide.

Then lets move to the IS Heavy class. Even with a XL most mechs are well under the 87km/h Clan moves at.

I mean that speed balance is fine normally, as that is where the balance lies as Clan mechs are more range and faster. However once you bring in a big map imbalance like this, it makes things very lop sided.

No other map allows the attackers to be in the gates for defenders. There is a reason for this. Why is this map now suddenly different?

[DevlinCognito]

+1 for this thread, lets try and bring some sense to FW eh?

[Nighthawk513]

justcallme A S H, on 28 September 2016 - 11:23 PM, said:

No other map allows the attackers to be in the gates for defenders. There is a reason for this. Why is this map now suddenly different?

Yeah, that is a bit of a problem. Either move the attacker spawns farther back or bring the defender spawn farther forward.