28 replies to this topic

[50 50]

justcallme A S H, on 29 January 2017 - 09:38 PM, said:

It still won't stop spawn camping though. people thinking this is the case are just deluded. 6 mech per a DZ - successful camp achievement unlocked. No PUGlet team is going to communicate well enough to work out which DZ to NOT deploy to.

That it was the prominent issue gathered from players prior to the actual round table, there has been plenty of threads on the subject and they started with CW Phase 1, it is worth looking at from the point of selectable DropZones.

It won't completely stop it as it is the action of spawn camping that will trigger the player response to change drop locations. It will depend a lot on the teams as to whether it is actually seen in a game, but it also depends a fair bit on the modes.
Skirmish and possibly Assault at the two modes that may experience more spawn camping. But in alleviating the problem we do create new options and tactics for players and experienced teams to develop.

To prevent players from unknowingly deploying to a DropZone that is overrun, I believe it needs at a minimum some sort of warning verbally announced but also visibly on the Battlegrid. I think the easiest option is to adapt the capture mechanics from Conquest for the DropZones. We already have the warning and visual clues with this mechanic, it just needs a Drop/No Drop option added.


***********************************************************************************************************************************************

The other side of the coin is having some way to send the DropShips to one of the other DropZones. So if the difficulty is in changing Alpha Lance to Take Alpha Dropship to Bravo DropZone, is there an alternative solution?
I think there might be two options.

• The Drop Pods.

This would be the high altitude... or at least moderate altitude drop using a disposable pod.

It avoids problems with re-pathing the Dropships.
As a straight up vertical drop it can be positioned to avoid conflicts with the Dropships.
It is a solo drop so it does not provide the protection in numbers without a whole bunch of players doing it at the same time,

• Using reserve Dropships and lances.

That is, if Alpha lance or a member of it wants to drop at Bravo DropZone, they are instead designated as Delta Lance, perhaps temporarily, and delivered by Delta Dropship. Once the Bravo Dropship departs, Delta is free to move in and so on.


It all seems possible, but it also seems a little needlessly complex.

One item that should really be included with the ability to select a DropZone is the ability to determine when the drop occurs. So instead of the 30 second continual timer, we have an option to declare when we are ready to drop and then in we go. It would be a nice feature at Lance Command level.

It does occur to me that players may refuse to drop again in which case the other team is stuck waiting for the match to time out if there is no objective that can be completed. For this reason we need to be able to capture and re-capture DropZones. It should go hand in hand with being able to select the DropZone and if a team is not able to hold on to any of DropZones, effectively they have lost their beachhead and need to regroup for another attempt (ie. end of that battle, get ready for another new one).

Edited by 50 50, 30 January 2017 - 01:58 AM.

[Vellron2005]

If we are talking about "select where you want to drop" mechanics, here's what I think how it should work..

1) Dropzones should move around.. The biggest problem I find both in FW and QP is the predictability of the drop zones.. they should move around..

2) The elevator from the steiner coloseum is awesome, and I hope to see some future maps using it, but it would not be good for dropping into FW.. I would much rather we use drop pods. In this case, the drop zones must either be protected by turrets, or we get to maually select any location on the map where we want to drop.. no drop zones as such, the whole map is open.. even behind enemy lines..

3) The dropships themselves provide some protection against spawn camping.. so if we use some other method, than the drop-area should be protected with turrets.

[Lily from animove]

so people can now actively choose to drop into the opponents by accident.

choosing droplocation will just swap one issue for another one.

A proper protected dropzone wiht evil things happening to the ones cmaping it would be good. however this benefit should not apply on modes where it is about kills , otherwise a team with lead could simply drozone camp their own dropzone. We need a system that can't be abused, which would basically mean, we need bigger maps making camping the dropzones not possible. Then choosing a dropzone may be a working thing.

[50 50]

A mix of different ways to deploy into a battle would provide some variety and present different challenges. Maybe we use dropships to get to certain locations, base facilities such as the lift at others. I think in terms of the coding it may be easiest to have set deployment methods at set locations. Would make some sense tying them in with the location. ie. It's an airfield so we get there via Dropship; It's a garrison base in a dense area so we deploy via lifts.

I like the idea of using drop pods and I think it would be a bit of a buzz to get dropped out of a moving dropship at a higher altitude. It needs some limitations though as one problem would be simply dropping in on the objectives. Maybe a new consumable item that can be used to enable the drop first? It gives a bit of purpose for players that might have scouted out a suitable dropzone, cleared it of enemies and then pop the smoke so allied forces can 'hot drop' to that location as long as the smoke is active. Using a consumable it would mean not taking one of the other options and it gives it a limited window of use.

It may also be worth discussing a retreat option.
We have a bit of that functionality now with the Dropship extraction in Scout mode. It would give us a third option beyond ejecting or just getting destroyed and if we are going to discuss greater functionality around these dropzones, we should include a retreat function as part of the discussion.

Totally agree that bigger maps will make it harder to camp multiple zones at once. Being able to select different locations and making them contestable points will give us a real back and forth territorial control aspect. With the added interest of having the different mission objectives on the maps, it will really start to feel like a war.

Edited by 50 50, 31 January 2017 - 01:49 PM.

[seperate]

i just want tanks, infantry, and helicopters. thats a lil more important in my opinion. either as a consumable, territory specific types, generic types, or all 3. but whaever. dropzones are the deal maker

[Jables McBarty]

Davegt27, on 28 January 2017 - 06:59 PM, said:

(snip)
Russ was just being difficult

Honestly this was my take-away from the RT.

The Community reps explained how DCs are already swapping around lances so people can drop in sync, and then five minutes later Russ says something along the lines of "Well [a suggested change] would require a lot of thought and micromanagement on the part of the players/DCs/LCs."

50 50, on 28 January 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

(snip)
So in regards to this specific topic, it seemed that from a development perspective there were hurdles that looked complex. From a player perspective, we weren't able to take that response and see ways around it or potential solutions that were not immediately obvious during the discussion. Hence, let's talk about it.

Idk, I don't code or program, but it seemed like he was making things overly complicated. Either it was "a burden on the players" or it was "too hard to code."

For example, "if we allow players to select dropzones, we could have all three lances selecting the same DZ, and then what will happen? COLLISIONS!!! Either that, or we'll need three separate landing areas within each DZ, two of which would be outside the gates."

Yeah, actually that sounded like a decent idea to me. Make three DZs or Drop Areas (1, 2, 3), then each has different Landing Pads (1-Alpha, 1-Bravo, 1-Charlie, 2-Alpha, etc.). Each lance has a default DZ (1-Alpha, 2-Bravo, 3-Charlie), and the other two are considered "reinforcement" zones and are outside the walls. So you're a little more exposed--at least you're next to your team.

And when it came to selecting the dropzones and how that interacts with lances, seemed to me like he was overcomplicating things again (see my comment at the top about DCs/LCs). Idk, I've never commanded an actual battlefield, but I'm assuming I don't send in three planes with one paratrooper each. I'd send in one plane with three paratroopers, even if they're from different units.

Which is to say I would worry less about maintaining lance cohesion at respawn time and prioritize grouped reinforcements.

gloowa, on 28 January 2017 - 11:52 PM, said:

The entire selectable dropzone discussion was overcomplicated. Russ thinks in terms of "Alpha lance dropship" while everyone else was thinking of "Alpha dropzone dropship".

Select your dropzone, get put in the queue for that dropzone, dropship takes 4 people from the queue for given dropzone, and drops them, leaves and takes another 4, arriving ~10 seconds after the previous wave. Just enough time for the previously dropped to move out of the way.

End of the story. Nothing complicated about this.

^Ah yes, this.^

Danjo San, on 29 January 2017 - 01:52 AM, said:

Because Lances and Dropships are coded to be bound entities. You are in slot 1 in alpha lance you are always in the respective slot facing the same direction when you drop.

Except when you are moved around by the Drop Commander.

Danjo San, on 29 January 2017 - 01:52 AM, said:

All three dropships run in the same cycles. This is designed this way to make it possible, if the entire enemy team happens to get killed and redrop at the same time all 12 players will drop in at the same time. Long Tom has proven this rare case scenario.

Spoiler

If you had all killed at the same time and all selected Alpha dropship, your logic, only four could possibly come in at the same time the others would have to wait out the entire cycle. 30sec for the second, 60 for the third. Thats a long time to wait. And its not only the players waiting to redrop its the team waiting to regroup... If 4 players are waiting and the enemy realizes that they have time until all 8 are there, what do you believe will happen. Invasion on grim Portico for instance it makes no sense but lets assume this scenario takes place... Wouldn't it be so much easier to farm waves of 4 every thirty seconds rather than having 12 at the same time redeploy?

I think this has been said already, but the 12-wipe in my experience is pretty rare. Much more common for you to end up respawning in two or three waves in the case of a stomp, in which case you are still coming in 3's and 4's.

And if the DZs are pretty spaced out anyway, sync-dropping 12 will be no different from stagger-dropping 3 waves of 4 if the enemy has pushed into your DZ.

Danjo San, on 29 January 2017 - 01:52 AM, said:

Another problem with the "Dropzone-Dropship Selection" rather than "Lance Dropship Destination" is players disconnecting.
It has been the case that instable internet connections, random bugs, hardware issues or rage cause players to dc at times. When you dc you stand around at spawn. Players are assigned to your slot and drop on your head, causing damage to you and damage to themselves. Of course this is minor but dropping a fresh mech on a fresh mech is dumb. Lets say you are not even dc... You are active but have to be afk for 30 seconds. The instant you return a mech drops on your head. Currently you have this bug where you drop through the map then when you redrop your legs are damaged at times... Nice to arrive on the battlefield damaged huh?
End of story.

Haven't experienced this but could conceivably be a problem.

[Jables McBarty]

As a final note, I just got back into playing FW (my relationship with it has been rocky...see sig) the past week or so, and I REALLY like seeing the Leopards flying in and out of the QP maps during FW combat. It's startling, it adds to the intensity.

Usually in QP you see them far away, and when you see them in classic Invasion maps it's because you are already stomping them.

So I'd rather not get rid of them for that small bit of immersion experience, but if it came down to selectable dropzones vs. keepign Leopards, I'd go with selectable dzs.

[Jaybles-The-PegLeg-PotatoCaptain]

If you listen to what Russ is saying from the town hall, it's that currently in game there are 12 slots and that the players can be switched around between the slots by the DC but the slots themselves do not change. So whoever is in a specific slot when the countdown reaches zero, they are taken to that slot.

I'm just guessing here, but I would assume they would need to add 24 additional "slots" so that if you have 3 zones, then each zone has 12 individual slots, or they would have to remove the current mechanic and add a queue one that takes the first 4 mechs and then 10 seconds later takes next 4 mechs etc. if everyone selects spawn A.

People in this thread say this is no big deal for PGI, but keep in mind, to this day we have false drops with disconnects where the dropship shows and doesn't drop a mech. We have glitches where it pretends to drop you and you "drop" but you can't move till the dropship cycles through again, We have times where it drops you off screen and you have to wait an extra cycle. And we have times where you clip through terrain and take 5% leg damage etc.

I'm not a programmer, I have no idea how complicated this is to write. But I do know that given PGI's track record, thinking that selectable drop zones is something that PGI can implement quickly or easily, well I have my doubts. And judging by Russ's reaction in the town hall, he does too.

Edited by Jaybles, 31 January 2017 - 02:39 PM.

[50 50]

An order of drop should work for using the other drop zones instead of adding 24 additional spots to the existing ones.

So if each dropzone has a position 1, 2, 3 and 4... or lets say for Alpha drop it might be designated 1a, 2a, 3a and 4a.
Then if player 1 in Bravo lance wants to drop to Alpha Dropzone, he/she would be delivered to location 1a.
It should then just be that if a drop is already in progress, that the next drop is simply delayed until the zone is clear for another dropship to move in. A dropship queue.
If we wanted to actually see that from the ground, it could be that additional dropships sit in a holding pattern above each other but this may not be necessary.

I would remove the timer so it's not a regular 30 second drop and instead rely on player input to initiate the drop. That way we have the option to wait until we have a full lance and there is a check in place when initiating the drop to see if there is already a dropship enroute or presently deploying mechs.

If we are not actually moving players to another lance, then it's like having 2 additional dropships available per drop zone.
Alpha 1 - default for Alpha Lance going to Alpha Dropzone.
Alpha 2 - default for Bravo Lance going to Alpha Dropzone
Alpha 3 - default for Charlie Lance going to Alpha Dropzone

With regards to the disconnects. A little added functionality could be added. If they are still in the dropzone in their drop position when another ship comes in, treat them as extracted and remove them from the field so there is no mech landing on top. (I can't think of a nice way to do this visibly, so just make them disappear)
If a disconnected player is waiting to drop, instead of sending them uselessly to be destroyed, have the dropships only take players that have readied up when the launch is initiated. (Including the first wave so we don't needlessly put a mech into the field only to have to remove it)
Should the team be wiped out and there are only disconnected players left, any in the field will be destroyed but those waiting to drop can be considered destroyed for the purpose of determining if the battle is won/lost. Should be a way to check this just looking at the team screen.

We could do something similar with lifts at a base, but these take up less space and don't have problems with the flight path so having 12 of them arranged around an area seems doable.... depending on the area we have to work with on the maps.
Be nice for the base in Assault to have this sort of structure to it.