142 replies to this topic

[alVolVloLy]

Kudzu, on 14 December 2011 - 08:45 PM, said:

Respawns means scouting, ammo, and tactics are worthless.

No, just that tactics are different than in a no respawn match, in some ways more tactics are involved. For instance, if there are respawn points of some sort then defense of your own respawn point and attacking of the enemies factor into your tactics.

There will probably be repair bays and MFBs, so ammo isn't a great argument against.

I'm failing to see how scouting will be affected at all, it's not as if killing the scout will in some way prevent him from revealing your location to his teammates.

Some of the ways that respawning could be accomplished have been mentioned in other posts show a lot of promise to me. For instance drop weight restrictions and BV (which I admittedly do not know a lot about, I've played MC2 so I have a general idea).

Let's say you are going to engage an enemy in a drop with 300 tons. Your team decides that instead of bringing 3 Atlas, you are going to bring 3 Madcats/Timberwolves, leaving one in reserve (the last 75 tons). Your opponents bring their 3 Atlas. You move your forces, the other team moves theirs. You end up engaging, damage is exchanged, BUT due to planning ahead and controlling the flow of the battle, the enemies 3 Atlas have moved into a bad location, pinched between your team and your DZ. You lose one of your Madcats, but your reserve is now in play, fresh, and behind the enemy forces. You may win by doing this, you may not, but it does add variety and another level of play (reinforcements).

Not everyone's cup of tea, but it doesn't necessarily need to be. There can be different drop types, we don't want to exclude anyone, we want the game to appeal to many.

[Evgeny Bear]

But its not about Assault/Heavy mechs only decide if it is a win or lose.
And thats why I think the Multiplayer of Mechwarrior 4 Sucks (If you go random match with respawn)

Everyone controlls a heavy, filled with Autocannons and Thumpers, only to achieve a quick kill.
And in the end you and up playing a simple First Person Shooter with respawns...

[alVolVloLy]

Andar89, on 15 December 2011 - 05:47 AM, said:

But its not about Assault/Heavy mechs only decide if it is a win or lose.
And thats why I think the Multiplayer of Mechwarrior 4 Sucks (If you go random match with respawn)

Everyone controlls a heavy, filled with Autocannons and Thumpers, only to achieve a quick kill.
And in the end you and up playing a simple First Person Shooter with respawns...

That was only an example, you could do a similar scenario with 150 tons. Also, the example above would promote an incentive TO take lighter mechs, since you would have the ability to use your tonnage as you see fit. Let the other guys bring 3 Atlas, you could bring 4 Hunchbacks, and leave 2 spare at the base.

Heck, even make it so that while the 2 Hunchbacks are available, they are still also destroyable.

[Omigir]

Unclecid, on 14 December 2011 - 04:02 PM, said:

ok here an idea i got replaying MW4 vengeance this afternoon.

as some may remember in MW4V when on some of the longer missions you would come across mech bays in which one could get a quick armour repiar ammo replenish in the midst of battle...either yourself or ordering a lancemate.


so hows about this....in MWO instead of respawns we have mech bays mobile or stationary.

all they can do is repair armour and reload ammo...no repairs to weapons or internals.

you run outta ammo or about to be cored...let you lancemates know so they can cover you as you run for the bay.

repair bays would be immune to damage and have a area around in which no damage can be taken.

stationary ones would be in set areas on maps like bases and whatnot and mobile one could follow you unit at a preset distance.

I like this. The commander can move them as well depnding on how the fight is going, and they can be targeted to affect the apponent capability. Good tactical addition!

[Gorith]

alVolVloLy, on 15 December 2011 - 02:50 AM, said:

Not everyone's cup of tea, but it doesn't necessarily need to be. There can be different drop types, we don't want to exclude anyone, we want the game to appeal to many.

This is what causes so many games to become homogenized garbage today. Devs want to appeal to EVERYONE (which is completely impossible) so they can sell more. It ends up with crap unfocused games. They need to choose a niche not try to appeal to everyone. If you stick to a niche and focus so it's well done you may not have as many people but you will have loyal people who are willing to stay longer and spend more money.

[Havoc2]

Team tactics shouldn't be affected by respawn vs. no respawn.

Running in and dying by yourself hurts your team whether you can respawn in 5 seconds or you're out for the match, either way your team is fighting short-handed.

That's almost like saying focus-firing will only happen in no respawn where in respawn everyone just shoots at the closest target.


That being said, from the way the devs have presented this game, lobby based matches determining control of a planet/system (ala MPBT:3025) I would suspect that matches will be no respawn and only lasting 10-15 minutes (more or less depending on how suicidal or cowardly the combatants are).

The depth I hope this game has though will give it more than MPBT's simple, run forward until 2 lances meet and then start fighting.

[Gorith]

I am with }{ on this I want meaningful gameplay with objectives and different balances for missions (A mission to breach the defenses of a large base or important complex should be harder than ambushing a supply route

also stuff like this prevents people from passively hiding. Your supposed to be guarding the convoy well you can't do that hiding in the corner of the map

Actually liked the Heavy Gear PC game (the first one) objective based online model

[TheRulesLawyer]

This is getting way off topic. Does anyone actually have some useful suggestions on how you can prevent splitting up groups in a game with no-respawns? We've already have the respawn vs no respawn thread many times.

[IceSerpent]

While respawns are fine in a free-for-all arena style matches, I would strongly prefer all fights that affect meta-game (planetary assaults, raids, etc.) to be no-respawn - you attack with whatever forces you brought planetside and either win or lose, no do-overs.

[IceSerpent]

TheRulesLawyer, on 15 December 2011 - 08:33 AM, said:

This is getting way off topic. Does anyone actually have some useful suggestions on how you can prevent splitting up groups in a game with no-respawns? We've already have the respawn vs no respawn thread many times.

Why would it split the team to begin with? Your and your 3 lancemates get a combat drop, it ends (one way or another), you and your 3 lancemates get another combat drop...and so on.

[MilitantMonk]

If there ever was a respawn mechanic that got my vote for the more casual and quick paced crowd it'd be this:

• BV / C-Bill per player per game. Each player gets X number of points they can spend on mechs for this mission. Do you want to spend it all on 2 Assault mechs or have more small units?
  
• Great for attrition based warfare. Ganging up to take down larger machines would benefit your team more by taking away respawns from opposing players. Kill those 2 Atlas spawns from that one player and you don't have to worry about him for the rest of the match.
  
• Encourages the use of light mechs. Not only will newer players use lighter or lower cost machines to have more 'lives' but some players may simply enjoy having a variety of mechs to choose from each respawn.
  
• The amount of resources each team gets can be made to vary. For instance a team defending a base could get lots of extra BV or just a free default mech to depict the reinforcements for the defending side. This is of course balanced by the fact the attackers only have to destroy a hardened static structure rather than the entire opposing team.

[CeeKay Boques]

Kudzu, on 14 December 2011 - 08:45 PM, said:

Respawns means scouting, ammo, and tactics are worthless.

Only if you're losing. If you're winning, you might certainly run out of ammo. Scouting is always important... tactics too.

This scares me, I'm not sure how WoT works, but whenever I played Mechwarrior, or ArmA, or any other game, we say "Hey, lets join Awesome No Respawn server 7, there's 8 slots" and everyone says ok, and we drop in.

I'd hate to just randomly get flushed down the server hole and pop out in some ocean I didn't plan on.

Edited by Technoviking, 15 December 2011 - 09:13 AM.

[Evgeny Bear]

Technoviking, on 15 December 2011 - 09:10 AM, said:

Only if you're losing. If you're winning, you might certainly run out of ammo. Scouting is always important... tactics too.

This scares me, I'm not sure how WoT works, but whenever I played Mechwarrior, or ArmA, or any other game, we say "Hey, lets join Awesome No Respawn server 7, there's 8 slots" and everyone says ok, and we drop in.

I'd hate to just randomly get flushed down the server hole and pop out in some ocean I didn't plan on.

WoT offers fight of 15 vs 15 tanks. mixed types without respawn per match.
you have to caprture the enmy base or kill all opponents.
In Clans, Companies it works out well. Every type of tank has his own style of play and a coordinated team
can overcome a foe pretty quickly by working together.

In random matches everyone plays like there is a respawn, only starving for a kill and tactics got wasted.
In the end it makes the outcome random and if your team fails (often) and the other is good (well a bit)
you end up loosing pretty quickly.

It only fails in random, becuase every destroyed tank got cloned for credits and you cant loose anything.

But making salvage and destroyable equipment available and forcing no respawns would drag even the randomly Solo
die hard "I dont need a team you fools, me is strong, me got Atlas" players to a team oriented tactical play.
(in my oppinion)

[MaddMaxx]

IF re-spawn some how made an appearance I would go the BV/Tonnage route as well. One change I would add is that you get as many players in Mechs as you can fit inside the restriction but could only fight with four designated "first out" pilots. If and when on of them gets downed, the next pilot waiting in the Drop Ship or the DZ in his Mech "tags in" like in wrastling.

This would allow more player involvement and if I was first of the re-spawn guys and didn't get in this Drop, I get moved to first droppers of the next wave. It also allows players who have to leave and new who show to get involved right away as long as they stay a min of 2 drops.

[TheRulesLawyer]

IceSerpent, on 15 December 2011 - 08:37 AM, said:

Why would it split the team to begin with? Your and your 3 lancemates get a combat drop, it ends (one way or another), you and your 3 lancemates get another combat drop...and so on.

Let me tell you how it really works from personal experience.

You spend 15minutes herding cats to get everyone in the ready room at the same time because people are finishing games, logging on at different times, etc.

You get your first drop.
Dave has a brawler and zergs the front line and dies in a blaze of glory 3 minutes in.
John and Paul have moderate config and die 8-15 minutes in.
Rick has been running a back line support mech and is one of the last to die 17 minutes in.

Dave got bored during the 14minutes between him dying and Rick dying and now has wandered off watching TV/Fixing dinner/Browsing the web or worse, jumped in another game.

Either John or Paul are probably doing the same as Dave, but not yet in a game.

You spend another 15 minutes herding cats to get everyone back in the game lobby so you can have another shot.

In a no-respawn game with reasonably long rounds this is the sort of stuff that happens all the freaking time when playing with a group. Its unreasonable to expect people to sit around patiently while you get out at the end of the game. You end up playing much less time than you spend waiting and they whole thing is just frustrating.

[Havoc2]

TheRulesLawyer, on 15 December 2011 - 10:00 AM, said:

Let me tell you how it really works from personal experience.

You spend 15minutes herding cats to get everyone in the ready room at the same time because people are finishing games, logging on at different times, etc.

You get your first drop.
Dave has a brawler and zergs the front line and dies in a blaze of glory 3 minutes in.
John and Paul have moderate config and die 8-15 minutes in.
Rick has been running a back line support mech and is one of the last to die 17 minutes in.

Dave got bored during the 14minutes between him dying and Rick dying and now has wandered off watching TV/Fixing dinner/Browsing the web or worse, jumped in another game.

Either John or Paul are probably doing the same as Dave, but not yet in a game.

You spend another 15 minutes herding cats to get everyone back in the game lobby so you can have another shot.

In a no-respawn game with reasonably long rounds this is the sort of stuff that happens all the freaking time when playing with a group. Its unreasonable to expect people to sit around patiently while you get out at the end of the game. You end up playing much less time than you spend waiting and they whole thing is just frustrating.

Dave should have learned patience by now then

With no-respawn there needs to be a "death cam" so that people can at least watch the action if not participate in it. This helps to keep the attention of people killed early and lets you cheer on your teammates. Even in the afterlife.

[MaddMaxx]

}{avoc, on 15 December 2011 - 10:06 AM, said:

Dave should have learned patience by now then

With no-respawn there needs to be a "death cam" so that people can at least watch the action if not participate in it. This helps to keep the attention of people killed early and lets you cheer on your teammates. Even in the afterlife.

Death Cam's are so much FUN!

Doing your best but get legged, "Punch out! You can't do any more good here!" Then join a members Mech. Some crazy matches have been played while simply being watched.

[Omigir]

TheRulesLawyer, on 15 December 2011 - 08:33 AM, said:

This is getting way off topic. Does anyone actually have some useful suggestions on how you can prevent splitting up groups in a game with no-respawns? We've already have the respawn vs no respawn thread many times.

BF3 allows you to go in fire teams. They are 4 man teams. Sounds like a lance much? When you die, you can choose to spawn on any one of the team members and you can look between them to see who is in a good spot. To make it almost cannon you can just have them drop pod in near thier lance mate. Problem solved. Just hope he does not get jumped while your in free fall.

[Zakski]

Mchawkeye, on 15 December 2011 - 01:41 AM, said:

Sure, they have to balance the weight classes; since they are determined to do that. and thanks to the patch system, even if things are a bit off it'll be reasonably quick to fix.

TF2 is an arcade game. I see why you would make the comparison, but it's an arcade game. this will be a simulator; aside from my other issues with respawning (which are conflicted I will admit) doing that would crap on any sense of immersion and realism they have strived to achieve.
It has to matter if you die. beyond your earnings at the end. respawns encourage a once-more-unto-the-breech-forlorn-hope style of game play "***** it, I'll be back in a minute". It's a tactical game. People have to be wary. choices have to be life or death. or there is no point in so much of what they propose.

firstly TF2, no way encourages suicidal charges, a death in TF2 is meaningful, it can change the result of the game (e.g., red spy kills blue uber-ready medic, red medic then ubers red heavy and they takes out all turrets, allowing their team to take the final control point. - that one death changed victory to defeat for the blues). Secondly while respawns are short in those sort of games, you have to realise that the games is designed to be fast paced, even if a man is just 1-2 mins out, it makes a huge difference.
Also while I am all for sim over more arcade-like games, the sim should not mess up the fun of the game. For instance, Men of War: Assault Squad models armour penetration very realistically, with smaller at shells pinging off heavy tank armour. On the other hand, they do not have sherman crocodiles with flamethrower fuel tanks behind them. The fact is I would prefer tight fun gameplay over more crippling realistic constraints.

Andar89, on 15 December 2011 - 05:47 AM, said:

But its not about Assault/Heavy mechs only decide if it is a win or lose.
And thats why I think the Multiplayer of Mechwarrior 4 Sucks (If you go random match with respawn)

Everyone controlls a heavy, filled with Autocannons and Thumpers, only to achieve a quick kill.
And in the end you and up playing a simple First Person Shooter with respawns...

I would like to refer you to my first response to Mchawkeye on the first page.

}{avoc, on 15 December 2011 - 07:17 AM, said:

Team tactics shouldn't be affected by respawn vs. no respawn.

Running in and dying by yourself hurts your team whether you can respawn in 5 seconds or you're out for the match, either way your team is fighting short-handed.

Also This.

}{avoc, on 15 December 2011 - 07:17 AM, said:

That being said, from the way the devs have presented this game, lobby based matches determining control of a planet/system (ala MPBT:3025) I would suspect that matches will be no respawn and only lasting 10-15 minutes (more or less depending on how suicidal or cowardly the combatants are).

The depth I hope this game has though will give it more than MPBT's simple, run forward until 2 lances meet and then start fighting.

No respawn objective matches might as well be team deathmatches, if everyone can die permanently, what is the point going after the objectives? You might as well gun straight for the enemy mechs and it will get old fast.

IceSerpent, on 15 December 2011 - 08:37 AM, said:

Why would it split the team to begin with? Your and your 3 lancemates get a combat drop, it ends (one way or another), you and your 3 lancemates get another combat drop...and so on.

Right, devs say objective games will take ~20 mins and say objective matches have no respawns. In an initial attack on a convoy about 5 minutes in, your hunchback takes a cyclops' gauss rifle to face and now you are out of the battle. you now have approximately 15 minutes to wait, assuming your friends decide not to make a futile charge because they are a 'mech down.

Then you are face with a choice, do you go play another game and leave your party? or do you wait? How many times would you want to play 5 mins then wait 15 mins?. I am guessing not many.

Edit: Damn you ninja ruleslawyer

Additional Edit: no respawns + long wait time breaks two rules of thumb, 1) It will inevitably split the party, 2) it will make the game unfun for the waiting player. The waiting player in all likelyhood will be a newbie, this will probably turn the player off the game, which will cause the playerbase to expand slowly, if at all. Basically It will cause the game to die a slow death.

Edited by Zakski, 15 December 2011 - 10:29 AM.

[Evgeny Bear]

TheRulesLawyer, on 15 December 2011 - 10:00 AM, said:

Let me tell you how it really works from personal experience.

You spend 15minutes herding cats to get everyone in the ready room at the same time because people are finishing games, logging on at different times, etc.

You get your first drop.
Dave has a brawler and zergs the front line and dies in a blaze of glory 3 minutes in.
John and Paul have moderate config and die 8-15 minutes in.
Rick has been running a back line support mech and is one of the last to die 17 minutes in.

Dave got bored during the 14minutes between him dying and Rick dying and now has wandered off watching TV/Fixing dinner/Browsing the web or worse, jumped in another game.

Either John or Paul are probably doing the same as Dave, but not yet in a game.

You spend another 15 minutes herding cats to get everyone back in the game lobby so you can have another shot.

In a no-respawn game with reasonably long rounds this is the sort of stuff that happens all the freaking time when playing with a group. Its unreasonable to expect people to sit around patiently while you get out at the end of the game. You end up playing much less time than you spend waiting and they whole thing is just frustrating.

Well if you cant hold together your team... thats your problem

A Corp or guild with some Teamspeak running and so forth can get organized better and also hope for the teamwork.

If everyone do what he wants they deserve the fail.


Edit:
Damn Casual players >.>

Edited by Andar89, 15 December 2011 - 10:26 AM.