162 replies to this topic

[LordNothing]

the only thing that gives me the new content blues is the lack there of. swapping out legacy alpha placeholders for equally broken systems doesnt really count. new modes at least are trying. all be it not very hard, with mechanics that make you scratch your head and ask why. none of the setups make any sense. doors in siege that pretty much invite people to knock them down, weird dust off mechanics in scouting, and defending the commander while he shows off his new atlas to some kuritain geisha he met in a bar on luthien. the steiner map, which i haven't even seen yet, should come with a solo lobby and a limited free use model (3 drops a day) to get people interested in potentially buying premium time.

putting qp modes into fp is probibly the best thing they have ever done (for those modes). objectives matter when killing all the mechs becomes harder. new weapons are going to mix things up, but i worry that they will be as with all things pgi does, rushed and ill conceived, not to mention redundant. new mechanics and good ones are needed to make them unique from existing inventory so it doesnt look like a cut and paste job. unfortunately thats all pgi seems willing to do with this.

[Gazbeard]

Karl Marlow, on 21 March 2017 - 07:45 AM, said:

Just some ideas on improving Escort. Note some of these ideas are not compatible with each other.

1. Give the defending team the route the so is going to take.
2. Give the Atlas weapons so it can shoot back.
3. Make the Atlas twist through incoming fire.
4. Make the Escort a armored vehicle of some sort.
5. Make the Escort a randomly assigned player from among the heaviest mechs in the team.

6. In the drop ship before the doors open, show each team whether they are attacking or defending - help them to decide strategy before they are on the ground.

[Jackal Noble]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 21 March 2017 - 11:55 AM.
unconstructive

[C E Dwyer]

*shrugs* I like maps without prefect conditions

[Tatula]

What about just giving the VIP an AMS with 5 tons of ammo? If it doesn't know how to attack or get into cover, at least it can defend itself somewhat from having LRMs dump on it from 900m.

[Deathlike]

Mcgral18, on 21 March 2017 - 10:13 AM, said:

"I refuse to follow Mr Potato Man"

You can't pay me enough Cbills to accept this contract
I'm a freelance Merc, who gets paid to Shoot Robots
Not protect them

The VIP is the perfect T5+ unicorn potato simulator.

All it needs to do is randomly say "hold locks", and it'll be indistinguishable from the real thing.

Edited by Deathlike, 21 March 2017 - 11:46 AM.

[Stugg]

Mcgral18, on 21 March 2017 - 05:47 AM, said:

But worst of all, what Escort did, was remove a large percentage of the GOOD maps from showing up, because they do not support the mode
HPG
Mining
Canyon

Truth.

[Morggo]

We're a fickle bunch that'll never be fully satisfied on all sides, no matter what PGI tries, me thinks.

- One one side, you always have people complaining loudly that "this game is nothing but TDM and no one plays modes!"

- On another side, you have people complaining loudly that "this should only be big stompy robot shooting, stop playing modes!"

Just like the "stompy robot shooters" say anyone playing the mode is an idiot and is ruining the game/wasting everyone's time... laughably they don't seem to realizing the humorous irony that it is just as valid then for the mode players to make the same claim about them.

Personally I enjoy the modes more, preferably whilst getting to shoot along the way but in the end, I enjoy winning and if capturing gets the win, great, I had fun. If we deathball on the way to objective and happen to wipe out the reds on way.. great too... win. Though I do admit to getting unreasonable private bit of delight when we lose because the team ran off and objectives are purposefully ignored in preference to sticking to TDM.... I know, petty but hey.... everyone plays their own game I guess.

Forum, my dear friend... thank you for the endless source of entertainment... pass the popcorn....

[DAYLEET]

Mcgral18, on 21 March 2017 - 05:47 AM, said:

I do not enjoy most of the new content
Protecting Mr Potato Head is just annoying, as you cannot know which route he is going to take until it's too late, and your Spud compratiots may or may not push, whichever side you're on.

The path Mr Potato takes should be an easy addition to the battlegrid, but we've not gotten that QoL feature in the months it's been here. I genuinely do not enjoy the mode.

But worst of all, what Escort did, was remove a large percentage of the GOOD maps from showing up, because they do not support the mode
HPG
Mining
Canyon

Fun maps, not too dark, good visibility, fast action...but we see Grim (poorly balanced), Forest (damn that visibility), and Frozen so very often
Ignoring the fact the FC & FC are inferior versions to the old ones (#PGIPLZ), I have played so many maps and modes I simply do not enjoy, it ruined my enjoyment of trying to play Shooty Stompy Robots

I do not enjoy the newest additions to the game...
I'd almost like the option to opt out of Escort, because then I win on two fronts. No more Mr Potato Head, and I also get to win the Map Lottery more often, seeing the good, small maps, more than the large, poorly designed maps.


Domination is at least Skirmish in a Circle...until the last Reds go to hide and protect their Kd, but your allies stay in the circle, making you unable to play Shooty Stompy Robots...

First, i really like Escort. Its fun and engaging and sometimes edge of your seat exciting and yes you mostly dont know how its going to evolve and thats the point of it.

However... You should be able to chose which game mode you play. Game Mode is a big reasons why we play a games. This is one place where i think splitting the playerbase again as it was before wouldnt be bad and infact retain and bring more player in.

Voting for map is also dumb and qwuite frankly worse because you get tired of playing the same thing over and over. When i get tired with a map i end up alone in a weird place because im not going to do the same ***** thing 3 times in a row when you guys must have polar or grim 3 times in a row.

It's one of those measures to save something(drop time) and make it worse with people leaving the game.

[Mystere]

Cathy, on 21 March 2017 - 11:22 AM, said:

*shrugs* I like maps without prefect conditions

Nah, each and every map must be exactly symmetrical from each and every possible drop point. Visibility should also be at 5km. Otherwise, it is a terrible map and needs to be removed nao.

Edited by Mystere, 21 March 2017 - 12:12 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

DAYLEET, on 21 March 2017 - 12:08 PM, said:

First, i really like Escort. Its fun and engaging and sometimes edge of your seat exciting and yes you mostly dont know how its going to evolve and thats the point of it.

However... You should be able to chose which game mode you play. Game Mode is a big reasons why we play a games. This is one place where i think splitting the playerbase again as it was before wouldnt be bad and infact retain and bring more player in.

Voting for map is also dumb and qwuite frankly worse because you get tired of playing the same thing over and over. When i get tired with a map i end up alone in a weird place because im not going to do the same ***** thing 3 times in a row when you guys must have polar or grim 3 times in a row.

It's one of those measures to save something(drop time) and make it worse with people leaving the game.

I'd be fine with choosing modes, but random maps. So tired of voting picking the same maps over again... and tbh, I've always felt that picking maps just caters to forming a new meta, with certain teams "vulturing" on certain maps so they can always be ultra optimized.

[Mcgral18]

Morggo, on 21 March 2017 - 11:49 AM, said:

We're a fickle bunch that'll never be fully satisfied on all sides, no matter what PGI tries, me thinks.

- One one side, you always have people complaining loudly that "this game is nothing but TDM and no one plays modes!"

- On another side, you have people complaining loudly that "this should only be big stompy robot shooting, stop playing modes!"

Just like the "stompy robot shooters" say anyone playing the mode is an idiot and is ruining the game/wasting everyone's time... laughably they don't seem to realizing the humorous irony that it is just as valid then for the mode players to make the same claim about them.

Personally I enjoy the modes more, preferably whilst getting to shoot along the way but in the end, I enjoy winning and if capturing gets the win, great, I had fun. If we deathball on the way to objective and happen to wipe out the reds on way.. great too... win. Though I do admit to getting unreasonable private bit of delight when we lose because the team ran off and objectives are purposefully ignored in preference to sticking to TDM.... I know, petty but hey.... everyone plays their own game I guess.

Forum, my dear friend... thank you for the endless source of entertainment... pass the popcorn....

Games where two people break 200 damage are not fun

[R Valentine]

Morggo, on 21 March 2017 - 11:49 AM, said:

We're a fickle bunch that'll never be fully satisfied on all sides, no matter what PGI tries, me thinks.

- One one side, you always have people complaining loudly that "this game is nothing but TDM and no one plays modes!"

- On another side, you have people complaining loudly that "this should only be big stompy robot shooting, stop playing modes!"

Just like the "stompy robot shooters" say anyone playing the mode is an idiot and is ruining the game/wasting everyone's time... laughably they don't seem to realizing the humorous irony that it is just as valid then for the mode players to make the same claim about them.

That'd only be true if you got rewarded for your contribution to play the game mode on the same level you did as just playing skirmish now and the mini-game after. You don't. XP, C-bills, and PSR are all much more closely tied to your damage done than anything else. So no matter what game you play, your return is always the greatest when you just go out and shoot people. PGI designed it this way, not us. If you want quick caps to be the way to play conquest, assault, or domination then they game needs to reward us accordingly. It does not, so we just all go out and shoot each other.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mystere, on 21 March 2017 - 12:10 PM, said:

Nah, each and every map must be exactly symmetrical from each and every possible drop point.

Balanced =/= symmetrical

[Mystere]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 12:11 PM, said:

I'd be fine with choosing modes, but random maps. So tired of voting picking the same maps over again... and tbh, I've always felt that picking maps just caters to forming a new meta, with certain teams "vulturing" on certain maps so they can always be ultra optimized.

I still have the following rule: If I get Skirmish 3 times in a row, I quit MWO for the rest of the day. And when I get annoyed, that same rule becomes "... for the rest of the week".

[Alan Davion]

Kiran Yagami, on 21 March 2017 - 06:16 AM, said:

Why do maps need to be so freakin' big?

PFFFT~! You think these maps are big? Try playing on Table Top where the maps can be easily 2 to 5 times bigger than the biggest map we have in this game.

[Mystere]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 21 March 2017 - 12:18 PM, said:

Balanced =/= symmetrical

How do you balance a map without adding symmetry?

And, oh, putting a big rock at X:Y, a giant tree at -X:Y, a skyscraper at X:-Y, and a bounded space-time singularity at -X:-Y does not count.

[Mcgral18]

Mystere, on 21 March 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

How do you balance a map without adding symmetry?

And, oh, putting a big rock at X:Y, a giant tree at -X:Y, a skyscraper at X:-Y, and a bounded space-time singularity at -X:-Y does not count.

Don't place the objective 90% on one side of a mountain, 10% on the other side

[Deathlike]

Mystere, on 21 March 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

How do you balance a map without adding symmetry?

And, oh, putting a big rock at X:Y, a giant tree at -X:Y, a skyscraper at X:-Y, and a bounded space-time singularity at -X:-Y does not count.

Noone suggested that everything must be mirrored in order to get balance.

Noone needs to be using red herrings to refuse/argue the point when that's not even the definition of what balance entails.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mystere, on 21 March 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

How do you balance a map without adding symmetry?

Look at HPG to find out (though this is fairly symmetrical so potentially not the best example, but it still isn't a mirrored setup). Canyon and Mining are decent compared to the rest as well.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 21 March 2017 - 12:32 PM.