25 replies to this topic

[50 50]

One small note about the size of the bases and therefore the size of the maps.
The base in Assault mode is tiny and has no structures beyond the tracked.... what ever it is.
Same thing for the resource points from conquest just being a drill.
On the other side of the scale is what we have in Siege mode and now Invasion.
These bases are huge. It can take several minutes just to get out of the gate.

With building up the objective points and including multiple major and minor locations to be captured, the bases should be more compact. We don't need to land the drop ships within the boundaries of the bases. We don't even need the dropships to deploy at the bases, can use the lifts instead.

A more compact base means we do not need to massively expand the maps.
It also means that defenses at these locations are more concentrated making them more difficult to capture and increases that challenge.

For the resource points, it would be great to see some alternatives to the drill.
If they each had 4 mech lifts so we can deploy from these locations then having a bit more structure would be great.
A supply station.
A hanger at an airfield.
A small fort.

[Insanity09]

Different base types and structures could be combined in different ways to mix up the objectives and play a little bit.

In assault, the points, plural, that can and must be captured could differ based on map and structures.
The same could be true of incursion (if it were added in to FW).
Imagine domination with 2 circles, each of which could account for only half the time (but if either half gets to zero, that portion is done, no reset).
What if conquest nodes did not all give the same capture rate. but some went faster?
(and took longer to gain control of, and were typically located in more heavily contested spots)

And so on. Mixing these things in got give a little more spice to the game play.

[Reno Blade]

I would like to see the resources and repair/rearm used for stationary/mobile assets such as turrets, walls, AI tanks/choppers/dropships.
That would not change the Mech warfare, but increase the FP specific parts of the map and tactics.

[50 50]

Reno Blade, on 31 May 2017 - 08:32 AM, said:

I would like to see the resources and repair/rearm used for stationary/mobile assets such as turrets, walls, AI tanks/choppers/dropships.
That would not change the Mech warfare, but increase the FP specific parts of the map and tactics.

That's an interesting idea.
If the points were initially fortified, even as neutral points, so they attack anyone, then after we destroy the defences it would be nice to be able to re-fortify them under our control.
Could use the resource points to do this.
What about just staying in the capture zone a bit longer? Creates a reason for players to hold a location longer than they do presently.

[50 50]

Insanity09, on 26 May 2017 - 04:10 PM, said:

Different base types and structures could be combined in different ways to mix up the objectives and play a little bit.

In assault, the points, plural, that can and must be captured could differ based on map and structures.
The same could be true of incursion (if it were added in to FW).
Imagine domination with 2 circles, each of which could account for only half the time (but if either half gets to zero, that portion is done, no reset).
What if conquest nodes did not all give the same capture rate. but some went faster?
(and took longer to gain control of, and were typically located in more heavily contested spots)

And so on. Mixing these things in got give a little more spice to the game play.

Absolutely.
Two points in Domination might be awkward... what if one team captures one of the locations and the other team gets the second one? If we added more points then we should also have the option to re-capture them. It then becomes 'domination' when one side can control the majority. Eg. If there were 4 domination points, the team that controls 3 wins.

Similarly for assault, having additional bases that could be captured and recaptured might be a great way to change up that mode.
Eg: an airfield that could be captured/recaptured on one side of the map and an artillery base on the other. While your team has control of them, those consumables can be restocked.

I would be really interested to see how a match might play out if we could combine modes.
eg: Mix Scouting with Assault. Conquest with Domination.

[Insanity09]

My thinking on the two dom points was exactly that, each team would tend to go after one of them. Then they could both get half the timer down, and net nothing on each other. Enter the next stage, with a little more sudden death feel (due to the reduced timer).
Unless one side or the other got clever, there would still need to be a fight over control of the second point (different for each side, at that stage). With the completed countdowns not affected by the alpha/beta adds (only partially completed portions could be added to), teams would be forced to capture the second point, while simultaneously preventing the enemy from doing the same.

Chalk it up to the fact that I actually like games (modes?) where you can't simply get in one big murderball to win. A little tactical finesse and I'm a happy clam. A murderball is a fine strategem from time to time, but as the go-to? I'd rather not.

Sure, 3 points, or more, would work also. I'd like a match like that far more than conquest (which I like), because the idea there would be you need to actively control (dominate?) more of the cap points at a time, kind of a combination of assault and domination, at that point.