162 replies to this topic

[Alistair Winter]

Deathlike, on 11 April 2017 - 09:45 AM, said:

I can sense the irony in that.

I mean, if you complain about non-mech content, it's apparently the player's fault for asking it.

If you need more time, why was that time wasted in FP Phase 3 in the Long Tom (and keeping it much longer than its expiration date)?

I mean, it's easier to deflect your problems when you are the source of it. So, until one side gives in, it's going to be a never ending cycle of fail, repeat, fail.

None of the stuff on this list is that interesting, not that some of it isn't needed (like new maps, apparently new TT was ~9 months ago and Grim Plexus was ~16 months ago or something), but kinda was longed for many moons before. At this rate, Crimson Strait is the island the Islanders received due to Escort.

Yes, yes, Deathlike, but.... VICTOR MISSILE TUBES! It only took 4 years to fix it. Are you not entertained?

Oh, and no mention of the rumoured hardpoint increase for older mechs. ETA 90 days after MWOWC?

Davegt27, on 11 April 2017 - 01:06 PM, said:

Why would Bombadil work on a angry rant?

Well, his angry rant at the end of the last podcast was pretty good. Probably good to plan those things in advance.

[Odanan]

Prosperity Park, on 11 April 2017 - 05:35 PM, said:

So, you think those matches would be better with more LRMs on the field?

This. ^

[DaisuSaikoro Nagasawa]

WarHippy, on 11 April 2017 - 10:09 AM, said:

Just be happy we are getting new maps at all. So long as voting is a thing creating new maps is a waste of time because after a week or two of being released they will disappear in favor of the same 3-4 maps we see 90% of the time now.

What just be happy. There was no promise of new maps, what they are, ETA, or anything beyond "New Maps!"

Btw, your assumption is based on the idea that the new maps won't be preferred over the old ones. That's possible, but isn't a given.

Flak Kannon, on 11 April 2017 - 04:27 PM, said:

Oh. And all I've asked for forever is new maps. They announce new maps, but have no time lines for said maps. So essentially no new maps until ... when again? New maps when?



Enjoi

Thank you. I don't get why people are stroking themselves to climax over a vague blurb that doesn't offer anything in the way of promise.

[Odanan]

Arkhangel, on 11 April 2017 - 08:54 AM, said:

no OmniMech, Clan or IS can swap their engine. doing so would take completely rebuilding the 'mech from scratch.

No Battlemechs could either, and look what we got: Battlemechs much more customizable than Omnimechs.

[Willothius]

Alistair Winter, on 12 April 2017 - 01:44 AM, said:

Oh, and no mention of the rumoured hardpoint increase for older mechs. ETA 90 days after MWOWC?

Wait, what? Haven't heard that rumour before, where's this coming from?

[Alistair Winter]

Willothius, on 12 April 2017 - 03:31 AM, said:

Wait, what? Haven't heard that rumour before, where's this coming from?

Google is your friend, I don't have time to look it up now. It's something that has been discussed by the devs, but never a clear ETA, of course. I guess since it's not on the roadmap, they've abandoned the idea.

[JonDoeIowa]

Willothius, on 12 April 2017 - 03:31 AM, said:

Wait, what? Haven't heard that rumour before, where's this coming from?

Here is Russ's tweet on the subject. He mentions adding new hard points to older mechs.

https://twitter.com/...833992030720000

[Trev Firestorm]

Krucilatoz, on 12 April 2017 - 12:08 AM, said:

People complains on feature that overdue..

try to realize that we are the biggest cause of overdue, mainly overcritizing about any changes in the game (re: the skill tree feature)

A proper skill tree was promised back in beta with what we have as a placeholder... so no, no it is not our fault.

[metallio]

Dee Eight, on 11 April 2017 - 07:13 PM, said:

Be easier to eliminate alpine from the map options for domination, just as escort isn't available to be run on HPG, canyons or mining colony. The alpine map doesn't present a "good" location for the circle anywhere on the map that could be between two opposite corner drop zones, that affords equal opportunities to both teams. Its just the completely wrong sort of map for that mission.

Actually, I think it'd work fine if the drops and beacon locations changed. Beacon center left of the map, drops top/bottom right of the map. Everyone gets to charge for the beacon while skirmishes happen along the way instead of smashing face in the center. Lights get to fight it out with each other when they get to the beacon first, without LRMs even close to in range, or at least no heavies, not at first.

Adjust as needed. It's just that the beacon doesn't HAVE to be right smack between the two drops.

[Athom83]

Dee Eight, on 11 April 2017 - 07:13 PM, said:

Be easier to eliminate alpine from the map options for domination, just as escort isn't available to be run on HPG, canyons or mining colony. The alpine map doesn't present a "good" location for the circle anywhere on the map that could be between two opposite corner drop zones, that affords equal opportunities to both teams. Its just the completely wrong sort of map for that mission.

There's a good area in the upper left of the map.

[WarHippy]

Daisu Saikoro Nagasawa, on 12 April 2017 - 02:09 AM, said:

What just be happy. There was no promise of new maps, what they are, ETA, or anything beyond "New Maps!"

I never said when we are getting them either. I just said be happy we are getting them(whenever they may be).

Daisu Saikoro Nagasawa, on 12 April 2017 - 02:09 AM, said:

Btw, your assumption is based on the idea that the new maps won't be preferred over the old ones. That's possible, but isn't a given.

Sure, a new map could replace one of the current "preferred" maps, but given that all new maps for awhile now have had visual clutter and day/night cycles that seem to make people freak out I won't hold my breath. Either way we will still be seeing the same 3-4 maps over and over again even if one of the current go to maps gets bumped.

[BLOOD WOLF]

WarHippy, on 12 April 2017 - 10:03 AM, said:

. Either way we will still be seeing the same 3-4 maps over and over again even if one of the current go to maps gets bumped.

Not the case. With the voting system, and with them being able to select 4 maps from the pool, at least there would be no mathematical reason why they would remove maps. There is no evidence that they removed any map before *except when fixes were due*

Seeing the same maps over and over again is a player-related effect. You can't control that so get over it

[Luscious Dan]

Interesting idea, having the beacon drop to the side rather than directly in between forces. Having lights able to race ahead, while the big boys can choose to either duke it out on the move or just try to safely find a path to the objective. It could also just be a debacle if the teams don't have good paths with proper cover, and reasonable travel time to the beacon.

*shrug* there's got to be a way to ensure Dom isn't just skirmish within a more confined area, this is an interesting one to try out since it would be pretty simple; no new features to test or anything just a different approach to spawn/objective locations.

Edited by Luscious Dan, 12 April 2017 - 11:09 AM.

[metallio]

I like it on Alpine because we already have natural cover/vision blocks in the middle of the map cutting off north/south fire from spawn points. The North side is a bit more open but only if you've already run across half the map and taken the high ground from the South. Even then the distances are long enough to keep it from being a massacre even if you've got LoS. The "base" on the left side makes a great beacon location. it's not completely enclosed but it isn't without cover either. The surrounding area is full of hills that I've used to hide plenty of times. The approach from both North and South has cover galore if you use it.

I mean, it could devolve into fighting over a few key choke points, but it'd be simple to try it out and fun to do something different even if it got changed back in only a few weeks because someone didn't like it. Different is good.

[Cy Mitchell]

metallio, on 12 April 2017 - 11:27 AM, said:

I like it on Alpine because we already have natural cover/vision blocks in the middle of the map cutting off north/south fire from spawn points. The North side is a bit more open but only if you've already run across half the map and taken the high ground from the South. Even then the distances are long enough to keep it from being a massacre even if you've got LoS. The "base" on the left side makes a great beacon location. it's not completely enclosed but it isn't without cover either. The surrounding area is full of hills that I've used to hide plenty of times. The approach from both North and South has cover galore if you use it.

I mean, it could devolve into fighting over a few key choke points, but it'd be simple to try it out and fun to do something different even if it got changed back in only a few weeks because someone didn't like it. Different is good.

Someone or a group of someones is always not going to like any changes in the game. That is not a reason to stop changing things that need it.

You should submit this as a proposal. Find the area that you think the Domination circle should cover. Time the travel time from the spawn points on both sides with something like a Locust. Adjust the location of the circle enough to make travel time equal for both sides while paying attention to choke points or advantageous terrain for one side or the other. Adjust as needed. Once you have established the location that is as fair as possible then post the changes for PGI to see or submit them directly to them.

I really like your idea of having the domination circle offset to one side of the map. That will actually increase the amount of the map that will be utilized for combat. It would be interesting to see this idea fleshed out a little more.

[metallio]

Pirate's Bane loaded up and ready to drop...now I need to actually get an Alpine map selection...

[Sniper09121986]

metallio, on 12 April 2017 - 12:09 PM, said:

Pirate's Bane loaded up and ready to drop...now I need to actually get an Alpine map selection...

Why do you need to drop in-game for that? Do you know where spawn points and that circle are on the map? If yes you can just load Alpine in Training Grounds and test it there any way you need.

Edit: ninja'd by the author

Edited by Sniper09121986, 12 April 2017 - 12:51 PM.

[metallio]

Ok, my graphics card keeps locking up but I went to the testing ground and here's the suggestion:

South spawn at the testing grounds spawn between K10-11 & L10-11.
North spawn between E8-9 near the smoking drop pod wreckage.

Domination circle centered on the base at J5. Circle needs to cover the safe zone behind the hill at I6/H6 to the northwest.
Circle can cover whatever to the south, plenty of cover there.

The approach in a max engine locust takes about 40-45 seconds and has long distance firing lanes on the east side of the central hill so you can see people moving a little bit but can't shoot at them unless you close. The high ground in the center is great for the southern group shooting down at northern group hiding behind hills but leaves you cut off from your forces to the south. The northern group has more options for maneuverability but less cover. There's still enough cover to hide from LRMs and to attack around north side or south from any piece of cover. There's accessible east side cover if you're brave enough to go for it so late game lights/fast mediums still have a role other than brawling. Long distance shots and LRMs are always useful on Alpine but there's a plethora of up/down locations (hills and valleys) to maneuver over and through without being a constant target for gauss/ppc/LRM. The actual domination circle would require you to be close enough that forcing a brawl is always an option.

...I mean, "I" like it...

Posted in "Feature Suggestions" here:

https://mwomercs.com...ination-circle/

Edited by metallio, 12 April 2017 - 01:40 PM.

[WarHippy]

BLOOD WOLF, on 12 April 2017 - 10:20 AM, said:

Not the case. With the voting system, and with them being able to select 4 maps from the pool, at least there would be no mathematical reason why they would remove maps. There is no evidence that they removed any map before *except when fixes were due*

What are you talking about? I never said anything about them removing maps.

BLOOD WOLF, on 12 April 2017 - 10:20 AM, said:

Seeing the same maps over and over again is a player-related effect. You can't control that so get over it

It is a player-related effect created by the voting system. It needs to go regardless of the fact that I have no control over it.

[Mycroft000]

Why does there have to be only 1 domination zone placement for the larger maps? Why can't there be 3 potential locations it is at on Polar Highlands or Alpine or Terra Therma? Why not make it so that on any given drop the location can be in a different place allowing for potentially more dynamic gameplay?