155 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

GrimRiver, on 18 April 2017 - 03:27 PM, said:

All I was saying is give bigger c-bill rewards for support/team and objective actions MORE on objective gamemodes than damage based c-bills.

It won't really make these game modes more fun which is why incentivizing objectives more is not a good idea outside of how it is done on conquest (where it is incentivized).

Khobai, on 18 April 2017 - 03:25 PM, said:

and what needs to happen is all players need to be put into one bucket with a variety of different gamemodes that arnt all skirmish (some of which might have respawn like incursion), and if you dont always get skirmish, then be a man and suck it up.

That's how you get people to leave as well.

[Khobai]

Quote

That's how you get people to leave as well.

people already left in droves. why do you think faction play is failing. the fact people have already left and faction play has completely failed is the whole reason why the one bucket thing needs to happen.

honestly hardly anyone will leave if they add respawn to some gamemodes in quickplay. and anyone whos petty enough to leave over that were better off without.

so I say good riddance and bring on the respawn gamemodes.

Edited by Khobai, 18 April 2017 - 03:44 PM.

[GrimRiver]

Khobai, on 18 April 2017 - 03:16 PM, said:

so now you have teammates that are busy farming cbills doing stupid **** and not contributing to winning the match?

what a dumb idea.

How is it dumb?

You can't get any more c-bills on an already capped point or destroyed base so how would you farm it?

All I've proposed on the idea is that objective plays give more endgame c-bills than damage based c-bills on objective gamemodes.

[Deathlike]

I think based on CS, I have some rudimentary ideas on some gamemodes (it's still going to be Skirmish-like, but there's a purpose).

If we consider CS's hostage mode, we could consider having like a CTF/Steal the Beacon type thing, where on opponent has to get into a base... "steal" the objective and reach a position to dump off the objective (something half-way between both team's spawn points). So, you'd have two places to cover (you can protect the objective or the dropoff area). Probably would need like 2-4 "data objectives" captured in order to give the attacking team a win. Getting the objective delivered would be a massive bonus to the attacking team (in the form of C-bills) or killing an objective carrier (which will be a risk-reward type of deal).

If we consider CS's bomb mode, we could consider having two potential bases to be attacked, and the attacking team can "cap" (1-3 seconds uninterrupted) to start a bomb/long tom timer (time of which needs to be determined - maybe 30s to 60s) where the team with the base to protect has to get to the correct base (it won't be told to all which base needs the defusing - that's what scouting and relaying info is for) to defuse/stop it (it will take 3-5 seconds uninterrupted to disable it).

It's rough/basic as I said before, but it's close enough to simulate the same CS modes... then again it's not really that interesting (but functional).

Whatever.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Khobai, on 18 April 2017 - 03:32 PM, said:

people already left in droves. why do you think faction play is failing.

So you want the only "successful" mode to fail as well?

[Khobai]

Quote

So you want the only "successful" mode to fail as well?

adding limited respawns to one or two gamemodes in quickplay is not going to make quickplay fail.

[Trev Firestorm]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 April 2017 - 04:24 PM, said:

So you want the only "successful" mode to fail as well?

Respawns is not why FW fails, not even really a factor. Tech imbalance and segregation is.

[Mystere]

Windsaw, on 18 April 2017 - 01:14 PM, said:

I stopped playing about a year ago but I still watch occasional let's plays to keep in touch. Now I heared that there would be a new gamemode.

I watched a game where the team fought for the objective.
It was cool! It was like you had something to battle for! Stuff destroyed. People working together for a goal.

And then: Almost no rewards.
PGI has not learned anything. There must never be a game mode that punishes you for succeeding in your objective!
You don't want another Skirmish?
Easy: Punish the players who do NOT go for the objective! Maybe it's just me, but to me Mechwarrior was never destroying other mechs. It was winning objectives. I guess this is why this game is not for me.

Rewards for fulfilling objectives other than murdering the enemy are low precisely because people whined and cried loudly and endlessly for them to be significantly reduced.

As I keep saying, at least half of the problems with MWO can be traced back to the whiny player base.

Paigan, on 18 April 2017 - 01:38 PM, said:

I don't know about respawns, but I find this whole thing with symmetrical bases (who builds hostile bases just a few clicks away from each other?) and the magically lying around fuel cells weird.

If it were some arena-style robot contest, that would make perfect sense, but for a game like Battletech with a an actual military setting, it's close to ridiculous.

Think eSports, man! F****** bloody eSports!

Edited by Mystere, 18 April 2017 - 05:01 PM.

[Mystere]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 April 2017 - 02:53 PM, said:

Because not everyone wants respawns in QP........nor does everyone want the sudden focus on objectives to shift (especially since many of the game modes don't actually force engagements with their objectives).

People do not want respawns? Well then, let us just have a reinforcement system instead: someone dies, another player waiting in the queue is brought in as replacement.

[MW222]

I was never able to load Inc. on test server it just never loaded a match. After patching. Just played one. Mini Map measles still an issue.

Regarding the new loading graphics Meh. Was there even a reason to change those?

It seems to me the text is smaller and harder to read. as well.

As to Incursion, way to busy not going to be choosing that. I can almost guarantee that it will get the same play as Escort or less. Put that stuff in Faction/Community war fair, the rest of us are not interested in that in general play.


One thing tho WOULD PGI Please, PLESE give us the option to turn of the game announcer. IT's an annoyance. IT'S a distraction.


IT steps on team mate communication and causes loss of vital info via in game Voip. It would be better to have the HUD icon for what ever it is blink and a Betty “Warning Check Hud” Once for incident. Just once not the continual haranguing that is currently done. Or disable the warning audio completly and have the Icons blink twice and stop. OR FOR OUR COLECTIVE SANITY, LET US TURN IT OFF.


Come on guys this is just lame.

[Khobai]

Quote

People do not want respawns? Well then, let us just have a reinforcement system instead: someone dies, another player waiting in the queue is brought in as replacement.

its only like two people that dont want respawns

I think most people recognize incursion doesnt work without respawns

because thats the only way to make the bases matter

[Deathlike]

MW222, on 18 April 2017 - 05:19 PM, said:

IT steps on team mate communication and causes loss of vital info via in game Voip. It would be better to have the HUD icon for what ever it is blink and a Betty “Warning Check Hud” Once for incident. Just once not the continual haranguing that is currently done. Or disable the warning audio completly and have the Icons blink twice and stop. OR FOR OUR COLECTIVE SANITY, LET US TURN IT OFF.

You can turn the voice messages off. You'd also make Betty shut up.

[SFC174]

MW222, on 18 April 2017 - 05:19 PM, said:

One thing tho WOULD PGI Please, PLESE give us the option to turn of the game announcer. IT's an annoyance. IT'S a distraction.


IT steps on team mate communication and causes loss of vital info via in game Voip. It would be better to have the HUD icon for what ever it is blink and a Betty “Warning Check Hud” Once for incident. Just once not the continual haranguing that is currently done. Or disable the warning audio completly and have the Icons blink twice and stop. OR FOR OUR COLECTIVE SANITY, LET US TURN IT OFF.

This can already be done in settings. I did it the first time I heard that ridiculous 80's era WWF wrestler voice while playing a clan mech.

As for Incursion, it plays a lot like conquest. If your team deathballs, you tend to win. Split up and you tend to die. And for that reason, it sucks. As for respawns, I like quick matches. Respawns defeat that. I am perfectly fine with lots of different options to please folks, but you have to have hard opt-outs available. Yes, you might play the same guys over and over again, but at least everyone playing wants to be in that mode.

[Bishop Steiner]

Trev Firestorm, on 18 April 2017 - 04:46 PM, said:

Respawns is not why FW fails, not even really a factor. Tech imbalance and segregation is.

respawns also do nothing to help it NOT fail. That's part of the point. As long as the game modes are designed bad, respawns just dilutes, dumbs down and further drags on bad game design and play.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 18 April 2017 - 08:00 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Khobai, on 18 April 2017 - 05:21 PM, said:

its only like two people that dont want respawns

Sure, only two

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 April 2017 - 07:14 PM, said:

Sure, only two

he's never let reality stop him before

[Anjian]

If the developers made a game mode that would have worked better with respawns, then there is no point of spending monetary, time, server, tester and coding resources --- all valuable --- to develop a game mode that only ends up like a skirmish without respawns. That's perfectly good money, thrown away. Your money, your contribution, your effort to help make this game great, wasted in an effort to make a game once again, not so great.

We should just cancel every game mode except skirmish. I am perfectly fine with that. Simplicity is good. If you want a game with better depth and more complexity, go find another game to play. While you walk out of that door, make sure you bring your wallet and your dollars along with it because you should not financially support a game and players that only want to play a simple game of skirmish.

[Moonlight Grimoire]

Anjian, on 18 April 2017 - 08:24 PM, said:

If the developers made a game mode that would have worked better with respawns, then there is no point of spending monetary, time, server, tester and coding resources --- all valuable --- to develop a game mode that only ends up like a skirmish without respawns. That's perfectly good money, thrown away. Your money, your contribution, your effort to help make this game great, wasted in an effort to make a game once again, not so great.

We should just cancel every game mode except skirmish. I am perfectly fine with that. Simplicity is good. If you want a game with better depth and more complexity, go find another game to play. While you walk out of that door, make sure you bring your wallet and your dollars along with it because you should not financially support a game and players that only want to play a simple game of skirmish.

Or if everything is skirmish maybe they should just remove skirmish from the game since it is redundant, allow for the other secondary methods of completing the mode to come to the front.

Or maybe PGI can stop, realize they can adjust values, and reward doing things so it is actually rewarding to do stuff beyond shooting stompy robots all the time. Or embrace that this is just a flat arena shooter at it's core and they have failed to make a battletech game and cut the second base and just let the mode run as is. Given Russ' E-Spurt's infatuation we might get the latter, but, probably not.

[Scout Derek]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 April 2017 - 08:00 PM, said:

he's never let reality stop him before

Unless we're in the matrix :-o

Either way, I guess I'm just a bit distasteful that it turned out to be what I thought it was.

Time to play more CSGO I guess. apparently I'm really good at it, go figure for a point and click game haha.

[R Valentine]

I hate Incursion. The worst is when you lose and you have to wait for the enemy team to damage your base. Seriously, just end the damn game.