5 replies to this topic

[Livaria]

If people are complaining that every game mode is skirmish; then you simply make the objectives easier to accomplish, so that fighting over objectives; is more valuable than the destruction of every enemy mech.

However, in Conquest; we also have to make sure that the resources are well fought over, Because if conquest is won without a fight, then the game mode becomes boring for many players. We have to make sure that a conquest victory doesn't happen without a fight.

So here is a list of ideas to make objectives more valuable We may include all or some of the ideas:

OPTION 1:
In Quickplay; Lower the resource cap from 750 to 500.
This is to ensure that winning the game through objectives happens more often in quickplay.

OPTION 2:
Reduce the amount of Capture points from 5 to 3.
This ensures that players have to fight over fewer but more valuable resource points.

OPTION 3:
Increase the rate of resource accumulation that is earned from resource points.
This is to counter-balance having fewer resource points as well as ending more games on an objective win.

OPTION 4:
Players must maintain a nearby presence of a 500 metre radius to earn resources from a point.
This ensures that players stay dedicated towards the defense of a resource point.

Edited by Livaria, 04 May 2017 - 01:41 PM.

[Metafox]

Personally, I like options 1, 2, and 3. When people complain about conquest, they seem to complain about having to deal with capture points when they'd rather be shooting things. Option 2 should create more incentive to fight over resource points. Option 4 would punish players who play the objective by forcing them to sit out the fight.

If there are only going to be three points, I would think that it would be best to have all three a bit closer to the middle so that teams can have a few different options on where to attack. With fewer capture points, and with both teams in proximity to each of the points, the maximum resource cap should go down and the accumulation rate should go up in order to make the objectives worth the risk.

[Nesutizale]

I can get behind this. It makes playing the objectives more worth it. You should also get a bigger win bonus for playing the objectives or a bigger win bonus when you won by playing the objectives then just killing everything.

As for people complaining about haveing to play objectives...they can still vote for another may. I would welcome to have somehting else to do.

[Livaria]

Metafox, on 30 April 2017 - 10:51 PM, said:

Personally, I like options 1, 2, and 3. When people complain about conquest, they seem to complain about having to deal with capture points when they'd rather be shooting things. Option 2 should create more incentive to fight over resource points. Option 4 would punish players who play the objective by forcing them to sit out the fight.

If there are only going to be three points, I would think that it would be best to have all three a bit closer to the middle so that teams can have a few different options on where to attack. With fewer capture points, and with both teams in proximity to each of the points, the maximum resource cap should go down and the accumulation rate should go up in order to make the objectives worth the risk.

You do bring up some excellent points, and I agree. All of these points should be positioned at the center line; between where both teams spawn.

As for option 4... yeah, that is a problem. Perhaps the idea can be improved or dispensed altogether.
If improving option 4 is of interest to anyone; then I suggest that once a point is captured; A fairly large radius would have to be displayed on the map. This is where players must maintain their presence.

An example would be that players would have to retain a 500 meter radius within the point to attain resources. It would be enough to move around and fight. But not so much that you can abandon the objective.

Nesutizale, on 01 May 2017 - 03:18 AM, said:

I can get behind this. It makes playing the objectives more worth it. You should also get a bigger win bonus for playing the objectives or a bigger win bonus when you won by playing the objectives then just killing everything.

As for people complaining about haveing to play objectives...they can still vote for another may. I would welcome to have somehting else to do.

I'm glad you care, it can be hard to find people that are interested in this sort of thing.

Edited by Livaria, 01 May 2017 - 04:01 PM.

[Livaria]

I've updated option 4, to help alleviate the previous issue mentioned. Let me know what you think.

[Athom83]

The only option that appeals to me and makes sense game-play wise is option 4. All the other options seem to lead to objective rush and win instantly (I know its not "instant" but you understand what I mean).