465 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Mycroft000, on 28 July 2017 - 07:12 AM, said:

Did you happen to read the whole thread?

It was a general comment on the nature of the demands I have been seeing for 5 years or so.

Heck, the OP even had these golden words:

gamingogre, on 21 June 2017 - 07:35 PM, said:

.. remove them from a multiple waves of drops. Please understand this is non-negotiable. Fix. The. Spawn. Killing.

Edited by Mystere, 29 July 2017 - 07:35 AM.

[DANKnuggz]

Here's an interesting idea and its realistic....

If you lose control of your drop location, you lose the ability to drop into the combat theater and you LOSE the match right then and there, no need to kill you as you drop. In reality if the LZ has been lost the fight has also been lost, plain and simple.

Basically your team was too terrible to hold onto its insertion point and lost access to the battle entirely.

[DANKnuggz]

Hobbles v, on 23 June 2017 - 12:48 PM, said:

Finally got around to digging through my stream recordings. Here is the game in which BCMC spawn camped the OPs team question.



Few lessons that can be observed from this match.

The first wave, you guys moved up to challenge us, this was good. Even though we utterly crushed your first wave, you'll notice your second wave had plenty of time to leave the DZ and contest us in the rear of the base. Our first wave went on for another 3 minutes after we destroyed your first 12 and because you did the right thing and moved up, we never got to touch your DZ.

Notice the big difference during our second attack wave, you guys all hung back close to O-Gen 2, so this wave when we crushed you, we were already at the DZ. Also not one bit of spawn "camping" occurred until we had already killed 32, and that was a semi suicidal charge into the DZ.

You only need to watch the first wave of that battle to understand why you got DZ killed.... you guys sucked hard... it was 12-0 after first wave and then OP's team had hard time killing the enemies beat up 1st wave mechs with their fresh 2nd... You guys played terribly, both piloting and tactics and you wonder why they rolled you up into your DZ??????

Its this kind of whiny garbage where they cry about how mean the enemy team was but completely ignore the fact that their own ineptitude caused it in the first place that really irritates me...

Edited by DANKnuggz, 29 July 2017 - 10:53 AM.

[vandalhooch]

DANKnuggz, on 29 July 2017 - 10:23 AM, said:

Here's an interesting idea and its realistic....

If you lose control of your drop location, you lose the ability to drop into the combat theater and you LOSE the match right then and there, no need to kill you as you drop. In reality if the LZ has been lost the fight has also been lost, plain and simple.

Basically your team was too terrible to hold onto its insertion point and lost access to the battle entirely.

OpFor will simply sit just outside the dropzone border, let you drop and then smash you.

[Starwulfe]

Winning by objective being worth just as much as 48 mechs.
Cbills, faction points and xp.

Then only skirmish would be an issue.

Trivial to implement. Just tweak some bits in the DB.

Edited by Starwulfe, 29 July 2017 - 03:09 PM.

[Mycroft000]

Mystere, on 29 July 2017 - 07:34 AM, said:

It was a general comment on the nature of the demands I have been seeing for 5 years or so.

Heck, the OP even had these golden words:

A few pages back the idea of capture-able drop zones came up, and if you combine that with Union Class drop ships being added to the game, it could go a long way to making FP more dynamic, less prone to spawn killing, and generally more enjoyable. This is something that could easily be accomplished if PGI could/would commit real effort to the game mode.

[Mystere]

Mycroft000, on 29 July 2017 - 05:46 PM, said:

A few pages back the idea of capture-able drop zones came up, and if you combine that with Union Class drop ships being added to the game, it could go a long way to making FP more dynamic, less prone to spawn killing, and generally more enjoyable. This is something that could easily be accomplished if PGI could/would commit real effort to the game mode.

That is the key issue.

[DANKnuggz]

Starwulfe, on 29 July 2017 - 03:08 PM, said:

Winning by objective being worth just as much as 48 mechs.
Cbills, faction points and xp.

This here pretty much sums up why the DZ camping happens... who wants to spend the time it can take to get a match only to finish it by objective before you've killed enough of the enemy to make the time you've already invested even worth it?? If killing 48 mechs earns me the best reward then killing 48 mechs will be my and many others desired method of victory. Also a great many of us play mainly to shoot giant robots not stand on cap points or shoot stationary generators. Its unfortunate when you're on the receiving end but hardly unexpected or worth throwing a fit over.

It might be nice if surviving team members getting farmed like this could vote to withdraw from combat rather than being forced back into the meat grinder. Any real assault commander would pull his assets from the battle if at all possible when defeat becomes obvious and surely would not continue to needlessly waste valuable resources by committing them to a lost battle. Just another instance where FP falls completely short of the mark in regards to actually feeling like a campaign.

[Mycroft000]

Mystere, on 29 July 2017 - 05:53 PM, said:

That is the key issue.

Russ is the person who originally mentioned Union Class drop ships being added to the game in a possible asymmetric game mode. Then again he's also mentioned lots of things that have never happened.

[Messiah Complex]

not sure if it was mentioned, but one change I would really like to see that could help the drop zone camping would be the ability to drop as a full drop ship. So you can wait up in the air for your team to all die then pick the option to drop. You could still drop 1 by 1 into the zone but just having the option to remain off the map after your mech dies and drop as a full 4-8-12 would help so you arent picked off one by one. Just to be clear, I mean you select a mech and then you have X amount of time for you lance mates to die and then you can all drop at the same time. If you are the last mech you wont get this option. Also the amount of time you have before it force drops you goes down as more and more of you team is perma dead to prevent people from drawing it out longer than it has to be.

[C E Dwyer]

gamingogre, on 21 June 2017 - 07:35 PM, said:

Every time I get spawned ***** I report the team as exploiting and quit for the night. Spawn killing is unacceptable. Why has PGI allowed this? Fix the maps or remove them from a multiple waves of drops. Please understand this is non-negotiable. Fix. The. Spawn. Killing.

Or just maybe play the game, and I know it's a long shot in a pug match, with people that support the drop point that's under pressure, it's to everyone's advantage.

P.G.I have gone a fair distance to stop camping, drop ship fire, the walls, and to expect more, isn't reasonable, without being stupidly unrealistic invulnerability timers.

It's a thing that happens in re-spawn games, and as a side note there are people trying to ruin Q.P with re-spawns, just be glad P.G.I haven't been stupid and listened to them.

[BTGbullseye]

Cathy, on 30 July 2017 - 11:21 AM, said:

drop ship fire

Still nowhere near close to TT dropship firepower on those dropships... A dropship shouldn't have any difficulty dispatching 3 or 4 mechs in a 15 second period, and they shouldn't be limited to the maximum range of a small laser. (most of them carry large banks of LRMs, PPCs, Gauss, and Large Lasers)

[Leone]

Leone, on 22 June 2017 - 11:07 PM, said:

Do you realize how formidable those things already are?

Here is the full Lore armament of a leopard class drop ship.

2 x PPCs
3 x LRM-20s
7 x Medium Lasers
5 x Large Lasers

And I'd rather have that than the 'ole Twelve ER Large.

~Leone.

[BTGbullseye]

And that's the Leopard... Made in 2537... That's not including the Upgrade it would've gotten in 3056. (switched to ER Lasers, and Artemis on the missiles)

The Clans should at least have the 2979 model of Broadsword. http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Broadsword
2x ER Large Lasers
2x ER PPCs
8x Medium Pulse Lasers
2x Small Pulse Lasers
1x Anti-Missile System
5x LRM-20s with Artemis IV FCS
2x Streak SRM-6s

IS should probably be using the Hamilcar. http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Hamilcar

4 x ER Large Laser
2 x ER PPCs
2 x Large Pulse Lasers
1 x Gauss Rifle
3 LRM-15s with Artemis IV FCS
3 x LRM-20s with Artemis IV
2 x SRM-4s with Artemis

At the absolute minimum the game should use the Confederate as the minimum loadout, complete with the range of those weapons. http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Confederate

14x Large Lasers
20x Medium Lasers


Or they could go to the iconic Union (3055 Upgrade model) for both sides... http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Union
3 x ER PPCs
3 x Gauss Rifle
6 x LRM-20s with Artemis IV
12 x Medium Lasers
5 x ER Large Lasers

Edited by BTGbullseye, 30 July 2017 - 09:35 PM.

[Starwulfe]

And yet no matter which dropship you put there...it still doesn't solve the problem in the slightest

[BTGbullseye]

I bet you a million c-bills that even the stupidest pilot would take pause if they were hit by those weapons beyond small laser range when trying to spawncamp. The LRMs alone will even make Atlases stay in cover for the most part.

[Stahlherz]

Or we can have two Union class drop shops dukeing it out with the pilots watching from the spawn.

[Starwulfe]

You can pay up if they ever allow trading.
Extended range weaponry has already been tried.
ER lasers that could shoot out past 1k (Beyond LRM range)
It didn't change anything.
The losing team would try to hide at their landing zone, praying that dropship dan would somehow save them, attackers would still push into range and kill them. Some of the more aggressive teams traded at range until the dropships left, then ran in and killed everyone. Sure they died to dropships, but the round ended 24-12 and dropship dan getting the credit for the kills instead of the players. (That guy makes bank for his kills)

So now we have the current wall solution, which doesn't solve it either.
Losing team still tries to hide, attackers push up and use walls as cover, still win.

A better solution involves something dynamic.
For example: Changing LZs. Allowing the player to choose, or simply auto-rerouting the dropship whenever an LZ is contested.
Extend that and allow the LZ to be captured, with a mech having to stay within X distance to maintain the cap or it becomes available to drop in again.
2nd LZ would be the same.
3rd LZ could have two options:
-allow similar capture, which would end the fight early - retreat called due to overwhelming opposition/etc
-3rd LZ would be a final stand scenario, shorten the drop timer so dropships would come in one after another until all 12 are in the LZ. As the other LZs have to maintain their capture only 10 mechs are present

[Mycroft000]

Starwulfe, on 31 July 2017 - 11:12 AM, said:

A few pages back I posted almost every idea you just raised. That just goes to show that the idea has enough potential that PGI needs to do some serious exploration on it.

[50 50]

If it continues with the current model of using the full drop deck in a single engagement then having more functionality around the drop zones needs to be looked at.
However, my concern is that this creates a line of development needed for each map and mode specifically to adapt them to Faction Play which has got to be impractical and will only get worse should Solaris get added as another mode.
There are only so many development resources to go around.
So while I love the idea of continual warfare and battling it out for hours in a single map, changing up drop zones and so on.
I am just not sure it's something that is practical or sustainable.

So more recently I have begun focusing on how the drop decks are actually used which has led me to the campaign idea.
Because that concept simply uses the quick play maps and modes as individual missions it does two things.
1. Completely eliminates spawn camping as you only get one drop. Face it. It's not a problem in quick play.
2. It links how the modes function closer to quick play so when we ask for more maps and more modes they can get added to quick play and straight into Faction Play.

Going forward, being able to cut down on that development time or that need to develop a new map/mode and then re-develop it so it works for Faction Play and instead have a single focus that can benefit multiple areas of the game is the logical way to go.