18 replies to this topic

[Alcom Isst]

It's a completely different game! 12v12 involves a lot of standing in a small area under cover, poking from across quadrants until the few brief moments where the combat dissolves into a brawl that's usually super one-sided due to snowballing.

4v4, is much more mobile, with more brawling, an even stronger emphasis on lance formation, and dammit, I love getting into a good fight so quickly! Cutting down the the team-size does way more to change the flow of the match than any of the existing game modes. Also I love how bite-size it is.

I need this! I need more! How do I get more? Like I can't be waiting on Public Test Sessions which are infrequent and intended for testing.

Edited by Alcom Isst, 28 June 2017 - 07:32 PM.

[Johnny Z]

Thanks I didn't know the new gear was playable. Updating now.

[Ruar]

Actually, I hate 4v4. The maps, modes, and gameplay in general are just not balanced for such a small group. It's boring and frustrating. There's a reason I do all my testing on PTS with the testing grounds.

[l33tworks]

8v8 is best of both worlds. Wish tjey would offer 8v8 que at least for the lower pop server like oceana

[Alcom Isst]

Ruar, on 28 June 2017 - 07:41 PM, said:

Actually, I hate 4v4. The maps, modes, and gameplay in general are just not balanced for such a small group. It's boring and frustrating. There's a reason I do all my testing on PTS with the testing grounds.

Interesting! See, I'm feeling like the larger maps detrimentally increase the travel time to reach the opposition, but the scale of the map doesn't affect the scale of the eventual engagement much. There will also probably be the occasional lone-wolf derp that circles around and engages too late, but that should be rare enough.

I don't see how it isn't balanced for small groups either except that the engagements are super brief.

I wasn't bored or frustrated. Yeah, it kinda snowballs, but so does 12v12.

l33tworks, on 28 June 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

8v8 is best of both worlds. Wish tjey would offer 8v8 que at least for the lower pop server like oceana

I started playing just as 8v8 was replaced with 12v12, but it sounds reasonable, I'd probably like it more than 12v12.

Edited by Alcom Isst, 28 June 2017 - 08:19 PM.

[Ruar]

Alcom Isst, on 28 June 2017 - 08:14 PM, said:

Interesting! See, I'm feeling like the larger maps detrimentally increase the travel time to reach the opposition, but the scale of the map doesn't affect the scale of the eventual engagement much. There will also probably be the occasional lone-wolf derp that circles around and engages too late, but that should be rare enough.

I don't see how it isn't balanced for small groups either except that the engagements are super brief.

I wasn't bored or frustrated. Yeah, it kinda snowballs, but so does 12v12.

I prefer playing on the flanks and constantly moving around in a fight. I can't do that in a 4v4. There is just the center of the fight, no flank, no maneuvering, just stay together and hope your mech selection is better than the other teams mech selection.

Consider HPG map design. In a 12v12 you can spread out to the top and some on the sides. You can move around cover, peek/poke, and move through the basement to flank. In a 4v4 then the fight is just in one small area. You can't really flank around unless you are a light and then you run the risk of your team dying before you can cut through.

[El Bandito]

l33tworks, on 28 June 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

8v8 is best of both worlds. Wish tjey would offer 8v8 que at least for the lower pop server like oceana

8v8 for Solo-Q, for all servers!

[Aggravated Assault Mech]

Really enjoy 4v4, although it might be because people trend towards brawly builds, so you get these really awesome close range melees. TTK in 4v4 is low enough that you can still survive a mistake and come back from it. Because teams are so much smaller, there's some suspense about when and where you'll actually meet the enemy. You can take a common, strong position only to find the enemy has gone elsewhere- search them out, or risk giving them the position?

Very fun.

[The6thMessenger]

Alcom Isst, on 28 June 2017 - 06:55 PM, said:

I need this! I need more! How do I get more? Like I can't be waiting on Public Test Sessions which are infrequent and intended for testing.

IDK, scouting on FW maybe?

[Brizna]

Solo queue could probably be 8 Vs 8 and work best.

[Composite Armour]

I like the 4v4, but it does make it hard to determine how the new gear would work on the live server. It's just such a different environment.

[Wildstreak]

Alcom Isst, on 28 June 2017 - 06:55 PM, said:

I need this! I need more! How do I get more? Like I can't be waiting on Public Test Sessions which are infrequent and intended for testing.

Didn't Private Matches go totally free with the June patch?
You get 7 other people, possibly 1-2 spectators, and have at it.

[Alcom Isst]

Ruar, on 28 June 2017 - 08:21 PM, said:

I prefer playing on the flanks and constantly moving around in a fight. I can't do that in a 4v4. There is just the center of the fight, no flank, no maneuvering, just stay together and hope your mech selection is better than the other teams mech selection.

Consider HPG map design. In a 12v12 you can spread out to the top and some on the sides. You can move around cover, peek/poke, and move through the basement to flank. In a 4v4 then the fight is just in one small area. You can't really flank around unless you are a light and then you run the risk of your team dying before you can cut through.

Alright alright alright this is getting super interesting because your interpretations and experiences are completely different from my own. In my experience, units that attempt to flank and teams that spread out are vulnerable and easily focus-fired. In a 12v12 I'm always on the lookout for that small group of units that's attacking from a different angle, so it can be squashed by a larger force if not the entire blob. If a flank does work it's usually because the flanking team is already winning and the flank is probably not necessary.

As for mech selection... yeah, that's definitely the biggest weakness of 4v4. It aint fun to have a match where your team has a Locust and a Spider with flimsy loadouts ^{(that was my first match, though though it was the enemy team that had those two tragic lights)}, though certainly scenarios like that could be ironed out with a few match-making tweaks. Even so, positioning and strategy is still a strong factor in 4v4. Teams that form up, re-position when needed, and focus down targets better can gain a strong advantage in spite of mech selection.

Here's a thing, some thing, the thing. I played a boat-load of MechWarrior 2, 3, and 4 singleplayer growing up. I fell in love with the individualistic duels and small scale battles, and have been looking to see that sort of micro-intensive gameplay in MechWarrior Online. Public Test has been the first time I've had easy access to that sort of gameplay, and I absolutely positively want to have more of that in MechWarrior Online, please.

Edited by Alcom Isst, 30 June 2017 - 04:39 PM.

[Linkin]

El Bandito, on 28 June 2017 - 08:49 PM, said:

8v8 for Solo-Q, for all servers!

Aff!

Would love for 8v8 back... for all servers, not just comp.

[Nightbird]

scouting

[Alcom Isst]

Linkin, on 30 June 2017 - 04:41 PM, said:

Aff!

Would love for 8v8 back... for all servers, not just comp.

8v8 sounds great.

You know what would be supreme? An alternative queue that would swap game modes every-so-often, ones that have fresh differences in gameplay unlike the skirmish-assault-conquest-incursion blob-fests. 4v4, 8v8, stock-only, 1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1, lights only... ooh, I wonder how light-only CTF would go. Yeah, it would split up the player-base, but this should be worth it.

Edited by Alcom Isst, 30 June 2017 - 05:02 PM.

[Tordin]

4V4 is nice, but 8 players on such large maps? 8 vs 8 would be the sweet spot I think.

[ChapeL]

I don't know guys. in my experience in 4v4 assuming two teams of equal skills and comparable builds: as soon as one team loses someone it's pretty much game over. 3 vs 4 is a a pretty steep uphill battle... and that's if you're lucky and that Dire Wolf/Executionner left on your side isn't packing nothing but flamers and machine guns. ( I've seen it ) 11v12, hell even 10v12 is still possible for the short handed team to mount a comeback. A 12 man can survive and win with a few clowns or afks, 4 mans can't.

-----------------------------

12v12 is lethal because the maps and game modes give us no reason to spread out. You risk moving out of cover at the wrong time and 12 mechs are blasting you to pieces. 8v8 is only less so because fewer guns are aimed at you. 4v4 should be better but we're still deathballing and one early death means 25% of your total force is gone.

I mean I could see this as a valid option for the new competitive bracket but I don't find the TTK to be particularly better.

[STEF_]

Being playing 4vs4 with tons of fun.

aaaaaaaaa that nostalgic feeling, dropping in mw2 and mw3......

NlGHTBlRD, on 30 June 2017 - 04:47 PM, said:

scouting

scout with light and medium only?

nope.