Jump to content

Objectives


9 replies to this topic

#1 Bjorn JorgenssonX

    Member

  • Pip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 19 posts

Posted 04 March 2018 - 03:25 PM

We should get a 30% cbill boost or something for winning by objective instead of just kills. It would help make the game more than just a team deathmatch.

#2 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 04 March 2018 - 03:27 PM

We used to get a bonus for completing by objective.

Then it became capwarrior.

#3 Variant1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,148 posts

Posted 04 March 2018 - 03:27 PM

Im sure this has been said before, but mechwarrior is a game about mech destroying each other. However some tanks/infantry/aircraft npc support would be nice to break up the monotony every once in a while. And more destructable objects like some buildings or cover.

#4 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 04 March 2018 - 03:28 PM

Personally I would like it if objectives mattered. It meant we defended the objectives, too, while others sought glory.

But defending can be boring if no one goes for them, and there's no money for it.
People worry too damn much about their stats to make meaningful objective based play.

#5 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 04 March 2018 - 03:45 PM

Quote

We used to get a bonus for completing by objective.

Then it became capwarrior.


because the objective in assault is bad

it allows both teams to ignore eachother and go for eachother's bases

a good objective is one where both teams have to fight over it and cant ignore eachother

#6 Variant1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,148 posts

Posted 04 March 2018 - 03:47 PM

View PostKhobai, on 04 March 2018 - 03:45 PM, said:

because the objective in assault is bad

it allows both teams to ignore eachother and go for eachother's bases

a good objective is one where both teams have to fight over it and cant ignore eachother

like escort basically, its an amazing mode and has some pve elements (turrets) and both teams have to confront each other

#7 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 04 March 2018 - 03:50 PM

Quote

like escort basically, its an amazing mode and has some pve elements (turrets) and both teams have to confront each other


escort is good from the standpoint that both teams cant ignore eachother

however escort has a different problem in that its asymmetrical. the defending team is always at an inherent disadvantage.

if they turned the atlas into a superheavy prototype with actual weapons, it would probably be a little be more balanced. like a Matar or something (the 110 ton superheavy that was the prototype for the behemoth)

Edited by Khobai, 04 March 2018 - 03:53 PM.


#8 EnochsBook

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 163 posts

Posted 04 March 2018 - 03:53 PM

View PostKoniving, on 04 March 2018 - 03:28 PM, said:

Personally I would like it if objectives mattered. It meant we defended the objectives, too, while others sought glory.

Objectives do matter, just not in an obvious way. They are secondary, but they still shape the flow of the match.

People rarely win by capping out in Conquest, yet both teams will still likely have to split up to cap several points, because if they don't, the enemy will, and they'll win.
Same for Domination: you still have to have some people in the cap circle even if you're planning to kill the whole enemy team, else you bet they will take advantage of the situation.

#9 Asym

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Nova Captain
  • 2,186 posts

Posted 04 March 2018 - 03:56 PM

Unfortunately, MWO isn't about strategy, teams or objectives: it's about brawling and brawling alone. Yes, it would be nice to have "objectives" and yes, it would be nice to have large open maps where teams and fully lethal weapons systems would need tactics and teamwork.... Again, unfortunately, that isn't MWO and if you doubt that, think SOLARIS......

Where there is only one objective: to blow the stompy red robot into tiny pieces: match, after match, after match......(sigh.) Oh God, I'm bored just writing about it.

Edited by Asym, 04 March 2018 - 03:57 PM.


#10 Wil McCullough

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,482 posts

Posted 04 March 2018 - 10:50 PM

objectives can't work in a single spawn pvp system.

because to:

1) win using the objective, it's a lot safer to beat the crap out of the opponents first so they can't respond properly to you going after objectives. however...

2) if you beat the crap out of them, you may as well just keep beating the crap out of them because it's faster and more effective, while also the safest course of action.

with a respawn/ticket based system (and the ability to change mechs mid-game on respawn), more objective focused gameplay can be done like actual capture the flag, payload, attack/defend, king of the hill (with a traditional capture time and timer, not this "stand in the yellow circle" nonsense we have) and more.

but that's not going to happen in mwo, so it's a sad day for you, bjorn.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users