107 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

Quote

But counter strike is also very popular and everyone plays it.

I assure you "everyone" does not play it.

counterstrike is quite frankly a bad game and MWO should not try to be like it at all.

Quote

And isint every fps involve shooting each other, so isint that still techincally skirmish despite objectives? The thing that makes mwo unique is there are no respawns(except fp) so its not generic like most fps that focus on objectives since their combat would be boring. Mwo combat has more punch and has no respawns would make sense for those modes to have some skirmish.

and again not every fps is skirmish. skirmish is essentially the same thing as deathmatch.

a lot of fps games have moved away from deathmatch to more objective based play because its quite frankly boring to play it over and over.

and MWO's decision to not have respawns was a bad one, its why every gamemode outside of FP has devolved into skirmish or a lame variation thereof. MWO wouldve been better off having a core gamemode more similar to what MWLL has; where players start out in light/medium mechs and have to work their way up to heavies and assaults by earning points, and if they die they respawn, but lose all their points that were spent on the mech that was destroyed. With a win condition thats more objective based and not just killing the enemy team.

Edited by Khobai, 10 May 2018 - 02:41 PM.

[TheCaptainJZ]

There was a currently logged in player count back in closed beta. It ran roughly 2000 players or more or less what we have now.

1 million accounts? Yeah sure, people who signed up for an account. Doesn't mean they ever played. My brother signed up but never installed the game nor played it.

[Thorqemada]

The Player Counter in the Beta ran most of the time around 5000+ People with 2 peaktimes at EU and America after school/work hours.

[sycocys]

Khobai, on 10 May 2018 - 02:28 PM, said:

a lot of fps games have moved away from deathmatch to more objective based play because its quite frankly boring to play it over and over.

I bet its equally or likely more because deathmatch is boring to watch and 99% of game advertisement is twitch and youtube streamers.

[Variant1]

Khobai, on 10 May 2018 - 02:28 PM, said:

I assure you "everyone" does not play it.

counterstrike is quite frankly a bad game and MWO should not try to be like it at all.

and again not every fps is skirmish. skirmish is essentially the same thing as deathmatch.

a lot of fps games have moved away from deathmatch to more objective based play because its quite frankly boring to play it over and over.

and MWO's decision to not have respawns was a bad one, its why every gamemode outside of FP has devolved into skirmish or a lame variation thereof. MWO wouldve been better off having a core gamemode more similar to what MWLL has; where players start out in light/medium mechs and have to work their way up to heavies and assaults by earning points, and if they die they respawn, but lose all their points that were spent on the mech that was destroyed. With a win condition thats more objective based and not just killing the enemy team.

I dont want mwo to be counter strike i was comparing the 2 games. Since aparently skirmish with x is exclusive to mwo which it is not, the only difference are the lack of respawns. Infact any objective based mode will have skirmish, because the enemy teams will have to engage each other in order to claim the objetive so in the end it boils down to skirmish with x except in other fps case they have respawns. No respawns for mwo is a good thing not a bad one, since it encourage tactical play and being more careful. I didnt like mwll because it didnt feel mechwarrior, the respawning and the class restriction wasnt fun to deal with. It felt too much like a mod for crysis then a mw game. It was also limited to one mode(purchase mech and deathmatch for points) that felt more generic fps than mech combat imo

Edited by Variant1, 11 May 2018 - 07:43 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Infact any objective based mode will have skirmish, because the enemy teams will have to engage each other in order to claim the objetive

you have missed the point completely. obviously teams will engage eachother even in objective based play. the point is that skirmish shouldnt be the primary win condition. that is the major failing of all the quickplay gamemodes.

Quote

so in the end it boils down to skirmish with x

if the primary win condition isnt killing the other team then its not skirmish with x.

for example, conquest with respawns is not really skirmish. because most of the time the gamemode ends because one team got to 1250 points. its rare to completely wipe out the other team in that gamemode.

conquest with respawns is probably the best gamemode in MWO right now because its the farthest thing from skirmish.

Edited by Khobai, 11 May 2018 - 01:02 PM.

[Zibmo]

Khobai, on 11 May 2018 - 12:55 PM, said:

you have missed the point completely. obviously teams will engage eachother even in objective based play. the point is that skirmish shouldnt be the primary win condition. that is the major failing of all the quickplay gamemodes.



if the primary win condition isnt killing the other team then its not skirmish with x.

for example, conquest with respawns is not really skirmish. because most of the time the gamemode ends because one team got to 1250 points. its rare to completely wipe out the other team in that gamemode.

conquest with respawns is probably the best gamemode in MWO right now because its the farthest thing from skirmish.

I agree with you in principle. But playing anything other than skirmish with most of the playerbase is one of the more frustrating things I've done.

How many times do people need to learn that capping matters?

[Ensaine]

Seeing as the OP is about player count.. any takers that number (whatever it actually, really is) will go down when this craptastic patch gets deployed?