49 replies to this topic

[Spheroid]

Defend what? A team that defended the lower side of alpine was screwed owing to the advantage provided by elevation. Also in the old days there was no 3,3,3,3 rule. One team invariably had a speed advantage from having more lights that satisfied the tonnage.

Additionally you could get symmetrical rushes where both teams bypassed each other without seeing each other such as on canyon.

[SFC174]

Mystere, on 10 June 2018 - 04:54 PM, said:

It sucked very well all right, for all the people who simply refused to:

DEFEND THE BASE

Apparently, it was on the level of rocket science. <shrugs>

I've seen you say this several times, yet you continually ignore the fact that if both teams defend their base, there is no combat. Without asymmetric modes (one team attacks/one team defends), teams aren't motivated to do anything (see Assault on Frozen City, for example).

Yes, you can send a lance to probe the enemy base while the rest of your team defends, but if the other team is defending, they kill that lance and then come roll your base.

Now, the only problem with asymmetric modes is that PGI failed pretty badly at their first attempt (Escort). Not only is Escort one of the less desirable sort of asymmetric modes, but PGI balanced it very poorly. So the hopes of having them do a good job in the future is a little low.

Besides skirmish, modes where both teams have to capture the same objective (a la Domination) tend to work pretty well. You've got to balance the capture point location, but PGI has proven reasonably capable at that (Alpine Peaks and Grim being two examples to the contrary, but they have improved them).

[JediPanther]

In Assault mode buzzing the base in a fast mover is a valid tactic when the fight starts. The hope is it will draw off the enemy's fast movers so while they run back to def base you've already ditched it and now are attacking with higher numbers from front and rear.

I agree that just zerg-ing the base does suck. I didn't come to stand on a square and only do so in conquest when I have to but you can pretty much just kill the enemy and win that way unless the enemy has four of the stupid things already. My mech has weapons to use,they are not cosmetic fluff.

[Mystere]

SFC174, on 10 June 2018 - 06:47 PM, said:

I've seen you say this several times, yet you continually ignore the fact that if both teams defend their base, there is no combat. Without asymmetric modes (one team attacks/one team defends), teams aren't motivated to do anything (see Assault on Frozen City, for example).

Yes, you can send a lance to probe the enemy base while the rest of your team defends, but if the other team is defending, they kill that lance and then come roll your base.

Now, the only problem with asymmetric modes is that PGI failed pretty badly at their first attempt (Escort). Not only is Escort one of the less desirable sort of asymmetric modes, but PGI balanced it very poorly. So the hopes of having them do a good job in the future is a little low.

Besides skirmish, modes where both teams have to capture the same objective (a la Domination) tend to work pretty well. You've got to balance the capture point location, but PGI has proven reasonably capable at that (Alpine Peaks and Grim being two examples to the contrary, but they have improved them).

That's what ninjas are for, silly. Slyly kill one (preferably two) of the enemy and then relentlessly goad them into attacking. It almost always works like a charm.

Heck, even getting one of your own killed sets the stage for a fight -- which is the point, right? <shrugs>

Edited by Mystere, 10 June 2018 - 08:18 PM.

[Mister Glitchdragon]

https://www.rocketleague.com/

[Prototelis]

I thought this thread was going to be about getting backstabbed by a PIR for sitting stationary in the square.

[Mystere]

Mister Glitchdragon, on 10 June 2018 - 09:02 PM, said:

https://www.rocketleague.com/

???

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Mystere, on 10 June 2018 - 09:40 PM, said:

???

He may be posting it because its a game with no fighting where you just complete the objective.

[Pain G0D]

Objectives serve two purposes .

1.Its your Hail Mary if things go south and all the stompy robots are dead except for one .

2.It makes your 20 ton speedster with 1 machine gun and 4 tons of ammo a useful member of your team . Every mode except skirmish is designed for scouts .
In the land of giant stompy robots , biggest weapons and toughest armour wins most of the time and scores the biggest payout .

[Moochachoo]

RickySpanish, on 10 June 2018 - 11:00 AM, said:

Objectives tend to work poorly in games without respawn/resupply. As Spheroid said all they really do is alter the locations of engagements. You're not actually meant to *complete* them. I'd wager nine tenths of my games end up in one team getting wiped out, which is a little sad. It'd be cool if even QP allowed players to field a deck of 'Mechs, or there was some other sort of resupply mechanic. Heck, allowing players to just respawn forever until an objective is complete would be cool... But that might make games go on for far too long.

How about a battlefield style respawn ticket system.

Both team start with 100 respawns, in bases on opposite edges of the map, by capturing objectives, you reduce the other teams respawn ticket by 10-25, also have secondary captures like ammunition dump and machine bays for repairs and reloads.

Whenever you die, you use up a ticket and respawn in your main base, main bases cannot be captured, with powerful powerful turrets to deter spawn camping, ammo reloads and repairs are not instant, and you will not be able to move or shoot while repairs or reload takes place.

This would probably need its own map and mod.

[Prototelis]

Thats been floated around more than a few times, but I personally don't think it belongs in QP.

I'd rather see an 8v8 mode in FP with ticket respawns where the objective is the overall goal. I'm sure the FP regulars would probably be against it though, they don't need a third bucket to fill.

[RickySpanish]

I think that's the chief reason; there are already many modes to fill and not quite enough players to fill them. Respawn costing resources is something that should have been in the game to begin with instead of yet another mode added later. Maybe they could revamp incursion somehow?

[Prototelis]

RickySpanish, on 11 June 2018 - 12:00 PM, said:

I think that's the chief reason; there are already many modes to fill and not quite enough players to fill them. Respawn costing resources is something that should have been in the game to begin with instead of yet another mode added later. Maybe they could revamp incursion somehow?

Asymmetric incursion (attackers vs defenders) with a base thats worth a damn and tickets would be awesome. Thats kind of where they were going with Siege mode, but I don't really care for the implementation or the maps. There has to be a way to make it less snowball but still preserve the "Coordination is King" sorta gameplay the "end game" of a teamplay game should have.

[MechaBattler]

Even if the objectives were worth more. I don't know that people would be happy with it. People want to fight.

[Eisenhorne]

Prototelis, on 11 June 2018 - 12:05 PM, said:

Asymmetric incursion (attackers vs defenders) with a base thats worth a damn and tickets would be awesome. Thats kind of where they were going with Siege mode, but I don't really care for the implementation or the maps. There has to be a way to make it less snowball but still preserve the "Coordination is King" sorta gameplay the "end game" of a teamplay game should have.

Siege mode is awesome, but yea most of the maps are crazy lopsided in balance.

[Prototelis]

MechaBattler, on 11 June 2018 - 12:21 PM, said:

Even if the objectives were worth more. I don't know that people would be happy with it. People want to fight.

Yah, and ticket respawns would only lead to coordinated groups mashing the same potatos over and over until you need to complete the objective to win.

Lol, so here we are back to square one.

[Alreech]

ManicDan, on 10 June 2018 - 10:03 AM, said:

What is the point of completing objectives when the bonuses for doing so are so minimal that you would get more value just doing 1 damage to a target that dies.
Flanking, Assist, Hit/Run, all add up to way more than completing the objective, even if you did only 1 damage.

Kind of hard to have player rating go up, or earn any credits when we take a long stealthy path for no reward.

Lol.

Play every mode like skirmish.
Form a murder ball, and kill everything that has a red square around.
Don't split the team to do silly things like taking Capture Points.
MWO is not a thinking mans shooter.

[Grus]

How do you expect PGI to get all this data about how OP X weapon is if you're capping flags... Stop It!

[Mechwarrior1441491]

There should be objective modes where they are more optional than necessary. Destroying supply dumps or raiding a warehouse for extra bonuses at the end of the map, but the main goal is to destroy the opposition.

Sides totally eliminating the other weren't really the norm and during the Succession wars the act of letting really damaged mechs leave the field of battle was common place as you'd want that courtesy returned to you on a later date. With so many Mercenaries in use, the act of outright murder for the sake of killing seems to be taboo in Btech.

[Brain Cancer]

Objective-based play would literally have to act as a bonus to combat action rewards (immediately, not a flat boost at the end) to work properly. That's why most modes are "kill first, cap later" now- it's far easier to gun down your enemy robots, then if you wanna pick up them bonuses, why you'll get them at the end regardless.

Imagine if Alpha/Beta on Domination were further out and in relatively protected (from being sniped) areas- but each one destroyed while you still have either your own Alpha or Beta would give your team a 10% bonus to Exp/C-bills earned by combat actions from that point on. Losing both on both sides would result in no bonuses for anyone, so you'd want to not only keep the circle in play, but protect at least one of your Alpha/Beta bases while attempting to destroy your opponent's ASAP.

Or Assault had locations near the base that if capped first would provide similar bonuses (like a generator, ammo dump, etc), meaning again, you'd have people wanting those objectives ASAP, because it'd mean the rest of the game became more rewarding. On Incursion, it's a gimme- the more base bits you blow up relative to your opponent, the more those enemy robots are worth shooting!

All modes are about killing robots. Therefore, objectives should make killing robots more rewarding if you do them first.