Jump to content

Punished For Capping The Base


58 replies to this topic

#1 Thraka

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Tracker
  • The Tracker
  • 42 posts

Posted 17 September 2020 - 09:36 PM

If I drive to the enemy base, cap it, win the game, and then go down in ranking for playing the game mode, why have it?

Remove it. It's pointless. If anything enable it halfway through or something if you don't want people to actually go for it.

#2 martian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,576 posts

Posted 17 September 2020 - 09:44 PM

View PostThraka, on 17 September 2020 - 09:36 PM, said:

If I drive to the enemy base, cap it, win the game, and then go down in ranking for playing the game mode, why have it?

Because, honestly, standing still in an empty square with no enemy in sight is hardly a show of piloting skill, quiaff?

View PostThraka, on 17 September 2020 - 09:36 PM, said:

Remove it. It's pointless.

99% of all QP games are played as Trial of Annihilation anyway.

View PostThraka, on 17 September 2020 - 09:36 PM, said:

If anything enable it halfway through or something if you don't want people to actually go for it.

I think that people would ignore it - after all, halfway though the game people are already engaged by the enemy team and disengaging enemy 'Mechs (to go after the enemy base) would be difficult or outright impossible.

#3 Thraka

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Tracker
  • The Tracker
  • 42 posts

Posted 17 September 2020 - 09:58 PM

Yeah we had three of us, working together on voice (not grouped) who went there, destroyed a defender, two others tried to defend but ran away. and we sat there and won.

#4 Monkey Lover

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 7,918 posts
  • LocationWazan

Posted 17 September 2020 - 10:13 PM

Good job winning but standing on a base doesn't take skills so why should it go up?

#5 Thraka

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Tracker
  • The Tracker
  • 42 posts

Posted 17 September 2020 - 10:58 PM

View PostMonkey Lover, on 17 September 2020 - 10:13 PM, said:

Good job winning but standing on a base doesn't take skills so why should it go up?


Because the description of the game mode told me to do it. It should at least not reward or punish. Right now, it punishes.

View Postmartian, on 17 September 2020 - 09:44 PM, said:

I think that people would ignore it - after all, halfway though the game people are already engaged by the enemy team and disengaging enemy 'Mechs (to go after the enemy base) would be difficult or outright impossible.


I'm guessing they only have it as a way to handle endgame scenarios where you have 1-on-1 and someone can bait them. Why not just enable it later in the game when that condition appears. That is my point about changing it.

Edited by Thraka, 17 September 2020 - 10:59 PM.


#6 Monkey Lover

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 7,918 posts
  • LocationWazan

Posted 18 September 2020 - 12:29 AM

View PostThraka, on 17 September 2020 - 10:58 PM, said:


Because the description of the game mode told me to do it. It should at least not reward or punish. Right now, it punishes.


.

I don't feel going down in Tier as a punishment. Truth is 99.9% of the time anyone capping without getting damage is bad for the team. You can use caps to win but only using caps to win isn't the game mode.

Edited by Monkey Lover, 18 September 2020 - 12:30 AM.


#7 Sjorpha

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,472 posts
  • LocationSweden

Posted 18 September 2020 - 01:00 AM

I agree.

It's quite bizarre to have the win conditions and the reward systems in conflict with each other.

Same problem in faction play. Very often you've won the match and can destroy the orbital cannon, but you are stupidly rewarded for grinding out all the enemy mechs at the dropzones.

And if you don't like the game mode's win condition, that's an argument for changing the game mode not for rewarding losing moves. Yeah maybe it's stupid to win by standing in a square, well then you shouldn't be able to do that. But to say that we should keep these wincons and then punish people for playing towards them is incredibly stupid.

One way to mitigate this, especially in Faction Play, would be to have a timing reward for winning quickly and efficiently so that you are not incentivized to drag out a won game.

Edited by Sjorpha, 18 September 2020 - 01:02 AM.


#8 crazytimes

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,316 posts

Posted 18 September 2020 - 02:21 AM

You're not being punished. You are being adjusted to play with other people that enjoy standing in squares, shooting the ground, sniping with light PPCs, running LRM assaults, and other assorted "I don't play the meta because I play for fun" types. if you don't want to play with them, then don't play like them.

#9 Black Caiman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Thumper
  • The Thumper
  • 101 posts

Posted 18 September 2020 - 03:27 AM

I dont think anyone here is arguing that standing in a square is the epitome of skill, but I agree 100% that if you win by an objective you should get rewarded more then you currently do. Its easy to get caught up in just wanting to blow **** up, but in plenty of games their are missions that require stealth, finesse, and subterfuge to win and thats essentially what these game modes are. To be fair its often not as easy as just standing there to cap the base on assault or win on conquest. You are often being assailed in the process, and in the right situation you can absolutely ruin an enemy team's strategy by taking their eyes off the "trial of annihilation" and making them think about the game scenario. In the end the major objective of any match is to WIN, and a team should do so by any means necessary. PSR might not reward you for doing so, but going up in PSR is not the primary of objective of any match. If you played any team sports then you know in the end all that matters is who got the W. If the other team complains you just point and say "scoreboard."

#10 Beorning

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 306 posts

Posted 18 September 2020 - 03:47 AM

View Postcrazytimes, on 18 September 2020 - 02:21 AM, said:

You're not being punished. You are being adjusted to play with other people that enjoy standing in squares, shooting the ground, sniping with light PPCs, running LRM assaults, and other assorted "I don't play the meta because I play for fun" types. if you don't want to play with them, then don't play like them.


Bit of a straw man there... You forgot to mention how not to take ams then whine about LRMs, or how to meta nascar, and then flex your E-Peen!

Anyhow there are all kinds of things you can do that result in a win for the team and SFA for you, nope it's not fair but that is the way it is.

#11 East Indy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 1,207 posts
  • LocationPacifica Training School, waiting for BakPhar shares to rise

Posted 18 September 2020 - 04:06 AM

View PostBlack Caiman, on 18 September 2020 - 03:27 AM, said:

I dont think anyone here is arguing that standing in a square is the epitome of skill, but I agree 100% that if you win by an objective you should get rewarded more then you currently do.

This, absolutely.

To the topic in general, I mean, PGI didn't have much success designing objectives on one hand, but on the other MWO's core gameplay of robot skirmishes is still so enjoyable most players log in for battle more than anything. There's essentially a gentleman's agreement never to cap early on most maps; teams themselves never consider staying behind because players would rather meet the other team as soon as possible. Turrets in earlier years prevented rush caps but didn't accomplish much else.

Since matchscore is today's currency and everything else is about damage, flatly increasing cap rewards would distort scores of rushers. I had a suggestion years back that cap speed start impossibly slowly at the start of a match, then increase as 'Mech on either side went down. That way, a big bonus for capping and winning by cap would require engaging earlier in the match, but...at this point? Assault provides alternative spawn points and tactical options through team rushes on just a few maps.



#12 Lanzman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 292 posts
  • LocationVirginia, USA

Posted 18 September 2020 - 06:04 AM

On the other hand, there have been plenty of times when a team has won Assault or Domination mode because the other team was so busy maneuvering that they never responded to base cap.

#13 ShiverMeRivets

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • 520 posts

Posted 18 September 2020 - 06:09 AM

View PostEast Indy, on 18 September 2020 - 04:06 AM, said:

This, absolutely.

To the topic in general, I mean, PGI didn't have much success designing objectives on one hand, but on the other MWO's core gameplay of robot skirmishes is still so enjoyable most players log in for battle more than anything. There's essentially a gentleman's agreement never to cap early on most maps; teams themselves never consider staying behind because players would rather meet the other team as soon as possible. Turrets in earlier years prevented rush caps but didn't accomplish much else.
...

Not capping is not an agreement. The reason it is not done is that in most cases capping the enemy base hurts your team and is more likely to lead to a loss than a win. A single mech capping takes long enough that for your team it is the same as having one mech disconnected - they will lose the skirmish before you complete the capture and then gang on you, the last survivor.

The reason to have the base captured mechanism is to spare us the “catch the squirrel” 8 minutes scene, where 5 slow mechs are trying to hunt the last opponent, usually a stealth light, or some other kiting mech. For this lack of alternative winning mechanism you should NEVER vote skirmish - all the other modes are skirmish + alternative win conditions.

Edited by ShiverMeRivets, 18 September 2020 - 06:12 AM.


#14 martian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,576 posts

Posted 18 September 2020 - 06:11 AM

View PostThraka, on 17 September 2020 - 10:58 PM, said:

Because the description of the game mode told me to do it. It should at least not reward or punish. Right now, it punishes.


Well, not exactly. It does not punish you.

Base capturing is rewarded with Match Score points - but the fact is that other in-game actions offer greater rewards.

#15 John Bronco

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Fighter
  • The Fighter
  • 966 posts

Posted 18 September 2020 - 06:43 AM

You weren't punished.

You won the game and got paid for it.

If you want to raise your PSR you'll need to contribute more to the fight - all there is to it.

Edited by BlaizerP, 18 September 2020 - 06:43 AM.


#16 East Indy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 1,207 posts
  • LocationPacifica Training School, waiting for BakPhar shares to rise

Posted 18 September 2020 - 07:17 AM

View PostShiverMeRivets, on 18 September 2020 - 06:09 AM, said:

The reason to have the base captured mechanism is to spare us the “catch the squirrel” 8 minutes scene, where 5 slow mechs are trying to hunt the last opponent, usually a stealth light, or some other kiting mech. For this lack of alternative winning mechanism you should NEVER vote skirmish - all the other modes are skirmish + alternative win conditions.

That's a purpose it serves now but that was never the design intent. But what you write only underscores how people log in to battle.

#17 Brauer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,066 posts

Posted 18 September 2020 - 07:32 AM

View PostEast Indy, on 18 September 2020 - 07:17 AM, said:

That's a purpose it serves now but that was never the design intent. But what you write only underscores how people log in to battle.


If you look at a map like Polar Highlands with the assault game mode it becomes pretty clear that whatever intent there was behind that map and mode combination did not come up with anything like an interesting or fun map and mode combo. If teams truly wanted to play the map and mode they'd either need to camp their base or fast rush the enemy base with relatively little in between due to the size of the map.

#18 Lanzman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 292 posts
  • LocationVirginia, USA

Posted 18 September 2020 - 07:33 AM

Well, the "design intent" was variety. That every QP match is still basically Skirmish kind of highlights one of PGI's failures.

#19 Beorning

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 306 posts

Posted 18 September 2020 - 08:46 AM

Incursion.
Was rather fun.
Three of us assaulted the base because we were there, let's say. We almost got it...
It looked like our team was going to win on kills though. However, they started to get finished off.
It came down to some beat up mechs versus a somewhat fresh Timberwolf.
So our last guy dies with what looked like a tick on the last enemy bunker - and then there was the victory screen, which I am still scratching my head about.

#20 martian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,576 posts

Posted 18 September 2020 - 11:11 AM

View PostLanzman, on 18 September 2020 - 07:33 AM, said:

Well, the "design intent" was variety. That every QP match is still basically Skirmish kind of highlights one of PGI's failures.

This exactly.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users