5 replies to this topic

[Kudzu]

We've been told that role warfare will make a mixed lance setup more combat effective than an all-Atlas lance, and I hope this holds true once we get our hands on the game, but throughout the Battletech lore most companies (12 mechs) were organized into specialized lances rather than as mixed bags. A typical company might contain a Recon lance (scout mechs like the Raven and Jenner), a Fire Support lance (longer ranged mechs like the Catapult and Awesome), and a Battle lance (brawlers like Hunchback and Atlas).

Being grouped by specialization tends to make organizing on the battlefield a bit more simple (Battle lance goes to coordinate X rather than mechs 1 and 2 from lance one, mech 4 from lance two, and mech 3 from lance three go to coordinate X) and by grouping mechs with similar speeds you don't have to worry about getting spread out from your lancemates as much.

So my questions to the community are these: Should we be able to organize on a company level rather than on the lance level and still get the same benefits? Should things like NARC missles, TAG, Beagle probes, etc be shared throughout the company or will that take away from the advantages of a mixed lance formation too much?

Bear in mind you wouldn't have to change your line-up, just how you are organized. You would end up going from looking like the first company to the second company:

Lance 1
Jenner
Hunchback
Dragon
Awesome

Lance 2
Raven
Centurion
Catapult
Atlas

Lance 3
Commando
Hunchback
Dragon
Catapult


Recon Lance
Jenner
Raven
Commando
Dragon

Fire Lance
Awesome
Catapult
Catapult
Dragon

Battle Lance
Hunchback
Hunchback
Centurion
Atlas


Same mechs, same roles being filled, the only difference is who your lancemates are.


(Edit for layout issues)

Edited by Kudzu, 02 May 2012 - 11:34 PM.

[Cruiser]

I honestly cant see a group of random people being able to coordinate the combat of 3 lances consisting of a specialized mech type in each lance. It's simply too much to ask of people.

Keeping a lance diversed and operating on a semi-autonomous level is probably the best that can be hoped for at the moment, and even that I don't have high hopes for will go very smooth unless the lance consists of people that already know eachother. But who knows, I might be surprised. I'm just basing my expectations of peoples behavior on games like World of tanks, BF3 and TF2 etc.

[Kudzu]

Cruiser, on 02 May 2012 - 11:36 PM, said:

I honestly cant see a group of random people being able to coordinate the combat of 3 lances consisting of a specialized mech type in each lance. It's simply too much to ask of people.

Keeping a lance diversed and operating on a semi-autonomous level is probably the best that can be hoped for at the moment, and even that I don't have high hopes for will go very smooth unless the lance consists of people that already know eachother. But who knows, I might be surprised. I'm just basing my expectations of peoples behavior on games like World of tanks, BF3 and TF2 etc.

This was actually more aimed at organized play rather than pub matches.

[pursang]

I think it will really depend from game to game. Allow me to give an example from a recent F2P game - Tribes: Ascend. Now in your average PUG game roles will be relatively be split evenly amongst players on a team. The menu system shows how many people are playing a certain class/role and that allows players to change their class/role to fill in a need i.e. if your team is low on base defense a player can see that and roll a technician accordingly. On the flip side of that, you'll have PUGs where everybody just goes and chooses whatever class they want (i.e. six + pathfinders), which leads to that PUG getting torn apart because they have no heavy firepower/defense.

It really is a balancing act, and something I think that the community itself will sort out on its own. So yes, you should be able to organize on the team/company level - as well as on the individual lance level.

Edited by pursang, 02 May 2012 - 11:47 PM.

[osito]

I think we will see a more balanced company level, and keep lances set up in specialization. Having a scout mech be part of a lance were most of them having a movement curve of 4/6 or 3/5 is a horrible idea. You won't be able to get proper use out of any of them. Yet having a fire support lance working closely with a scout lance will prove deadly with called in indirect fire missions.

[Hakija]

pursang, on 02 May 2012 - 11:44 PM, said:

I think it will really depend from game to game. Allow me to give an example from a recent F2P game - Tribes: Ascend. Now in your average PUG game roles will be relatively be split evenly amongst players on a team. The menu system shows how many people are playing a certain class/role and that allows players to change their class/role to fill in a need i.e. if your team is low on base defense a player can see that and roll a technician accordingly. On the flip side of that, you'll have PUGs where everybody just goes and chooses whatever class they want (i.e. six + pathfinders), which leads to that PUG getting torn apart because they have no heavy firepower/defense.

It really is a balancing act, and something I think that the community itself will sort out on its own. So yes, you should be able to organize on the team/company level - as well as on the individual lance level.

keep in mind that in any team game, there are some people who just can't handle certain roles. You have some that don't have the patience for scouting or defence, and others that don't have the multitasking ability for pitched battles.

I expect that when playing without an organized team, every once in while you'll see a group that meshes well, but we'll more often see a very chaotic style of battle. Definitely be looking at a team myself.

Edited by Hakiyah, 03 May 2012 - 12:13 PM.