808 replies to this topic

[Dlardrageth]

How about the mode "permarespawn clusterf***"? A persistent arena-like map, free-for-all slugfest where you can enter and leave at will. You get perma-respawn, unlimited ammo, and naturally at least 10 times as many XP and C-bills as in all other game modes. Only real limit would be that you get forcefully kicked after 10+ minutes inactivity as chances are, you fell asleep after 10+ hours of permarespawn... "goodness". Additionally this preferred game mode should always have at least half of the total server capacity allocated to it. And as soon as possible, a console port for this game mode should be developed so all like-minded can join up there.

Seriously, I kinda love this idea, would mean all the people who like this kind of stuff will hang out there. And I won't have to bother at all with them elsewhere.

Edit: And that was my 1000th post on these forums? Oh the humanity...

Edited by Dlardrageth, 12 March 2012 - 08:48 PM.

[FinnMcKool]

but really ? death match would get old, really really old and very fast.

But whats wrong with a little day dreaming about possibility's

[Anvil Dragon]

Defend the royal: One mech has a Stiener royal wanted for war crimes. Others are here to take him alive. Seems he doesn't want to go.

One group is protecting a few trucks in route and others are here to take the cargo. Trucks go boom everyone looses.

A group of mercs lost their first dropship. Now they have to get to the new site for pickup in x amount of time. Another group is trying to stop them.

Locate the hidden base (that may have lost-tech) before others find it.

Rescue the downed pilot, seems his family is very well connected.

[Fooooo]

A few of the suggested game modes imo would be best suited to Solaris style "arenas" which would be cool if eventually that came.....

I could see some sort of CTF in a Solaris arena working.

I haven't read any storys about any CTF games on solaris but to me it seems like a feasible spectator sport for the fictional universe alongside the normal tournys.

As for a game mode...... most I can think of have been said.

How about a Conquest style mode for Merc corp battles where there are

- 3 maps, (2 being maps with bases on them.)

- The match starts on the "middle" map ( so say map 1 has base A , map 3 has base B... we start at map 2. )

eg.... 1B - 2 - 3B


So basically, first match, if your team wins you push forward to the next map containing the enemys base, be it a rival merc corps HQ on a planet or whatever, if you lose they push to your base....if you push them off your base it goes back to the middle map etc etc until someone takes a base.

All of these being seperate matches one after the other, so like a series of normal matches you need to repair , reload etc after each battle.

Before the matches start each of the merc corp leaders or someone with authority to do so must preset their teams for each map. (middle and base)

Would probably work best as a NR setup as 3 drops for the middle and base maps might mean some matches would go on for hours before someone wins.

Pretty similar to another idea tho........

Edited by Foòóoo, 13 March 2012 - 01:30 AM.

[Titus Pullo XIII]

"Ring around a rosie, a pocket full of posies. Ashes, ashes we all go BOOM!"

Or if you're a member of the Sternguard (Old Man Brigade)--

"Ring around a rosie, a pocket full of posies. Ashes, ashes we all suffer a catastrophic containment failure! Five seconds to minimum safe distance!"


-- Delivered in a 'stern' manner -- The very thought of a Lyran Scout Detachment dancing around the posie pole with bright pink and purple streamers is shameful! Though I concede I never believed an Atlas might be so nimble. Kick up those heels boys!

Edited by Titus Pullo XIII, 13 March 2012 - 03:06 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

Bluey, on 12 March 2012 - 03:12 PM, said:

The game mod in my mind
Beachhead from small mech carrying boats.Attackers are 12 lights or mediums vs 6 heavies or assaults defenders.Goal is capture inland HQ building which is away from beach so that lights can utilize their speed agaisnt defenders.


http://animestream.t...es-episode-001/
Please watch following link its a mech anime called votoms shown mechs and beach head could be very cool.

MaddMaxx You dont have to have respawn to have game mod.Im just like no ticket for simulations.

Maps could be quite look like WW2 dday style.Defenders on high ground and hills and attackers be on open beach with little or no cover even debries can be used as cover.

I wasn't necessarily advocating re-spawn. If it is 8 v 8 or 12 v 12 one Team only needs 3 Mechs (1 per base) to have the tickets drain while the other fight or Guard. Annihilation of the enemy force outright, always achieves Victory. Ticket countdown just prevents the Campers from doing their thing with a hope to win.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 13 March 2012 - 09:40 AM.

[Sideslip]

Aegis Kleais™, on 12 March 2012 - 02:06 PM, said:

MWO is starting with 2 game modes: Team Deathmatch and Dropship. So let's suggest others and their implementation.

I'll refer you to my previous thread

http://mwomercs.com/...d-multi-player/


There should be a mode (Campain mode maybe) that has a similar feel to a single player campain with proper objectives that make it feel like there is a reason to be fighting there. It would be almost like a CO-OP mode if the game had a single player, only that players would be on both sides.

[Gunslinger2]

I like the idea of a campaign mode as well, might take a bit of work but whats wrong with having the choice of worlds to attack?
If we're "choosing sides" so to speak, then if your a "Davion" and one of you worlds is attacked wouldnt it be expected that you might have to respond in either a defence, or liberating role?
Granted these type of campaign battles would be a bit longer than the 30 min games we have now, but the realism would be well worth the effort.

Guns

[The Hot Phoenix]

I have no idea if this have been said, but if i get this right, you have 3 tickets in the drop ship mode. would it be an idea if you had to eject if you wanted to use the other tickets? that would mean if you had 5% of life, you would need to eject to save you own a**. otherwise, if you got flanked, you would not have a chance to eject.

just throwing it out. my first post here and from denmark. im looking forward to this game and i loved the old one.

[Outlaw2]

The problem with other types of game modes in MW games is that they never are as interesting as the best game mode of all imo : destroying the other sides mechs. Unlike a typical FPS game, mechs take a lot more abuse before going down...which makes taking down a mech as efficiently as possible a game of sorts all on its own. I played a lot of objective based maps in NBT, and they always felt pretty lame. I know the NBT-sunder guys will disagree with, but they played in unlimited respawn matches.

Within unlimited respawn matches I think objectives that are the focal point of the match work just fine.... since people are going to be constantly dying and coming back to finish that object (plus without it respawn games are kinda dull IMO). However in NR matches once you're dead, you're gone and who cares what the objective had you do. Plus you don't really need objectives taking focus from the match. They just get in the way, since killing a mech in NR is its own objective...and a very rewarding and satisfying objective I might add. The drop ship limited respawn could possibly benefit from objectives since its somewhere in the middle.

I think any game mode with alternate objectives for NR needs to be based around the idea that destroying the other sides mechs is THE main objective ...and any other objectives play a secondary role ....acting as a supplement to the main NR gameplay.

Edited by =Outlaw=, 13 March 2012 - 04:07 PM.

[MaddMaxx]

The Hot Phoenix, on 13 March 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

I have no idea if this have been said, but if i get this right, you have 3 tickets in the drop ship mode. would it be an idea if you had to eject if you wanted to use the other tickets? that would mean if you had 5% of life, you would need to eject to save you own a**. otherwise, if you got flanked, you would not have a chance to eject.

just throwing it out. my first post here and from denmark. im looking forward to this game and i loved the old one.

The current wording would seem to indicate that you have a Dropship with 4 Mechs. You drop 1 and then you have 3 more before your game ends, that round. How points or rewards are rewarded are yet to be released.

[Belisarius1]

=Outlaw=, on 13 March 2012 - 03:25 PM, said:

The problem with other types of game modes in MW games is that they never are as interesting as the best game mode of all imo : destroying the other sides mechs. Unlike a typical FPS game, mechs take a lot more abuse before going down...which makes taking down a mech as efficiently as possible a game of sorts all on its own. I played a lot of objective based maps in NBT, and they always felt pretty lame. I know the NBT-sunder guys will disagree with, but they played in unlimited respawn matches.

Within unlimited respawn matches I think objectives that are the focal point of the match work just fine.... since people are going to be constantly dying and coming back to finish that object (plus without it respawn games are kinda dull IMO). However in NR matches once you're dead, you're gone and who cares what the objective had you do. Plus you don't really need objectives taking focus from the match. They just get in the way, since killing a mech in NR is its own objective...and a very rewarding and satisfying objective I might add. The drop ship limited respawn could possibly benefit from objectives since its somewhere in the middle.

I think any game mode with alternate objectives for NR needs to be based around the idea that destroying the other sides mechs is THE main objective ...and any other objectives play a secondary role ....acting as a supplement to the main NR gameplay.

NR had plenty of flaws. I loved it, but it can be improved.

The biggest weakness in an objective which is solely "kill the other guys" is that it creates an impasse. If one team chooses, from the start, to adopt an unassailable position and never budge, there are plenty of compositional mismatches which mean the other team has to either bite the bullet and put themselves at a disadvantage just to end the match, or sit out the most boring hour of their lives in safety. That fact is cripplingly detrimental to gameplay when it gets abused.

Most leagues dealt with the problem through honour systems and subjective admin oversight regarding "camping." To the players' and admins' credit, that mostly worked. But a system like that can't function in something as large-scale and quick-match based as MWO seems to be.

Stalker started a thread a few years ago where he talked about this, and we spent a while discussing alternatives. I think in the end he wanted some kind of "move to nav c and declare; if you stay in the open and they don't come out of hiding, you win" system, but that's almost as open to abuse as camping itself.

I don't have an answer off the top of my head, but the key thing, as you said, is to make sure the objectives point players towards each other, not the objectives themselves, but also that they do so with enough force to prevent camping.

Edited by Belisarius†, 13 March 2012 - 06:09 PM.

[Dlardrageth]

One main issue with lack of objectives in NR matches would be role diversity though. It's nice and well for the well-armed pilot in his Assault Mech i.e. to tell the guy in the Ostscout he can play spotter and "nice scout" and what not, but with the armament that light Mech has (not), a lack of secondary/additional objectives would make gameplay unattractive bordering on boring for him. It is understandable to be perfectly content with a mere slugfest as main goal in a NR battle if you are the proverbial "heavy hitter", but it leaves a lot wanting for other Mech types/roles.

I think a Solaris-like setup might be more suited for those "kill only" types of battles, would fit the background/lore and not unnecessarily limit/restrict the NR mode globally too much. After all, we don't want yet another "AssaultMechWarrior" game, do we?

Edited by Dlardrageth, 13 March 2012 - 06:42 PM.

[Harkonnen Vladimir]

what about some assault/defend base mode? four mixed lances without repairbay attacking two assault lances with repairbay and some defensive building (LRM, laser turrets,...) in large base with multiple target objectives (repairbay, orbital command,turret control, relay station, airfield...) attackers would have advantage in numbers and have to decide where to attack, where to make diversion attack and large area to outmaneuver enemy. defenders would have to patrol inside the base to cover multiple entry points, they would have advantage in tonage and repairbay, defensive buildings (enemy can/will destroy turret control, perfect role for fast light/medium mech with jumpjets) but lacking in numbers, could be PvP or PvE
based on mission from mechcommander

pls dont sit on team deathmatch like in WoT, it is killing that game, mainly when you drive top tank and your team doesnt support you, this is sickness of public games, team play can not be achieved in random game
put as many different modes as you can, I would like to see some sort of campaign mode to remind me old times MW games

Edited by HarkonenSVK, 13 March 2012 - 07:12 PM.

[wwiiogre]

Have the computer admin program automatically place 1, 2 or 3 new objectives once a match has stalemated for more than 3-5 minutes with neither side moving or shooting at each other. Now the kicker, each side gets different objective map markers that are actually 500 meters farther towards the enemy. So Company A has to move West for 1.5 kilometers and Enemy B has to move 1.5 Kilometers East but they are actually just 1.2 Kilometers away from each other. Meaning to capture their own objective they will have to pass thru the enemy and will still remain insight of the enemy even after capturing new objective.

The point is, to make sure a game does not stagnate, each team should always have different objectives and they should be close enough to each other that they will have to fight over them. The great thing about hidden objectives is the other team does not know what you are fighting for, just that they want whats pretty close to their own objective and they can't win while your mechs are near. This guarantees conflict. But it also guarantees tactical decisions matter. Especially if teams are camping sites and not fighting, have computer admin drop two new objectives for each side such that they will have to cross paths to get to them.

It is the only way you stop camping, besides with hidden objectives and dynamic admin giving new objectives part way thru a battle, you can almost always up the ante. Each side starts with one or two objectives, Give each objective a time limit. At a certain time then give new objectives or completely change objectives. Each team gets points or xp or cbills based on how well they completed first objective, then new objective starts based on where each team is, how well they completed primary objectives, etc. A dynamic flow, with good scripting say Commander (NPC) comes on line and uploads new instructions, then you got to go with the flow.

To me, this would be near story mode, but can be pulled off rather easily. With some randomness thrown in, it will feel like the chaos of battle, where things change on the fly. The best team at improvising could pull a win from a defeat, or a draw from a loss. Plus it would feel more like the fiction. Kind of having a second game but within the first game.

Just kind of rambling trying to get the idea out there, not a programmer but could see this as a branching tree based on how each side has accomplished initial objectives or just you get a secondary objective at 10 minutes into the battle or after completing first objective. Defenders might have the order to defend three spots. While attacker might only have initial order to attack just two spots. Thus forcing the defenders to spread out and then counter attack when attackers are spotted. This will give an attack counter attack feel to missions. Then having the attackers given the objective of the third spot at x amount of time into the mission. Forcing commanders to improvise. Defenders with good fast recon can try to spot the vector of the attackers and intentions and relay to slower heavier mechs that then start moving towards where the attacker is coming from.

just some thoughts of what I would like to see, forcing a more dynamic combat system tactically and strategically, plus forcing decisions on the fly by each team. I hate stalemates and draws and camping. Anything that can end camping and circle strafing assaults is a plus.

chris

[Erie]

Hello all, I'm new at this but have been a huge mechwarrior fan well since I had a 286.

I was a bit upset that they are changing the game from PVE to PvP, but I've decided to make the best of it and thought up plenty of ideas. I've always like a challange of wit, so the first thing I think of would be stronghold siege and attack witch leads to idea #1.

1. A teared game of city or strong hold attack and defense. Start off with the defense of a munition depot, 4 walls a gate 4 missle turrets and say 2 lances of light mechs. Vs 2 mediam to heavy lances of mechs. Have a scaleing scenarios where its harder to attack and easier to defend, till you get to a fortress city with 3 lances of mech 2 longtoms and a list of missile turrets to deffend. The defenders would start with the easiest to defend and work to the harder to defend. defending teams will be scored on time defended and total amount of resourses used. Attacking teams will be scored on time to defeat defenders and resources then maybe the skill of finding weak points " I need to work on scoring Ideas, I know" As a fan of all things mech I would like to see about the incorperation of the use of inteligence officers like the game play in mechcommander. Having intel and working like a group will make this scenario better. Collecting info on weak defensive points and seting up temp nav point to complete the objective faster would be great. The defending mech commander can operate the missile turrets, long toms and help defending mechs get in the fight fast. " maybe an air support opion would be cool." "Or heck lets us play and an areo jock or tanker / infantry or elemental."

limitaions to this senerio would be to nerf the defenders mech tonage and amount of static defence wepons and ammo.

more things to come I would love some input on this Idea and any other Idea I come up with in hope that one day I could play them against you.

Erie

"good bad I'm the one with the gun"

[Kaemon]

As much as 'Team America' death match begins to wear on me, finding alternative game modes that fit within similar parameters (time, role specialization, environments) is tough.

I find myself trying to hit 3 things with alternative game modes to make them useful:

• They should be instructive in at least 1 (preferably more) specialized role or function
  
• They should work for all types/styles of mechs equally
  
• They should reward team work, and while some parts may require individual actions, you should not be able to win solely on 1 player's actions.

1. Recon, Relay, Rampage - 'Scout' mech must stay close enough to objective to gather intel via captured transmissions, then move to another objective to relay it to dropship, which then allows the full contingent to drop and begin to take a location objective. Scout then is tasked with taking out NPC defenses (troops, tanks/light vehicles) and stationary LRM's. Basically the chance to mow down some infantry and work the ECM stuff (which is always fun).

2. King of the Hill (Tourney) - Random draw lance vs lance EACH ROUND, winners continue, losers go into consolation bracket (double elimination and you're out). This is an easy way for new players to meet a lot of people quickly, and not a bad way to keep an eye out for new recruits.

3. Battleship - Timed map to find enemy 'battleships', then hit via Arty (off map resource). Timer and size of map (plus enemy) makes multiple UAV usage and commander coordination a must (this is a 'tutorial' style game play for the commander/scout roles).

4. Connect 4 (or 6) - Multiple objectives (laid out in a grid pattern) 6 objectives in a row must be taken (any direction), objective must be held by at least 1 mech. Time limit unlimited respawns (so all the 'respawn, boo!' people can throw their tomatoes at this one now).

5. Trench Run - Good old fashioned rush to a objective through the gauntlet (mounted NPC turrets), best time and amount of damage done, wins.

Edited by Kaemon, 13 March 2012 - 07:57 PM.

[guybrarian]

An initial thought I had today was for a longer, perhaps scenario-based games.

Dropship

The initial idea behind Dropship was that I thought while deathmatch would be cool, a more scenario-driven game style might be fun. The defender would be invaders, having dropped in and landed a Union-class dropship to help stake their claim. The attackers would be the planetary defense forces, who must drive the invaders from their home. I'd see it as starting off as a recon by the attackers. The attacking force must recon, say, 3-4 points around the drop ship, and destroy some basic encampments that are already being set up. There would be automated defenses set up, as well as the defenders trying to stall the attackers. I'm unsure as how respawns/new mechs would balance for both teams.

After the recon, the Big Battle would begin. The attackers would have to, gradually, destroy the Dropship, while taking fire from its defenses, as well as weathering the fire of enemy mechs. Once the Dropship was destroyed, the attackers would get a victory. If one side runs out of mechs, that side loses. If the attackers run out of time, they would also lose.

Balancing and the like, I'm not sure about, though the Defenders seem to start off in a fortuitous position, especially considering the backup they get. Perhaps a numbers advantage by the attackers? Maybe the attackers get more mechs to choose from?

It was a thought that popped into my head, and I could see it being an interesting scenario with a lot of teamplay, coordination, and roles.

Edited by guybrarian, 13 March 2012 - 08:02 PM.

[Belisarius1]

Dlardrageth, on 13 March 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

One main issue with lack of objectives in NR matches would be role diversity though. It's nice and well for the well-armed pilot in his Assault Mech i.e. to tell the guy in the Ostscout he can play spotter and "nice scout" and what not, but with the armament that light Mech has (not), a lack of secondary/additional objectives would make gameplay unattractive bordering on boring for him. It is understandable to be perfectly content with a mere slugfest as main goal in a NR battle if you are the proverbial "heavy hitter", but it leaves a lot wanting for other Mech types/roles.

I think a Solaris-like setup might be more suited for those "kill only" types of battles, would fit the background/lore and not unnecessarily limit/restrict the NR mode globally too much. After all, we don't want yet another "AssaultMechWarrior" game, do we?

While I think we see eye to eye on a fair few points, I feel like you don't really know what NR looks like in practice. Scouts are possibly the most important unit on the battlefield in a gametype won and lost by out-maneuvering your opponent's lance. You can't do that if you don't know where they are, and you unfortunately also can't do that on a cramped solaris-style map.

wwiiogre, on 13 March 2012 - 07:06 PM, said:

The point is, to make sure a game does not stagnate, each team should always have different objectives and they should be close enough to each other that they will have to fight over them. The great thing about hidden objectives is the other team does not know what you are fighting for, just that they want whats pretty close to their own objective and they can't win while your mechs are near. This guarantees conflict. But it also guarantees tactical decisions matter. Especially if teams are camping sites and not fighting, have computer admin drop two new objectives for each side such that they will have to cross paths to get to them.

I agree, something like that is what I think would have to be done. But you have to be careful, because if they're completely random you risk having your one turn up a really stupid place, but if they aren't random, the system can be solved and abused. Thus, you permit sitations in which a team that understands the objective spawns can make their opponents' one turn up in a really stupid place. Hiding them only delays this, it doesn't fix it.

The key, I think, is to have a lot of thought and attention go into the map, and build a limited number of carefully chosen but unpredictable and non-intrusive objectives into specific locations that are hard to abuse. It also helps immensely to give teams a choice of more than one objective, because then OpFor can't just camp where they know you are going to go.

Edited by Belisarius†, 13 March 2012 - 08:54 PM.

[Dlardrageth]

Belisarius†, on 13 March 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

While I think we see eye to eye on a fair few points, I feel like you don't really know what NR looks like in practice. Scouts are possibly the most important unit on the battlefield in a gametype won and lost by out-maneuvering your opponent's lance. You can't do that if you don't know where they are, and you unfortunately also can't do that on a cramped solaris-style map.

Indeed. Take that Ostscout Mech from my example, why would I really bother fielding that one in a Solaris match (apart from possibly being a glutton for punishment)? I wasn't so much referring to you as to another prior post, let me quote:

Quote

[...]
However in NR matches once you're dead, you're gone and who cares what the objective had you do. Plus you don't really need objectives taking focus from the match. They just get in the way, since killing a mech in NR is its own objective...and a very rewarding and satisfying objective I might add.[...]

The role I can possibly see for me in an Ostscout in that kind of NR match sounds utterly boring. Running around and spotting enemy Mechs occasionally. Right, sounds thrilling. Not likely I'd even fire my one MedLas, as there's no secondary static objective (infantry, static defence, enemy encampment, whatever) where that might be useful. So I can use my advanced sensor system to report spotted enemies and then just run off. Again and again. Instead of e.g. getting to an enemy base and play "artillery spotter" for my commander, For the secondary objective "you don't really need". Or using my speed to take out unarmed comm beacons quickly (which I could with even only one MedLas) that jam our unit's capability to call in air-/artillery strike. For the secondary objective "you don't really need". Etc.

I could quote more examples, but let's leave it at these. Now you might claim just "running around" and spotting/reporting enemies is fine. It might be to some degree. But it is still limiting the capabilities of me in my Mech. Just because someone else in a Mech which might be too slow to do any of these jobs thinks "you don't really need" them. And let's talk about reward structure. Unless you straightaway decree that damage/kills/hits inflicted on enemies will have no influence/relevance whatsoever on XP/monetary/salvage rewards, where does that leave me in my Ostscout? Yep, exactly, holding the short end of the stick again.

Why would I even bother actively playing in that case? Could as well go AfK after joining the match in a location where I have good visuals of the surrounding landscape. Thus by making the whole NR mode rather unattractive for me in my scout Mech, by marginalizing my role's
potential, we land exactly where we have been once before again - Assault Mechs Online. Thrilling.

Could as well play a scout tank on WoT in that case, at least there I can occasionally kill enemy artillery additionally. Would be more interesting than what someone envisins for MWO NR mode. Considering how low an opinion I meanwhile hold of that game, that is saying quite much. Oh yeah, WoT is NR only, BTW, and looking at my stats there I should have some knowledge "what NR looks like in practice", thank you very much.

Edited by Dlardrageth, 13 March 2012 - 08:54 PM.