"conquest Mode" Speculation
#1
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:06 PM
Our current "Assault" game mode is basicly a "Deathmatch" but has equal capture points for teams to try to score a "touchdown" with if it looks like an outright slugfest with the enemy will end badly for them. What do you guys think "Conquest" mode will be like?
#2
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:09 PM
#3
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:11 PM
Redshift2k5, on 11 December 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:
How is that going to work with no respawns? I'm just not seeing it. Probably going to be a singular flag or base in the middle of the map that you have to capture and hold.
Edited by Windies, 11 December 2012 - 03:11 PM.
#4
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:13 PM
It will be a change and something that will probably feed into Dropship modes
1 more week
#5
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:15 PM
#6
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:15 PM
#7
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:17 PM
Not because "hurrrrrrrr Call of doody", but because it would make it more than superficially different from Assault mode.
If either game mode can be won by simply facerolling the enemy team, what's the point in adding different side objectives?
Edited by Vlad Ward, 11 December 2012 - 03:17 PM.
#8
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:17 PM
... Piranha plans to add a Conquest mode, a match setting that combines a ticket system (reduce the enemy's ticket count to zero to win), capture points, and armed, functional bases. ... "You have to disable or take over a portion of a base, or destroy part of the base, in order to get those tickets to count down. It's a bit more involved, it has a little bit more strategy, and also requires player coordination".
It, however, goes on to mention a lot of other things being involved in Conquest, like turrets and drones that are controlled by modules, and it says we'd have the dropship stuff before Conquest.
So basically, same as usual ... wait and see what fraction of what they promised we end up with
#9
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:22 PM
I'd like to say that Lights would benefit from being able to quickly capture bases, but unable to defend them, but with the lag being how it is, that really isn't the case. If this requires sequential base assault and then capture/hold to reduce tickets at a faster rate to 0 then I can see teams just rolling in nothing BUT lights.
#10
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:40 PM
Lin Shai, on 11 December 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:
... Piranha plans to add a Conquest mode, a match setting that combines a ticket system (reduce the enemy's ticket count to zero to win), capture points, and armed, functional bases. ... "You have to disable or take over a portion of a base, or destroy part of the base, in order to get those tickets to count down. It's a bit more involved, it has a little bit more strategy, and also requires player coordination".
It, however, goes on to mention a lot of other things being involved in Conquest, like turrets and drones that are controlled by modules, and it says we'd have the dropship stuff before Conquest.
So basically, same as usual ... wait and see what fraction of what they promised we end up with
Oh cool, that sounds interesting because while multiple capture points make speedy scouts very important, it sounds like being able to be able to do damage (to bases, not just to the bad guys) will still be very important too.
#11
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:44 PM
Lin Shai, on 11 December 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:
... Piranha plans to add a Conquest mode, a match setting that combines a ticket system (reduce the enemy's ticket count to zero to win), capture points, and armed, functional bases. ... "You have to disable or take over a portion of a base, or destroy part of the base, in order to get those tickets to count down. It's a bit more involved, it has a little bit more strategy, and also requires player coordination".
It, however, goes on to mention a lot of other things being involved in Conquest, like turrets and drones that are controlled by modules, and it says we'd have the dropship stuff before Conquest.
So basically, same as usual ... wait and see what fraction of what they promised we end up with
I'm not holding my breath. Cautiously optimistic, maybe. But, PGI is really good at delivering that crushing disappointment, so I'll be realistic and expect that.
#12
Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:49 PM
#13
Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:48 PM
#14
Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:37 PM
Davion5150, on 11 December 2012 - 04:48 PM, said:
Don't forget the festive pineapples.
#15
Posted 12 December 2012 - 08:50 AM
Vlad Ward, on 11 December 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:
Not because "hurrrrrrrr Call of doody", but because it would make it more than superficially different from Assault mode.
If either game mode can be won by simply facerolling the enemy team, what's the point in adding different side objectives?
That depends. If the only way to score is to hold a 'capture ponit' for x amount of time, then it's possible for you to lose while still wiping out the enemy. If you don't have enough time left on the clock to out-score them after they're all dead, they still win. Sure, it's a pyrric victory, but that'd be cool too. I could see mechs killed/damage done used as a tie-breaker in the case of an even score, however.
#16
Posted 12 December 2012 - 08:54 AM
#17
Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:29 AM
Without a respawn the match will end quickly.
This in time will become boring to many and the complaints will start flying again.
I believe the devs are doing thier best to give us a great game. It is up to us the community to make and do the best with it. I don't believe I need to post examples of this meaning.
The title did say speculation so hopefuly I'm wrong.
Edited by BLUPRNT, 12 December 2012 - 09:42 AM.
#18
Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:32 AM
#19
Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:34 PM
PurpleNinja, on 12 December 2012 - 08:54 AM, said:
Pretty sure you can choose modes while maps within modes are random. It was hinted at as part of one of Garth's posts regarding groups and matchmaking.
4 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users