229 replies to this topic

[Captain Midnight]

S3dition, pretty sure the auction system has nothing to do with saving lives and all the more to do with proving your honor by doing more than they can, with less than they have. It's totally an epeen thing as the clans were driven almost solely on epeen. The ONLY reason the clans lost to the IS was because they wouldn't stoop low like the IS would, same reason the british lost to the USA in the war of independence.

Team Deathmatch needs to be in this game because for one, why not? For two, is the only thing keeping this game from being an arms race is the fact that light mechs can steal the capture point? That isn't strategic depth, that's bad game design. There needs to be a reason in 8v8 TDM to bring something other than an atlas or else this game is in fact an arms race and it's just an arms race with window dressing.

Let's examine what capture squares provide currently. For one they allow a team to finish the game when the score is 7-0 and a commando is shutdown or running away faster than anyone can chase and you can just end it and win, that's a fair usage. For two it allows a pair of lights or something to do a diversion tactic while the main group advances, if you they don't pull some back they lose so it makes them split their force. A smart commander sends the right mech back, a dumb commander panics and his team crumbles beneath an assault, also fair enough. Third, it allows a team of 8 ECM ravens/cicadas to come up jenner alley and cap the base in under 15 seconds and farm cheesy c-bills, NOT OKAY.

The third example is why captures have GOT to go. The legitimate uses are faaaaar outweighed by the cheese uses. No one wins a game with a capture unless they've already won the game through combat or they are cheesing rushes with lights. Capture points are why the OPTIMAL strategy on many maps is 8xDDC configured to brawl and just literally not leaving the square. I think that strategy might be unbeatable, but I haven't ever encountered it because of how lame it is. Unfortunately that is the metagame we live in and it's a damn shame that the metagame is so bad that optimal play is so unfun that literally no one will actually play optimally.

A quick fix would be to put a hard limit on capture speed so that one mech of eight mechs capture at the exact same speed; this diminishes but still allows for all the strategic depth that option 1 and option 2 of captures provide, but it eliminates the cheese of option 3 entirely.

Edited by Captain Midnight, 15 December 2012 - 02:44 AM.

[Jadel Blade]

I can't understand this last post. Its seems to be a combination of arguments both for and against both capture and tdm.

Is that what its supposed to be?

[S3dition]

Captain Midnight, on 15 December 2012 - 02:41 AM, said:

S3dition, pretty sure the auction system has nothing to do with saving lives and all the more to do with proving your honor by doing more than they can, with less than they have. It's totally an epeen thing as the clans were driven almost solely on epeen. The ONLY reason the clans lost to the IS was because they wouldn't stoop low like the IS would, same reason the british lost to the USA in the war of independence.

Team Deathmatch needs to be in this game because for one, why not? For two, is the only thing keeping this game from being an arms race is the fact that light mechs can steal the capture point? That isn't strategic depth, that's bad game design. There needs to be a reason in 8v8 TDM to bring something other than an atlas or else this game is in fact an arms race and it's just an arms race with window dressing.

Let's examine what capture squares provide currently. For one they allow a team to finish the game when the score is 7-0 and a commando is shutdown or running away faster than anyone can chase and you can just end it and win, that's a fair usage. For two it allows a pair of lights or something to do a diversion tactic while the main group advances, if you they don't pull some back they lose so it makes them split their force. A smart commander sends the right mech back, a dumb commander panics and his team crumbles beneath an assault, also fair enough. Third, it allows a team of 8 ECM ravens/cicadas to come up jenner alley and cap the base in under 15 seconds and farm cheesy c-bills, NOT OKAY.

The third example is why captures have GOT to go. The legitimate uses are faaaaar outweighed by the cheese uses. No one wins a game with a capture unless they've already won the game through combat or they are cheesing rushes with lights. Capture points are why the OPTIMAL strategy on many maps is 8xDDC configured to brawl and just literally not leaving the square. I think that strategy might be unbeatable, but I haven't ever encountered it because of how lame it is. Unfortunately that is the metagame we live in and it's a damn shame that the metagame is so bad that optimal play is so unfun that literally no one will actually play optimally.

A quick fix would be to put a hard limit on capture speed so that one mech of eight mechs capture at the exact same speed; this diminishes but still allows for all the strategic depth that option 1 and option 2 of captures provide, but it eliminates the cheese of option 3 entirely.

Do not make this an issue between US Colonials vs British Regular and their war crimes. Just please refrain from this, period.

Yes, it was about saving lives, equipment, and industry. Let me get you the link:

Quote

Over the next several centuries, the Clans are described as gradually increasing in strength, colonizing new worlds, and developing new technologies. Nevertheless, their environment remains depicted as a harsh one. The fictional "Kerensky Cluster", which formed the core of their space, is many jumps worth of jump drive travel from the Inner Sphere, and is represented as being totally cut off from it. Depicted as a means to reduce collateral damage to their fragile and limited infrastructure, the Clans soon developed rules of ritualized combat and warfare to avoid damaging vital resources and harming civilians. These rules are a key feature of BattleTech lore. Nevertheless, partly as a result of the Clan breeding program, these rules were paired with a ruthless level of martial training, resulting in both an extremely warlike culture and superbly capable warriors. In year 3049 of the BattleTech timeline, the Clans are depicted as finally returning to conquer the Inner Sphere after two and a half centuries of expansion, preparation, and planning.

The Clans are not stupid, they understand that honor means nothing if you've destroyed everything you're fighting to gain. Every battle for them is over an objective that is critical to survival.

Edited by S3dition, 15 December 2012 - 04:28 AM.

[Sifright]

Jadel Blade, on 15 December 2012 - 04:14 AM, said:

I can't understand this last post. Its seems to be a combination of arguments both for and against both capture and tdm.

Is that what its supposed to be?

Yes, it's called a comparative analysis which explains or attempts to explain the effects of certain facets of the mechanics involved.

You are to draw your own conclusion from the information provided to you.

S3dition, on 15 December 2012 - 04:27 AM, said:

The Clans are not stupid, they understand that honor means nothing if you've destroyed everything you're fighting to gain. Every battle for them is over an objective that is critical to survival.

That's nice darling, We aren't clanners though we are Innersphere pilots.

You know the same IS that at one point nuked everything into dust?

Total war is the name of the game in the IS

[Joseph Mallan]

Teralitha, on 15 December 2012 - 12:32 AM, said:

Well you can keep your objective based games, the rest of us want TDM now. Alot of players find base capping boring as hell.

No sir. the rest of us do not want TDM. You made a faulty generalization. If I wanted that i think i'd just go play that other game.

[Sifright]

Joseph Mallan, on 15 December 2012 - 04:29 AM, said:

No sir. the rest of us do not want TDM. You made a faulty generalization. If I wanted that i think i'd just go play that other game.

base capping IS boring as hell.

I don't see how you can argue against that.

Personally I'm not playing so I can run to cap point and win with out pew pewing at enemy mechs.

[Captain Midnight]

Sifright, on 15 December 2012 - 04:29 AM, said:

That's nice darling, We aren't clanners though we are Innersphere pilots.

You know the same IS that at one point nuked everything into dust?

Total war is the name of the game in the IS

True that. The canon states that the nuclear holocaust was so vast and widespread that microprocessors NO LONGER EXIST. That's right folks, the PCs we use today are lostech. Tell me morrreeee about how canon is the right way to balance this game guys! tell me all about it!

I know Joseph here served in the marines ostensibly, and he always goes off about how this game ought to mimic his service except with a mouse and a keyboard and a marine sized brain in mind, let's hear what the rest of you have to say :-)

Edited by Captain Midnight, 15 December 2012 - 04:33 AM.

[S3dition]

Sifright, on 15 December 2012 - 04:29 AM, said:

Yes, it's called a comparative analysis which explains or attempts to explain the effects of certain facets of the mechanics involved.

You are to draw your own conclusion from the information provided to you.



That's nice darling, We aren't clanners though we are Innersphere pilots.

You know the same IS that at one point nuked everything into dust?

Total war is the name of the game in the IS

Nukes != Thoughtless Warfare. Yes, the IS is more brutal than the clans. Yes they prefer asymetrical warfare. But you STILL have logic to deal with. Why would you send 5,000 soldiers to blow up a desalination plant that you need to keep said 5,000 soldiers alive? That makes absolutely no sense. Even battles fought during the dark ages shied away from the hollywood "battle on the grassy flat lands." Instead, battles were fought over towns and castles. Why kill half your forces for a small plot of nothing in the middle of nowhere when you could go around the enemy and take their castle?

History itself proves TDM to be nothing more than superfluous "quake 1 era" video game material.

[Sifright]

S3dition, on 15 December 2012 - 04:35 AM, said:

Nukes != Thoughtless Warfare. Yes, the IS is more brutal than the clans. Yes they prefer asymetrical warfare. But you STILL have logic to deal with. Why would you send 5,000 soldiers to blow up a desalination plant that you need to keep said 5,000 soldiers alive? That makes absolutely no sense. Even battles fought during the dark ages shied away from the hollywood "battle on the grassy flat lands." Instead, battles were fought over towns and castles. Why kill half your forces for a small plot of nothing in the middle of nowhere when you could go around the enemy and take their castle?

History itself proves TDM to be nothing more than superfluous "quake 1 era" video game material.

Except at the moment what happens in assault is

defending force loses 80% of their forces.

Assaulting force loses 5% of forces.

Other 20% ran forward and stood in the assaulting forces forward supply base (didn't blow it up or anythng)

assaulting force gives up and surrenders.

Instead of massacring the remaining 20% that refuses to give up.


You keep trying to bring in 'real life' as a counter point with out applying the same principles symmetrically to both sides of the argument.

So yea of course i'm OBVIOUSLY wrong if you refuse to your own logic against the current implementation of the game.

TDM is closer to reality than Assault is at the moment.

Assault ignores the fact that one mech can't take and hold an objective.

[Captain Midnight]

Taking a castle by siege involved killing all the enemies defending it, not sieging for five turns and automatically winning. Objective based warfare is TDM where the winner holds the objective.

[S3dition]

Sifright, on 15 December 2012 - 04:42 AM, said:

Except at the moment what happens in assault is

defending force loses 80% of their forces.

Assaulting force loses 5% of forces.

Other 20% ran forward and stood in the assaulting forces forward supply base (didn't blow it up or anythng)

assaulting force gives up and surrenders.

Instead of massacring the remaining 20% that refuses to give up.


You keep trying to bring in 'real life' as a counter point with out applying the same principles symmetrically to both sides of the argument.

So yea of course i'm OBVIOUSLY wrong if you refuse to your own logic against the current implementation of the game.

TDM is closer to reality than Assault is at the moment.

Assault ignores the fact that one mech can't take and hold an objective.

lol.

I won a game in a CPTL-C1-F with no ammo. Yes, I won it by myself vs an enemy mech purely through capping while it was trying to kill me and I had no weapons to attack with.. Don't believe me, I have several neutral parties that will vouch for me.

I put stock in Patton's idea of offense over everything else. He did not fight defensively and he was charged with making Gen. Montgomery look bad. Mostly because he could have won WW2 by himself.

Point is, I've been in plenty of games where 100% offense wins. That's all assault and no defense. I'd say it wins more than 90% of the time. I don't need more than 1 mech to win, so I don't see any reason for TDM to invade an otherwise good game.

Captain Midnight, on 15 December 2012 - 04:45 AM, said:

Taking a castle by siege involved killing all the enemies defending it, not sieging for five turns and automatically winning. Objective based warfare is TDM where the winner holds the objective.

Again, history proves you wrong. Most sieges were won through starvation and biological warfare, where the sieged fortifications were forced to surrender. The only notable forced assaults took place during the first crusades, where Arab supplies were substantially larger than the Norman and Germanic forces, and no supplies were readily hunted (it was Aleppo and Jerusalem, where are you going to find game in that desert?). But European and classical history shows a huge disdain for battles not involving a city or battlement as a direct objective.

Edited by S3dition, 15 December 2012 - 04:52 AM.

[xenoglyph]

u guys gettin all cerebral on this are funny. Some of us want TDM, some of us don't.

Logic says that some of us would be happy if TDM was introduced, and the others wouldn't be forced to play it.

Sounds good to me.

[Captain Midnight]

xenoglyph, on 15 December 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

u guys gettin all cerebral on this are funny. Some of us want TDM, some of us don't.

Logic says that some of us would be happy if TDM was introduced, and the others wouldn't be forced to play it.

Sounds good to me.

Several of the people who want TDM want you to be forced to play TDM with them.

ALL of the people who are against TDM are trying to FORCE you to play Assault with them, mainly because they know their capture rushes obviously wouldn't work in a TDM environment and considering their complete lack of talent at this game that is a horrifying prospect. No one, absolutely no one (besides cap rushers) would choice Assault over TDM if given a choice.

Edited by Captain Midnight, 15 December 2012 - 04:52 AM.

[Sifright]

S3dition, on 15 December 2012 - 04:48 AM, said:

lol.

I won a game in a CPTL-C1-F with no ammo. Yes, I won it by myself vs an enemy mech purely through capping while it was trying to kill me and I had no weapons to attack with.. Don't believe me, I have several neutral parties that will vouch for me.

I put stock in Patton's idea of offense over everything else. He did not fight defensively and he was charged with making Gen. Montgomery look bad. Mostly because he could have won WW2 by himself.

Point is, I've been in plenty of games where 100% offense wins. That's all assault and no defense. I'd say it wins more than 90% of the time. I don't need more than 1 mech to win, so I don't see any reason for TDM to invade an otherwise good game.

my point seems have flown over your head in a rather impressive fashion.

Winning a match by capping a point when you have no weapons on your mech should be impossible.

How exactly are you capturing anything when you have no ability to hold it afterwards? |:

Captain Midnight, on 15 December 2012 - 04:51 AM, said:

Several of the people who want TDM want you to be forced to play TDM with them.

ALL of the people who are against TDM are trying to FORCE you to play Assault with them, mainly because they know their capture rushes obviously wouldn't work in a TDM environment and considering their complete lack of talent at this game that is a horrifying prospect. No one, absolutely no one (besides cap rushers) would choice Assault over TDM if given a choice.

Midknight get on comstar, I want to 8 man with some one I can trust to actually know what hes doing

[KinLuu]

Sifright, on 15 December 2012 - 04:31 AM, said:

base capping IS boring as hell.

I don't see how you can argue against that.

Personally I'm not playing so I can run to cap point and win with out pew pewing at enemy mechs.

TDM IS boring as hell.

I don't see how you can argue against that.

Personally I'm not playing so I can just to brawl it out with enemy mechs without any objective.

[S3dition]

Sifright, on 15 December 2012 - 04:53 AM, said:

my point seems have flown over your head in a rather impressive fashion.

Winning a match by capping a point when you have no weapons on your mech should be impossible.

How exactly are you capturing anything when you have no ability to hold it afterwards? |:



Midknight get on comstar, I want to 8 man with some one I can trust to actually know what hes doing

That has happened many, many times through history. Look at the number of castles and cities that have been taken and lost in a very short time span, simply because the attacker could not hold them. The crusades is another shining example of this, where very large cities were taken and abandoned because there were not enough soldiers to keep the defenses.

It's a not problem if you want to 8 man with someone else. I only have about 8 generations of combat veterans in my family. Wouldn't want you to side with the wrong type

Edited by S3dition, 15 December 2012 - 04:58 AM.

[Captain Midnight]

KinLuu, on 15 December 2012 - 04:54 AM, said:

TDM IS boring as hell.

I don't see how you can argue against that.

Personally I'm not playing so I can just to brawl it out with enemy mechs without any objective.

The objective is to capture the planet Noobulon IV, it has a factory that can produce Raven 3Ls and ECM. House Kurita has sent their best forces to capture this world, and defeat will be crippling to the war effort. Gentlemen, defeat is not an option. The southern peninulsa is best defended, numerous mines and static emplacements covering the approaches through the ravines. For this reason, we're going to send an elite squad via orbital drop into the forests in the north. From the rendezvous proceed south to E5 and engage the enemy and take the factory, if you stand in the red square for 25 seconds the enemy will surrender the factory regardless of how many forces they have remaining. Good luck and god speed.

YEAH SO BASICALLY TELL ME ALL ABOUT IT GUYS

Edited by Captain Midnight, 15 December 2012 - 05:01 AM.

[Klaus]

Teralitha, on 15 December 2012 - 12:28 AM, said:

It would be pretty simple to implement I would think. Just disable bases. Has a dev ever said that TDM was going to be added to the game? What are they afraid of? Is this mode not part of their money making scheme? Why havent they added it in yet when it should be so simple?

They've said why before I'm sure.

In a game where you can run out of ammo along with having your weapons destroyed there has to be another way to win other than killing the other team. It's pretty simple. TDM will never happen unless they introduce repairs/rearms in the actual match.

What are they afraid of? Obviously it being an assault mech only fest which goes against everything the game is trying to do. Go play some baby fps if you just wanna run around and shoot things without thinking.

Edited by Klaus, 15 December 2012 - 05:02 AM.

[Thorn Hallis]

Sure, why not. If it makes this unknown rest of them happy.

[Sifright]

Captain Midnight, on 15 December 2012 - 05:00 AM, said:

The objective is to capture the planet Noobulon IV, it has a factory that can produce Raven 3Ls and ECM. House Kurita has sent their best forces to capture this world, and defeat will be crippling to the war effort. Gentlemen, defeat is not an option. The southern peninulsa is best defended, numerous mines and static emplacements covering the approaches through the ravines. For this reason, we're going to send an elite squad via orbital drop into the forests in the north. From the rendezvous proceed south to E5 and engage the enemy and take the factory, if you stand in the red square for 25 seconds the enemy will surrender the factory regardless of how many forces they have remaining. Good luck and god speed.

YEAH SO BASICALLY TELL ME ALL ABOUT IT GUYS

This is the problem with assault as it stands at the moment.

There is no excuse for this kind of silliness.