32 replies to this topic

[GalaxyBluestar]

well with so many people talking about conquest mode let's see if the opinion that it's no good rings true.

have PGI got something good happening here or not? i think it's changed up gameplay and tactics very well and the cap wins feel well earnt as opposed to the ninja caps assault offeres. you feel like a winner with caps in conquest as the other team screws up in managing resources and or can't kill as well as the other team. it can only get better

[Kaspirikay]

i voted 'no'.

it just devolves into an all out brawl sooner or later. Much like assault, but with less ninja caps.

[Xenois Shalashaska]

travel in groups of 3 mechs and be prepared to cover retreats of scout mechs.

[GalaxyBluestar]

well anything's better than assault, it may not be a holy treasure of a game mode but it's certainly better gameplay than assault ever was.

[Ranzear]

Xenois Shalashaska, on 23 December 2012 - 01:44 AM, said:

travel in groups of 3 mechs and be prepared to cover retreats of scout mechs.

And get handily creamed by the roaming group of 7 on the other team while half of you are on the wrong side of the map.

[Adridos]

Assault mode had far more startegizing and tactics included.

If anything, this is the dumber one.



P.S. Use the phrase "thinking man's shooter" one more time and horrible things will happen to you, I gurantee.

[Balsover]

"Is Conquest The Thinking Mans Shooter?"

if thats the case, then is "Arathi Basin, the thinking mans WoW battleground".

Its still just straight out kill the other guy. The reason it doesn't work here is the maps are way too small. It takes no time at all to travel between capture points. If you had to commit your forces to one side of the map, because it would take 3 mins to get there, then you would have strategy.

[Khobai]

Conquest is not the thinking mans shooter. In fact I would argue that thinking too much in Conquest is a bad thing.

The fact is, without respawn, the easiest way to win Conquest is simply to kill the other team.

Overthinking conquest and splitting your team to capture multiple objectives is actually BAD. It will just result in in your team losing 90% of the time.

[Thirdstar]

Ahahaahahahahahhahaahahhahaahah

*takes a deep breath*

No.

[Buck Cake]

No.

[GalaxyBluestar]

Adridos, on 23 December 2012 - 01:50 AM, said:

Assault mode had far more startegizing and tactics included.

If anything, this is the dumber one.



P.S. Use the phrase "thinking man's shooter" one more time and horrible things will happen to you, I gurantee.

LOL there's hardly any stratagy than hearing an even more tireing phrase... stick together focus fire. bores me to tears. i enjoy the fact that teams get so carried away just playing another TD match that they don't realise the caps are against them and they can't find that last mech, the jokes on you guys if you can't hack it.

Balsover, on 23 December 2012 - 01:51 AM, said:

"Is Conquest The Thinking Mans Shooter?"

if thats the case, then is "Arathi Basin, the thinking mans WoW battleground".

Its still just straight out kill the other guy. The reason it doesn't work here is the maps are way too small. It takes no time at all to travel between capture points. If you had to commit your forces to one side of the map, because it would take 3 mins to get there, then you would have strategy.

i agree there both assault and conquest would benifit greatly if the maps were larger!

Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 23 December 2012 - 02:16 AM.

[Thirdstar]

The term 'thinking man's shooter' has been created by elitist TT [Redacted] to bludgeon any shifting of the status quo. Please refrain from using it.

Edited by Egomane, 23 December 2012 - 04:03 AM.
Language

[GalaxyBluestar]

Thirdstar, on 23 December 2012 - 02:19 AM, said:

The term 'thinking man's shooter' has been created by elitist TT [Redacted] to bludgeon any shifting of the status quo. Please refrain from using it.

it's actually apart of an advert used by pgi and was an extract from pc gamer a while back. that's what they saw this game as and pgi agreed going so far as to put it in their adverts. no elitest here.

Edited by Egomane, 23 December 2012 - 04:03 AM.
Edited quote

[Felix]

Thirdstar, on 23 December 2012 - 02:19 AM, said:

The term 'thinking man's shooter' has been created by elitist TT [Redacted] to bludgeon any shifting of the status quo. Please refrain from using it.

you heard it here folks, PGI are elitest TT [Redacted]!

Edited by Egomane, 23 December 2012 - 04:04 AM.
Language

[Adridos]

Thirdstar, on 23 December 2012 - 02:19 AM, said:

The term 'thinking man's shooter' has been created by elitist TT [Redacted] to bludgeon any shifting of the status quo. Please refrain from using it.

It's a term made up by IGN.

It is their answer as to what happened to the skilled shooters a la Quake, UT, Tribes and others.
The problem is it is their description of a rambo shooter like CoD, MoH and such...

Nothing short of a swear for anyone with any taste in games.

Edited by Egomane, 23 December 2012 - 04:04 AM.
Edited quote

[Thirdstar]

Adridos, on 23 December 2012 - 03:24 AM, said:

It's a term made up by IGN.

It is their answer as to what happened to the skilled shooters a la Quake, UT, Tribes and others.
The problem is it is their description of a rambo shooter like CoD, MoH and such...

Nothing short of a swear for anyone with any taste in games.

No, no, because PGI use it and IGN use it's a valid descriptor for games I like (vs games I don't like). So that's settled then.

Edit: In hindsight I realized that people on the forums here are sarcasm challenged so i'll be more blunt. It's a ******** term meant to belittle players (yes, players) who play games you don't like. Doesn't matter who the hell uses it.

Edited by Thirdstar, 23 December 2012 - 04:05 AM.

[Buck Cake]

I find the term itself ironic.

[Exoth3rmic]

Conquest is too big a concept for the current size of maps and when all your team drop right next to you. If the lances were split 4 + 4 and dropped spaced out then automatically you require a better team balance of mechs / co-ordination and comms etc

When you're an 8 man fist at the start, why split to poke with fingers when you can punch the opposing team in the mouth?

[Thirdstar]

Exoth3rmic, on 23 December 2012 - 04:37 AM, said:

Conquest is too big a concept for the current size of maps and when all your team drop right next to you. If the lances were split 4 + 4 and dropped spaced out then automatically you require a better team balance of mechs / co-ordination and comms etc

When you're an 8 man fist at the start, why split to poke with fingers when you can punch the opposing team in the mouth?

Exactly. Now it would be a different matter if say the resource counter doubled in speed. That's my suggestion anyway.

[Rippthrough]

Play it like assault and you'll win.

I see way too many people splitting their forces up and trying to 'defend' one of the points instead of staying together and using the terrain as normal, and they get slaughtered.

You can kill the other team before they get anywhere near 750 points 99% of the time.