8 replies to this topic

[SaJeel]

In Conquest mode, base capping lacks a sense of urgency. Never do I feel like I need to capture bases unless the two teams have been reduced to two or three players.

Currently in conquest mode every base gives 1 point every two seconds or .5pt/sec. At this rate with one base it takes 25 minutes to win. with two bases it takes 12 mins 30 secs, with three it takes 8 mins 20 seconds. With four it takes 6 mins 15 seconds and five takes 5 minutes.

To me, these times are far too long. Eight minutes doesn’t provide much urgency. I suggest changing the rate to .75pt/sec. With this rate it takes only 5 min 30 secs to win when in control of 3 bases. I feel this will place the importance of conquest on capturing rather than what it is now, A death match that just shifts one direction or the other.

[Dark Fox]

I have to agree Conquest needs a bit of help. It tends to be played like Assault, but with differant battle locations becuase of the path the caps lead you along. There's also a touch of "maybe we can still win" when you have one guy left against a full team, I've never seen that actually happen though.

I'm not sure a quicker point gain would be the best solution though. The team with more light mechs would rapidly outscore a team with mostly heavies/assaults. I'm in a Cataphract usually, they're heavy but move as slow as assaults. Both teams lights capture the nearest points before I even get there. I imagine a fast point build up would have the light enemies skip theta and go for your home base. Which again, they can cap before I get there. This turtle and mouse game could just continue till they win.

I don't really have much better ideas, except one main point. This applies to both Conquest and Assault:

There needs to be incentive to defend your point.

Many assault matches are simply base swapping. Both teams go opposite directions to the other's base, whoever has more light mechs win. Like I mentioned before, once they step on on point and it alerts me it's already too late for me to try to get there and defend. There's no real reason for the team to be tempted to hold back either, after all for all they know they can win the base swap - since the game doesn't automatically balance teams class-to-class.

As for Conquest, like you said, I don't really get a feeling like the bases are important.

The solution to both I think is to make the bases have more practical use in game. They should have a limited-range ECM piercing radar. After all it is a base it should have a strategic function like that, and on top of that its radar should be better than a mechs since it's stationary and much larger.

I think radar is the best option on a base, but there are other options too. What about a weak repair bay on it? Limited reload ammunition? Fuel for jumpjets?

Really, bases could be made really cool and interesting rather than just "place I should stand around for a bit then leave". If you really wanted to take it even further, you could make it so teams could spend the resources they generate to build defensive systems on it.

[Orkimedes]

Base radar would make a huge difference. Making the resource bonus a lot higher will further provide further incentive players to get the bases.

[Steel Talon]

Entire concept of conquest mode is badly implemented.
In Battlefields u got 5-7 bases on big 32vs32 maps with respawns, team that gang up here may always take any base but due to size of maps they simply cant win until they split up to take more key possitions.
In MWO u got 5 bases on small 8vs8 map - that is breaking point even in BF with respawns, team that split up to take 2 bases will get ganged by 8 players that can travell between bases extreemely fast due to low distances.
Even 3 bases would be too much for just 8vs8 no respawn, AI base defenses would help, but this game will get nowhere until we get a rid of those no respawn/PVE bitc*es!
MWLL has both & its great game(mod).

[SaJeel]

Ok so here's the thing how could you implement a conquest mode without respawns that would work, and don't you dare tell me it can't work because every new video game concept people have said wouldn't work "an fps on a console, you're an *****.."

[spectrum8]

Conquest? Oh, you mean the game mode that earns about half as much xp/cbills as assault and usually ends up with people running to random CP's?.....ya just sort for assault only.

[Dirus Nigh]

With the maps, and the size of them, that we have now I think four capture points is ideal. Five is ok depending on what map is being used. The drop location should not be capture points. No team should start with a captured point. Drop points should be relocated if the original drop location would make an ideal capture point. The space port, and loading docks on River city are a good example of drop locations that make logical capture points.

XP and C-Bill rewards need to be given for the fallowing actions.

Capturing a point.
award given for mechs in the capture zone that has the capture meter fully change from either a first time capture, or a full capture from enemy control.

Defending a point
Killing an enemy in the capture zone of a controlled point. Point must be flagged as blue.

Assaulting a point.
Killing an enemy mech in the capture zone. Point must be flagged red.

[p00k]

how to instantly improve conquest.

respawns.

they've even given us convenient numbers to make a strategic decision out of it - respawning costs a team resource equal to the tonnage of the respawned mech.

you're at 300, they're at 500? well respawn a few lights to recap some points!

you're at 500, they're at 300? well respawn some heavies and stomp their survivors!

let the team commander decide who gets to respawn when. or some other clever way, i don't care. right now conquest is <those who realize it's still deathmatch> stomping <those who don't>

[Easyvue]

How about 3 capture points? One in middle and one at each spawn so the fighting isn't so unfocused. If you're going to do 5 capture points you need at least 12v12