Jump to content

Real Assault Game Mode


52 replies to this topic

#1 MouseNo4

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 630 posts
  • LocationVictoria Australia

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:59 PM

Create a new game mode.

Remove the base capture, remove the timer.

Match is won by the team that destroys the other. No cheap wins by completely avoiding the enemy and going for the swift capture. This is MechWARrior, not capture the flag.

#2 Dagnome

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 906 posts
  • LocationNew Hampster

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:02 PM

Conquest mode is scheduled to be launched soon, though I did wonder why they chose to do the "Capture the flag" game mode as the default beta mode instead of a death match. I cant help but disagree with your comment on removing the timer though, in any "FPS" game a time pushes players to keep the action moving and helps keep "camping" down to a minimum.

I do agree that I would like to see this game mode sooner than later even though I know it will be released eventually.

Edited by Dagnome, 10 November 2012 - 01:05 PM.


#3 Odins Fist

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,111 posts
  • LocationThe North

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:03 PM

View PostMouseNo4, on 10 November 2012 - 12:59 PM, said:

Create a new game mode.

Remove the base capture, remove the timer.

Match is won by the team that destroys the other. No cheap wins by completely avoiding the enemy and going for the swift capture. This is MechWARrior, not capture the flag.

.
That would be called TEAM DEATH MATCH...

#4 El Penguin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Guardian
  • Guardian
  • 478 posts
  • LocationAntartica

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:05 PM

What we have now is nothing like capture the flag... I would actually like to see that mode in the future though as an option (CTF). :)

#5 Dagnome

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 906 posts
  • LocationNew Hampster

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:05 PM

View PostEl Penguin, on 10 November 2012 - 01:05 PM, said:

What we have now is nothing like capture the flag... I would actually like to see that mode in the future though as an option (CTF). :)


Is this game mode only playable in commandos because that would be awesome!

#6 Kargush

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 973 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:06 PM

I've had matches where the last two mechs had either run out of ammo or had all usable weapons blown off. Battle was won on timer.

So no, keep the timer.

#7 Nathan Foxbane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Wolf
  • The Wolf
  • 2,984 posts

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:09 PM

That is just a team death match. Assault implies you are you know, attacking an objective.

#8 El Penguin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Guardian
  • Guardian
  • 478 posts
  • LocationAntartica

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:09 PM

View PostDagnome, on 10 November 2012 - 01:05 PM, said:


Is this game mode only playable in commandos because that would be awesome!


When the commandos capture the flag, the flag goes in there hands too! That'd look awesome :)

#9 Dagnome

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 906 posts
  • LocationNew Hampster

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:10 PM

View PostEl Penguin, on 10 November 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:


When the commandos capture the flag, the flag goes in there hands too! That'd look awesome :)


WHY ARE WE NOT WORKING FOR PGI!
;p

#10 MouseNo4

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 630 posts
  • LocationVictoria Australia

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:11 PM

The maps are so tiny... the timer removal would make little difference anyway. You have very few places to hide anyway.

#11 Lavrenti

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 310 posts

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:12 PM

I am constantly amazed by the never-ending progression of people who want to remove tactical decision-making from the game. If you don't like how it is at the moment surely it's better to expand the game rather than limit the players... but no. Apparently if people get a little freedom, they'll demand even less.

What you're suggesting is not an "assault" game mode, it's team deathmatch. It would be vulnerable to someone hiding in a corner of the map and powering down so no-one could find them, ensuring that the enemy team couldn't achieve victory even if they killed everyone else.
Just my opinion here, but it is also boring as ****. With no decisions to make about how or if to attack, defend, or play for time; we would just end up with a brawl. I like the fact that teams have to be alert to the possibility of someone trying to cap their base, it makes things a bit more difficult for them and gives fast mechs more things to worry about than just circling the enemy. It also adds a layer of choice for attackers - do we try for a cap, and if so how do we do it?
Personally I'd rather see MORE objective-based gameplay, not less.

#12 MouseNo4

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 630 posts
  • LocationVictoria Australia

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:14 PM

View PostMouseNo4, on 10 November 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

The maps are so tiny... the timer removal would make little difference anyway. You have very few places to hide anyway.


#13 El Penguin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Guardian
  • Guardian
  • 478 posts
  • LocationAntartica

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:14 PM

View PostMouseNo4, on 10 November 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

The maps are so tiny... the timer removal would make little difference anyway. You have very few places to hide anyway.


I'm sure in the future they will add Team Deathmatch. Right now there priority is more on there Conquest gamemode which I think is good since we need some unique gamemodes.

#14 MouseNo4

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 630 posts
  • LocationVictoria Australia

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:16 PM

The capture aspect removes the aspect of having to face the enemy. Why FIGHT the enemy when we can simply avoid them completely and win the match cheaply without a shot fired?

#15 Lavrenti

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 310 posts

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:18 PM

View PostMouseNo4, on 10 November 2012 - 01:16 PM, said:

The capture aspect removes the aspect of having to face the enemy. Why FIGHT the enemy when we can simply avoid them completely and win the match cheaply without a shot fired?


That depends on the enemy team agreeing with your plans, or at least not doing anything to prevent it. If they object, I think they might express their displeasure in the traditional way - through the medium of a barrage of firepower. At that point, whether there's a fight or not is up to you.

Edit: In fact, the capture option means that there's a way to force the enemy to fight. If you start capping and they don't do anything, they'll lose. If they want a chance at winning they HAVE to either fight or cap faster, and if there's been no combat so far and you started capping first they can't do the latter.

Edited by Lavrenti, 10 November 2012 - 01:20 PM.


#16 MouseNo4

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 630 posts
  • LocationVictoria Australia

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:23 PM

View PostLavrenti, on 10 November 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:


That depends on the enemy team agreeing with your plans, or at least not doing anything to prevent it. If they object, I think they might express their displeasure in the traditional way - through the medium of a barrage of firepower. At that point, whether there's a fight or not is up to you.

Edit: In fact, the capture option means that there's a way to force the enemy to fight. If you start capping and they don't do anything, they'll lose. If they want a chance at winning they HAVE to either fight or cap faster, and if there's been no combat so far and you started capping first they can't do the latter.

Sorry wrong. That isnt how things go. Go play a few rounds and see what happens.

#17 0d1n

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Dragoon
  • The Dragoon
  • 89 posts
  • LocationTukayyid

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:28 PM

Screw CTF, bring on a revival of MECH RUGBY! :)

#18 PYR0MANCER

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 154 posts

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:28 PM

View PostLavrenti, on 10 November 2012 - 01:12 PM, said:

What you're suggesting is not an "assault" game mode, it's team deathmatch.

With no decisions to make about how or if to attack, defend, or play for time; we would just end up with a brawl.


This is what the random drops want though... No strategy, no teamplay, just run around like a fool... This will probably be introduced at some point to appease them cause they will be in the forums whining until they get it...

#19 MouseNo4

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 630 posts
  • LocationVictoria Australia

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:29 PM

Players are just too chicken to face the enemy... to afraid they might lose. So they avoid the enemy completely and race for the cap.

It has only gotten worse over the past couple months.

#20 Lavrenti

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 310 posts

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:30 PM

View PostMouseNo4, on 10 November 2012 - 01:23 PM, said:

Sorry wrong. That isnt how things go. Go play a few rounds and see what happens.


If that's true then it's the players that are ignoring the mechanisms of the game that are the problem, not so?





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users