65 replies to this topic

[SunshineSloth]

Energy collection and combat need to be buddies. Either make separate trees for each team at opposing ends of the map - forcing a collect and defend scenario (but again this favors defense) or have the primary (or at least equally viable) collection mechanic be kills.

The idea that Battleships move tangentially across the map makes the middle much more dangerous and the AA more important.

You could even make siege timed and the deciding factor could be the number of Battleships that made it across the line. Like a real siege.

[virella]

i like the idea of a timed siege would solve some of the issues with the current one without having to put in alot of time for the devs.

[Karaipantsu]

Beemann, on November 29 2012 - 08:03 PM, said:

There needs to be a reason to engage. If there isn't one, then there's no reason not to camp

SunshineSloth, on November 29 2012 - 08:45 PM, said:

Energy collection and combat need to be buddies.

The answer to both of your concerns is right there in my original post.  Limit resources from the start, and increase the number of nodes to force competition for resources.  Combat needn't be the focus, but yes, it should be a factor.

I think the biggest flaw with Siege, as beeman said, is the rigid two step process.  Add in more options, and suddenly I believe the game type would be a WHOLE lot more interesting.  P1 is combat for resources, and P2 is combat for the ship's passage by defense of the AA and supression of enemy resource gathering.

Timed siege... what a bad idea.  It makes no sense in the context of the game as it's set up now.  There's no "defender" and no "sieger", per se.  You'd have to completely change the gameplay mechanics, maps, and resource allocation to make it a classic siege type gameplay.  I'd call that a lot of time spent by the devs.

[SunshineSloth]

Timed siege would play out exactly the same as current siege. The only difference would be the winner is declared by the number of ships across the line not the first to get 2 past.

[Ace4225]

timed seige..._

It's bad enough deathmatch is timed.

I've never been a fan of timed games over score-based ones. Why_:

in a timed game, there's no requirement to reach a goal, only to stay in first place. That could sometimes mean being anti-productive.

In score-based gameplay, you have to work the whole time to get to the goal first. That's much more competitive. Timed games are more ideal for non-serious/practice matches, or when you have real-world obligations that limit the amount of time you'd be available for a game.

That said, open beta should [and probably will] have the option to choose between timed matches and score-based ones. The more competitive scene will undoubtedly demand score-based matches.. while the casual players can continue to enjoy 10-15 minute killfests.

Edited by Ace4225, November 30 2012 - 01:50 AM.

[draco7891]

Additional Ponderings:

The Seesaw

• Trees contain 300 EU at a time.
  
• Only one tree active at a time.
  
• Draining one tree "powers up" the other tree, but cannot draw from the second tree until the first is drained.

EU Powered AA

• Energy trees remain active during AA phase, but control of AA is based on the amount of EU deposited into it by team.
  
• AA fire/control consumes deposited EU, requiring constant resupply.
  
• Ships do not move unless team is in control of AA.

Variable Battleship Strength

• Battleships can be launched at 600 EU deposited, but may be "overcharged" by depositing additional energy before launching (up to some maximum limit).
  
• Battleship launch now explicitly controlled by some mechanism, rather than automatic.
  
• Overcharged ships receive additional turrets/HP proportional to the amount of EU used to launch them.
  
• Overcharged ships (potentially) cause greater damage to enemy base when connecting.

Assume generally in these that Battleships do not drop EU, they fight each other if counter-launched, that the AA is an open design to make it easily attackable/hard to defend, and that player weapons do not damage the Battleship (but can destroy BS turrets).

Draco

Edited by draco7891, November 30 2012 - 11:22 AM.

[HellRik]

draco7891, on November 30 2012 - 11:20 AM, said:

EU Powered AA

• Energy trees remain active during AA phase, but control of AA is based on the amount of EU deposited into it by team.
  
• AA fire/control consumes deposited EU, requiring constant resupply.
  
• Ships do not move unless team is in control of AA.

I luv it, simply brilliant!

Makes me think about another idea.

-Get rid of Battleships. and get rid of the AA. Put 1 tree in the middle and power the base weaponery system to fire at the other base. Only way to collect EU is to kill Mech and get their energy drops, or control AA with one part of the team while others carry them to base.

Edited by HellRik, November 30 2012 - 11:32 AM.

[virella]

the big thing everyone seems to agree on is the current version is way to short, easiest fix would be a temp time limit of 30 minutes or 5 battleships made it through so it wont last forever but still has a way to end it early. this would just be a temporary thing till  they get the whole thing balanced to a longer version.

as it currently stands seige will still have issues filling lobbies once open beta hits.

[AsianJoyKiller]

HellRik, on November 30 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

Makes me think about another idea.

-Get rid of Battleships. and get rid of the AA. Put 1 tree in the middle and power the base weaponery system to fire at the other base. Only way to collect EU is to kill Mech and get their energy drops, or control AA with one part of the team while others carry them to base.

What you've done there is essentially take Missile Assault and removed 2 of the silos.
And that basically ends up as a team deathmatch on one single part of the entire map.

That's bad.

[HellRik]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 30 2012 - 11:41 AM, said:

HellRik, on November 30 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

Makes me think about another idea.

-Get rid of Battleships. and get rid of the AA. Put 1 tree in the middle and power the base weaponery system to fire at the other base. Only way to collect EU is to kill Mech and get their energy drops, or control AA with one part of the team while others carry them to base.

What you've done there is essentially take Missile Assault and removed 2 of the silos.
And that basically ends up as a team deathmatch on one single part of the entire map.

That's bad.

Anyway everyone else ideas are just bad. That was an idea might not be a perfect one but thats better then simply living to stomp everyone's posts. I am not the one asking to tiny little BS to have turrets removed.


Idea was supply your base weaponry system to fire FROM base to the other base. We could have 3 tress, but changing randomly. Its easy to say something is bad. Less easier to stfu and listen sometimes.

In other words , YOU are bad. ty bye

PS: The actual Siege is very close to a death match with pauses where you do nothing else then carry ( w/o fighthing ) EU to base. At some point we only fight in a single spot '' the middle AA '' . pretty much the same as my idea.

Edited by HellRik, November 30 2012 - 01:45 PM.

[Karaipantsu]

Ha ha, wow.  That's the biggest batch of uninformed nonsense I've ever heard.

[HellRik]

Karaipantsu, on November 30 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

Ha ha, wow.  That's the biggest batch of uninformed nonsense I've ever heard.

was pretty much intended

Edited by HellRik, November 30 2012 - 02:08 PM.

[AsianJoyKiller]

Let's analyze this post and break it down into fallacies.

HellRik, on November 30 2012 - 01:40 PM, said:

Anyway everyone else ideas are just bad.

Red herring/Implied Ad hominem

Quote

That was an idea might not be a perfect one but thats better then simply living to stomp everyone's posts.

Ad hominem/Appeal to spite.

Quote

I am not the one asking to tiny little BS to have turrets removed.

Ad hominem/Red herring/Invalid analogy

Quote

Idea was supply your base weaponry system to fire FROM base to the other base. We could have 3 tress, but changing randomly.

The only part worthwhile part of this post.

Quote

Its easy to say something is bad. Less easier to stfu and listen sometimes.

Red herring/Ad hominem/Appeal to ridicule

Quote

In other words , YOU are bad. ty bye

Straight up insult.

Quote

PS: The actual Siege is very close to a death match with pauses where you do nothing else then carry ( w/o fighthing ) EU to base. At some point we only fight in a single spot '' the middle AA '' . pretty much the same as my idea.

I have never argued that it's not exactly that (at least for pubs).

Oh, and this:

HellRik, on November 30 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

Karaipantsu, on November 30 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

Ha ha, wow.  That's the biggest batch of uninformed nonsense I've ever heard.

was pretty much intended

I don't understand why you would try to purposely make yourself look like a fool.
Can you explain the reasoning behind that_

Edited by AsianJoyKiller, November 30 2012 - 04:31 PM.

[Ahmintar]

Idea : Add another objective : Power core : Like Capture the flag:
Get the powercore from the enemy base: aka An alter or something. Then return it to your base when you have enough power to launch the battleship with the core.

Edited by Ahmintar, November 30 2012 - 06:10 PM.

[Ahmintar]

Let me redo this whole thing
Break down how to win a match.
The match starts with the power nodes with 350 energy, (with normal recharge rate or 1 min cooldown with fast recharge to 350 something) and the power core in the middle. This power core must be take to the docking bay and be filled with 600 energy for launch. You may bring the energy to the docking bay without the core being there but the energy will degrade, as it should do after a short period in you mech storage tank. When one team gets the core powered and launch their ship the 2 aa gun becomes active (computer neutral AI system) Energy must be taken to the AA guns for it to shoot. double the shots to take down the ship then what it is now in siege (something liek that).
The ship will travel in different position on the map (75%) across the map and start to damage base. With a full core it will (untouched) do 50& hp. If the ship is downed before that time the core will drop with the remaining energy in it where the process startes over again.
Just  a idea.
Hope it sparks some minds

[Noin]

I liked the short version better.

I think it basically need less things that draw you away from the action, and more things that are central to the action / theme like I said earlier in the thread.

Make it so the EU is part of the entire match.
Make it so the team has to protect it's EU ferrying mechs.
Make it so it is important to have your different classes of mech participating.
    The vulnerable type being the ferry and the tanks needing to protect them or vice versa.
Make it so the whole thing is contended.

[Karaipantsu]

Noin, on November 30 2012 - 07:24 PM, said:

Make it so the team has to protect it's EU ferrying mechs.

I've been thinking about this idea for a while, but I can't see any way within the frame of the game's limitation that would allow this kind of play.  Protection of a ferry mech would be basically impossible without a lot of gameplay tweaks, and the general strategy isn't to flank people because it takes too long.

[Noin]

Karaipantsu, on November 30 2012 - 07:32 PM, said:

Noin, on November 30 2012 - 07:24 PM, said:

Make it so the team has to protect it's EU ferrying mechs.

I've been thinking about this idea for a while, but I can't see any way within the frame of the game's limitation that would allow this kind of play.  Protection of a ferry mech would be basically impossible without a lot of gameplay tweaks, and the general strategy isn't to flank people because it takes too long.

Maybe the mech delivering energy in the 'AA' unit is vulnerable and needs to be protected.  Kind of like the current delivery baskets, but maybe with a bit more protection, or that the whole unit is destroyable.  You could have the AA units only attackable when occupied by an EU delivering mech and that is what would make the protection mechanism.

[Karaipantsu]

Perhaps amplify damage by x% for every 100 points of energy you're carrying_  Could be an interesting addition. Still don't see how your teammates would protect you, tho, aside from driving off attackers with superior numbers, which is already pretty much what always happens.

[Beemann]

Karaipantsu, on December 01 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

Perhaps amplify damage by x% for every 100 points of energy you're carrying_  Could be an interesting addition. Still don't see how your teammates would protect you, tho, aside from driving off attackers with superior numbers, which is already pretty much what always happens.

But if both teams camp EC`s both teams have the same bonus
Plus we`re unnecessarily nerfing A (and to a lesser extent B ) mechs at that point

Edited by Beemann, December 02 2012 - 12:03 AM.