HAWKEN servers are up and our latest minor update is live!
Forgot Password_ SUPPORT REDEEM CODE

Jump to content


How to fix siege_ Turn it into FIGHT CLUB!


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Silk_Sk

Silk_Sk

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted May 27 2014 - 07:10 AM

The problem with siege mode is one team knows when to take AA and the other (the team I'm on) does not. Lets take team communication out of the equation entirely and make the battle for AA a duel!

How it goes is this. EU gathering functions exactly the same but the AA is not activated by players being within its radius. Throughout the game, a random player from each team is teleported into the duel arena with full health, items, and cooldowns reset. Any energy they were carrying is automatically transferred to the ship launcher.

These two players fight and when a player wins a missile is launched at the enemy ship. If they have no ship, it damages the enemy tower directly. As soon as this happens, the winner is teleported out and two new players immediately take their place, and so on for the whole match. So, there are essentially two battles going on at once. The battle for energy to launch ships, and the duels that launch the missiles. There doesn't need to be a ship in the air to launch a missle either.

What problems will this solve_ Well, obviously team communication part. But also it will solve the stalemates can happen in siege which can potentially make a single game last hours. Now, like Missile Assault, the enemy base is constantly taking damage, either from ships or from missiles. Teamwork for gathering EU is important, but so is winning duels.

Possible downside: massively imbalanced duels. This would almost certainly be a huge issue. But I can see the matchmaker balancing them so that only players closest in skill to each other will fight.

What do you think_ A good starting point for actually making this gametype fun_ There are many other factors to adjust, like whether or not the ships can attack each other or damage the tower even if the other ship is launched. But I think this would solve most of the gametype's current issues..

Edited by Silk_Sk, May 27 2014 - 07:12 AM.

Posted Image

#2 camtheking20

camtheking20

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 251 posts

Posted May 27 2014 - 07:54 AM

Cool

#3 caduceus26

caduceus26

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 617 posts
  • LocationHere

Posted May 27 2014 - 07:55 AM

Ideas are the life blood of keeping Hawken interesting and fun. However, I believe this would introduce many more issues than it would solve. Siege does need a re-work to make it a more interesting and competitive mode and I've heard that Siege 2.0 is/was supposed to do that. However, I've never heard any of the details of how Siege 2.0 would be different from the current Siege mode or if or when it would ever be done. Introducing more imbalance to a mode that already suffers in that area, not to even mention how long a game like this would go are just two issues that are problematic right out of the gate. A lot of players don't play DM and might see this as another form of one-on-one DM with missiles.

Siege should be fixed and let Fight Club be Fight Club IMO.
ASUS P9X79LE /i7-3820 3.6 (OC 4.7) /Corsair H80 Liquid CPU Cooling /16 Gb RAM /Dual-SLI EVGA 670 2 Gb Sig II /Antec 850 PSU /Antec 1200 Black Steel Tower
MaddMaxx (Zerker) / Silent Knight (Infil) / BurnYa (Scout) / Scythe (Reaper) / S0ckd0lag3r (Aslt) / PopOff (SS) / Bluto (Bruiser) / xXRoadRageXx (CR-T) / ShiftySwifty (Raider+G2) / PatchUp (Tech) / Krusher (Brawler) / Seekin' Ya'! (Rocketeer) / Doughboy (Vngrd) / FireFly (Incin)

#4 Silk_Sk

Silk_Sk

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted May 27 2014 - 08:01 AM

View Postcaduceus26, on May 27 2014 - 07:55 AM, said:

Ideas are the life blood of keeping Hawken interesting and fun. However, I believe this would introduce many more issues than it would solve. Siege does need a re-work to make it a more interesting and competitive mode and I've heard that Siege 2.0 is/was supposed to do that. However, I've never heard any of the details of how Siege 2.0 would be different from the current Siege mode or if or when it would ever be done. Introducing more imbalance to a mode that already suffers in that area, not to even mention how long a game like this would go are just two issues that are problematic right out of the gate. A lot of players don't play DM and might see this as another form of one-on-one DM with missiles.

Siege should be fixed and let Fight Club be Fight Club IMO.

Not sure what imbalance or length issues you are talking about. The matchmaker is excellent at balancing a team based on skill already. Imbalanced teams happen because some teams have better teamwork. Balancing duels would be much easier. Top player on one team vs. the top player on the other, and so on down the ranks.

Games would almost certainly be shorter. One tower or the other would always be taking damage from missiles or ships. No more dry spells where neither tower takes any significant damage. Remember the rest of the team is still fighting the other. Of course, having a player randomly disappear from a team fight is an issue. I'll have to think on that.

Edited by Silk_Sk, May 27 2014 - 08:06 AM.

Posted Image

#5 caduceus26

caduceus26

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 617 posts
  • LocationHere

Posted May 27 2014 - 09:46 AM

View PostSilk_Sk, on May 27 2014 - 08:01 AM, said:

View Postcaduceus26, on May 27 2014 - 07:55 AM, said:

Ideas are the life blood of keeping Hawken interesting and fun. However, I believe this would introduce many more issues than it would solve. Siege does need a re-work to make it a more interesting and competitive mode and I've heard that Siege 2.0 is/was supposed to do that. However, I've never heard any of the details of how Siege 2.0 would be different from the current Siege mode or if or when it would ever be done. Introducing more imbalance to a mode that already suffers in that area, not to even mention how long a game like this would go are just two issues that are problematic right out of the gate. A lot of players don't play DM and might see this as another form of one-on-one DM with missiles.

Siege should be fixed and let Fight Club be Fight Club IMO.

Not sure what imbalance or length issues you are talking about. The matchmaker is excellent at balancing a team based on skill already. Imbalanced teams happen because some teams have better teamwork. Balancing duels would be much easier. Top player on one team vs. the top player on the other, and so on down the ranks.

Games would almost certainly be shorter. One tower or the other would always be taking damage from missiles or ships. No more dry spells where neither tower takes any significant damage. Remember the rest of the team is still fighting the other. Of course, having a player randomly disappear from a team fight is an issue. I'll have to think on that.

"...Possible downside: massively imbalanced duels. This would almost certainly be a huge issue. But I can see the matchmaker balancing them so that only players closest in skill to each other will fight."

You say yourself that imbalances would be created in the duels and then say you're not sure about "what imbalances..._" Okay!

Siege (and MA) relies heavily on teamwork where skill disparity can be mitigated if one team is better coordinated than the other. Your proposed mode replaces the team effort with individual effort which cannot be as easily balanced out.

Matchmaker may be adequate at balancing a game at the beginning (sometimes) but it can do nothing once the game goes 6v4. 5v2, etc. Will matchmaker kick in for every 1v1 match-up_ How will that work in-game_ In addition, matchmaker has nothing to do with determining a player's skills in 1v1 dueling so the top player on Team A not necessarily = to top player on Team B.  There could be serious imbalances in that component of the game alone, notwithstanding the fact that 1v1 dueling isn't everyone's idea of fun and could turn many players away just because of that feature alone.  


You asked for feedback and I'm giving you some.
ASUS P9X79LE /i7-3820 3.6 (OC 4.7) /Corsair H80 Liquid CPU Cooling /16 Gb RAM /Dual-SLI EVGA 670 2 Gb Sig II /Antec 850 PSU /Antec 1200 Black Steel Tower
MaddMaxx (Zerker) / Silent Knight (Infil) / BurnYa (Scout) / Scythe (Reaper) / S0ckd0lag3r (Aslt) / PopOff (SS) / Bluto (Bruiser) / xXRoadRageXx (CR-T) / ShiftySwifty (Raider+G2) / PatchUp (Tech) / Krusher (Brawler) / Seekin' Ya'! (Rocketeer) / Doughboy (Vngrd) / FireFly (Incin)

#6 FakeName

FakeName

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,927 posts
  • LocationIn the cockpit of my Succubus

Posted May 27 2014 - 09:54 AM

Completely idiontic, improvised, ridiculous, extreme unrealistic idea.

I like it.

"Things change ... thank god, otherwise we would still hunt animals to survive and forge weapons of stone."

- FakeName

Posted Image


#7 camtheking20

camtheking20

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 251 posts

Posted May 27 2014 - 01:58 PM

View PostSilk_Sk, on May 27 2014 - 08:01 AM, said:

View Postcaduceus26, on May 27 2014 - 07:55 AM, said:

Ideas are the life blood of keeping Hawken interesting and fun. However, I believe this would introduce many more issues than it would solve. Siege does need a re-work to make it a more interesting and competitive mode and I've heard that Siege 2.0 is/was supposed to do that. However, I've never heard any of the details of how Siege 2.0 would be different from the current Siege mode or if or when it would ever be done. Introducing more imbalance to a mode that already suffers in that area, not to even mention how long a game like this would go are just two issues that are problematic right out of the gate. A lot of players don't play DM and might see this as another form of one-on-one DM with missiles.

Siege should be fixed and let Fight Club be Fight Club IMO.

Not sure what imbalance or length issues you are talking about. The matchmaker is excellent at balancing a team based on skill already. Imbalanced teams happen because some teams have better teamwork. Balancing duels would be much easier. Top player on one team vs. the top player on the other, and so on down the ranks.

Games would almost certainly be shorter. One tower or the other would always be taking damage from missiles or ships. No more dry spells where neither tower takes any significant damage. Remember the rest of the team is still fighting the other. Of course, having a player randomly disappear from a team fight is an issue. I'll have to think on that.

2 people who have jus exploded or a key to volantear apon impact with missiles/bullets/explosen well good enuugth needs to be lots of cover within the range of aa tho

Most of my fights are 1 on 1 with missiles lol

Edited by camtheking20, May 27 2014 - 01:59 PM.


#8 caduceus26

caduceus26

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 617 posts
  • LocationHere

Posted May 27 2014 - 03:36 PM

Huh_
ASUS P9X79LE /i7-3820 3.6 (OC 4.7) /Corsair H80 Liquid CPU Cooling /16 Gb RAM /Dual-SLI EVGA 670 2 Gb Sig II /Antec 850 PSU /Antec 1200 Black Steel Tower
MaddMaxx (Zerker) / Silent Knight (Infil) / BurnYa (Scout) / Scythe (Reaper) / S0ckd0lag3r (Aslt) / PopOff (SS) / Bluto (Bruiser) / xXRoadRageXx (CR-T) / ShiftySwifty (Raider+G2) / PatchUp (Tech) / Krusher (Brawler) / Seekin' Ya'! (Rocketeer) / Doughboy (Vngrd) / FireFly (Incin)

#9 Bazookagofer

Bazookagofer

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,070 posts

Posted May 27 2014 - 04:10 PM

I could see this as a new game mode, siege needs a different rework...

Posted Image "If at first you do not succeed... reload"


#10 camtheking20

camtheking20

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 251 posts

Posted June 01 2014 - 01:16 PM

View PostBazookagofer, on May 27 2014 - 04:10 PM, said:

I could see this as a new game mode, siege needs a different rework...

It be very popular if it happend

#11 ThatDamnedBoedy

ThatDamnedBoedy

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted August 05 2014 - 02:07 PM

View PostSilk_Sk, on May 27 2014 - 07:10 AM, said:

The problem with siege mode is one team knows when to take AA and the other (the team I'm on) does not. Lets take team communication out of the equation entirely and make the battle for AA a duel!

Abridged for space.

So you propose that instead of learning about a game mode to play it properly we make it stupid. o/
If you want to play team death match...go play TDM.  If you want to capture an area we already have missile assault.

You are correct that often in a public game we end up being on team where some jerk is sniping from the back at the enemy ship and basically being a waste of a slot on a team.  Or someone is just trying to get high personal kill scores as if it was death match or TDM.  These people aren't team players and get really mad when you call them out on their pride...constantly pointing to their personal score despite the team base health being ridiculously low.  

To fix siege you just have to remove personal scores altogether and just have HC be doled out by how good the win is.  And that amount should also be scaled against how many people are on the other team on average for the duration of the match.  So a win due to a 6 v 4 game won't net much HC but a flawless 6v6 match would net a very high payout.  Again that's on average so if a team has people frequently dropping there's no way to meta-game the match for large payouts.

The you can have bonuses for ships launched but also time bonuses as well...but all payouts are weighted against the avg numbers your opponent has.  That means a 6v3 match won't yield much at all for the winner.  If the team of 3 somehow wins...well by that miracle they'd get a massive payout.  Thanks to the averaging system I'm suggesting...swapping teams wouldn't make the payout any better...in fact it would probably make it worse.

Get rid of individual scoring in Siege and it will get better.  Also force people to play a tutorial game in every mode before they play so they know whats expected.

also watch the second video here...

https://community.pl...uide-for-noobs/

#12 ThatDamnedBoedy

ThatDamnedBoedy

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted August 05 2014 - 03:02 PM

For the noobz out there here's a peek at how Origin is laid out in two pictures.  its simplified and doesn't display all routes but it gives you a rough overview.

Notice the AA area has a COLORED BORDER around it.  You have to stand inside that border and it will chance to favor your team color and fire off the powerful anti-air missile.  The more team mates that stand inside the border the faster it fires the missile.  So it is important for the entire team or at least the vast majority 4-5/6 to be inside the AA as much as possible.  

Once the other team is routed you can push forward to OB1/OB2 area and keep them pinned in their base.

Scenario 1 that happens is that the enemy BS is blown up and you only need ~200 EU or less.  In that case only one or two of you need to get EU and the rest can hold the AA

Scenario 2 is the reverse...and you need a full load of EU (800+).  In that case you need to take the AA even more and hold it as the other team will launch first in all likelihood.  Your team may have stored up EU from killing other players.  you should stagger and take turns dumping EU to make sure the AA is held.

Attached Files






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users