65 replies to this topic

[Nept]

As much as possible, please keep discussions centered around gametypes (TDM, MA, Siege).  Please keep discussions civil. If you did not participate in TPG's first season and/or have no interest in participating in its second, please be especially careful about any contributions. In other words, don't post only to argue.

It is important to note that we are not treating these feedback threads as popular votes. We will be reading all suggestions/discussions and taking them into account when we make our decisions for the second season. We will not, however, implement a suggestion only because it was popular amongst the community.

If you have any suggestions unrelated to our current topics, please post them here, wait for the relevant topic, or send me a pm.

Thanks,

Nept
Head Admin - TPG Hawken

[OmegaNull]

Personally, I felt that TDM had very little to no strategy at all. I for one, am for MA.

Also, Bunker and Bazaar should be not allowed for MA.

Edited by OmegaNull, August 09 2014 - 05:01 PM.

[_incitatus]

I for two, am for MA as well.  

And another second for no Bunker (even though I do enjoy MA immensely on this map) or Bazaar.

[ThirdEyE]

MA has been my preference for scrims since I started playing high tier and comp games.  It allows the strengths of all classes to shine, allows many different playstyles/strategies, provides highly dynamic action, predictable/non-random spawns (typically), and is a good mix between killing and objectives.

Bunker might be an ok change of pace for matches, but I agree with axing Bazaar since it's so heavily imbalanced between spawns.

[LoC_TR]

I actually really like bunker for MA, especially when you have class restrictions. Is it not a balanced map as far as symmetry goes_ Otherwise i'd like to see wreckage in the rotation and possibly keep the rotation at 2 or 3 maps so matches are balanced over the course of the season.

[EliteShooter]

I think siege is the best possible choice; the ultimate focus in this mode is on strategy, smart and fast thinking, synced team movement and engagement, fighting over highly contested positions, and definitely a race between teams in every single objective. Basically the mode that will get the very best out of all of us.

TDM is centered around fighting mainly. MA about point control, fighting, and fast traveling. While siege contains and values all of them and contains all of them; Delivery of energy, control of the AA, and obviously fights everywhere.

Going into the second season, players should be pretty used to their teams, and I'm pretty sure that the chemistry is high enough for teams to not just fight together like in TMD_ but think, approach, plan, and execute together in siege fights.

Gentlemen, you need to understand that there will never be more exciting and competitive games than siege games. And the main problem is that pub siege games have clearly changed our opinions about siege, and probably made us hate it. But with such a great environment of communication and with the high level of participants, I expect TPG siege games to absolutely fantastic.

Not to take anything away from MA, I mean, it also requires strategical thinking, but not anywhere near siege.

Also, one good reason why I think siege is better is because, for MA games, it can almost never go beyond 20 mins. While a TPG siege game can easily beyond an hour, which is -in my opinion- what people are in TPG for.

I mean, let's face it, we played 2 TDM in a week, that's 20 mins in a week. Is that enough_ Will that cover our need for competitive HAWKEN_ Definitely not even close to enough. It's too short, and it can go south so fast.

You might think that same goes for siege; if the enemy takes a 700 base HP advantage, it's all over. While yesterday, in a siege game, we came back from 26-2300 to 26-35. We did more than 2000 dmg to enemy base while not allowing any damage to our base, but we lost when kopra joined the enemy team.

Note that the server's rating is above 2000, probably higher. And the enemy team had incredibly talented players, while my team had me, who isn't even any good (led my team with 1300 score ;p).

It was basically one of those games where you go; "this fun, this excitement, you'll never find it anywhere but in HAWKEN, in a siege game".

Seriously gentlemen, siege is the ULTIMATE hawken game mode, the depth is higher than in any other mode.



TL;DR: Siege requires more thinking, and strategy than any other mode. It requires all kinds of objectives and activities. Mech variation stands out pretty well. Games can be much longer (note; only 1 match per game), and that's a good chance for teams that are trailing to recover, or teams that are leading to dominate.

I would love the guys who suggest MA to explain to me how it can be better than siege.

Edited by EliteShooter, August 10 2014 - 12:13 AM.

[Xacius]

EliteShooter, on August 10 2014 - 12:10 AM, said:

I think siege is the best possible choice; the ultimate focus in this mode is on strategy, smart and fast thinking, synced team movement and engagement, fighting over highly contested positions, and definitely a race between teams in every single objective. Basically the mode that will get the very best out of all of us.

TDM is centered around fighting mainly. MA about point control, fighting, and fast traveling. While siege contains and values all of them and contains all of them; Delivery of energy, control of the AA, and obviously fights everywhere.

TL;DR: Siege requires more thinking, and strategy than any other mode. It requires all kinds of objectives and activities. Mech variation stands out pretty well. Games can be much longer (note; only 1 match per game), and that's a good chance for teams that are trailing to recover, or teams that are leading to dominate.

All game modes are centered around fighting.  The difference between Siege and TDM is that in Siege, enemies generally only fight over one or two areas (AA and EU trees).  In actuality, it entirely removes a large portion of each map from gameplay.  In TDM, both teams can utilize the entire map.  This is not the case in Siege because it has designated zones that are either A. unsafe for one team (like near base turrets) or B. not worth being near.  

As for your TL;DR: there are two things to do in Siege.  1. Collect Energy.   2. Charge the AA.  If the AA can't be charged, then you're forced to shoot down the ship in place of number 2.  Technically, it requires more thinking and strategy than TDM, but not by much.  Not at all.  It's not even worth mentioning, really.  Both gamemodes are simple.  

Until a more competitive gamemode comes around, I doubt we'll see much of a reason to use anything other than TDM in organized play.

Edited by Xacius, August 10 2014 - 03:06 AM.

[deidarall]

I suggest death match turret mode only....


Actually I think the devs need to put in a cap game mode in which you have vertical progression like Tf2. It would be a game of push and pull more so than running around the map capping the point that the enemy team is not at, and honestly the TDM gamemode is a bit rigged at times to due spawns and and picking off people that get unlucky.

Siege might work if the devs do some pretty big changes to it, it is just not interesting to play, and the games can take forever.

Edited by deidarall, August 10 2014 - 06:07 AM.

[Daronicus]

Xacius, on August 10 2014 - 03:04 AM, said:

EliteShooter, on August 10 2014 - 12:10 AM, said:

I think siege is the best possible choice; the ultimate focus in this mode is on strategy, smart and fast thinking, synced team movement and engagement, fighting over highly contested positions, and definitely a race between teams in every single objective. Basically the mode that will get the very best out of all of us.

TDM is centered around fighting mainly. MA about point control, fighting, and fast traveling. While siege contains and values all of them and contains all of them; Delivery of energy, control of the AA, and obviously fights everywhere.

TL;DR: Siege requires more thinking, and strategy than any other mode. It requires all kinds of objectives and activities. Mech variation stands out pretty well. Games can be much longer (note; only 1 match per game), and that's a good chance for teams that are trailing to recover, or teams that are leading to dominate.

All game modes are centered around fighting.  The difference between Siege and TDM is that in Siege, enemies generally only fight over one or two areas (AA and EU trees).  In actuality, it entirely removes a large portion of each map from gameplay.  In TDM, both teams can utilize the entire map.  This is not the case in Siege because it has designated zones that are either A. unsafe for one team (like near base turrets) or B. not worth being near.  

As for your TL;DR: there are two things to do in Siege.  1. Collect Energy.   2. Charge the AA.  If the AA can't be charged, then you're forced to shoot down the ship in place of number 2.  Technically, it requires more thinking and strategy than TDM, but not by much.  Not at all.  It's not even worth mentioning, really.  Both gamemodes are simple.  

Until a more competitive gamemode comes around, I doubt we'll see much of a reason to use anything other than TDM in organized play.

While I don't disagree with the message, I do think you are being overly dismissive of the coordination involved with having the team in several different positions that you have to control all while having people filter in and out (the need for a player to leave the battlefield to run energy adds an interesting dynamic to the momentum of a given team, etc).  There are also a couple different strategies that can work out.  E.g. if you can't hold AA, maybe you can starve them of EU, etc.

On the other hand, I don't really think it's that different from TDM, especially when two ships are in the air, which happens pretty frequently with two evenly matched teams.

Also, there are only two maps that I find tolerable (Frontline and Wreckage) and only one of those I actually enjoy (Wreckage).  Considering also the long hour-plus games that can result from close matches, and I think it would get kind of old quickly.

Edit:  I also wouldn't have an issue with MA so long as Bazaar is banned (I actually like Bunker and think its ok so long as SABOT/Hellfires are restricted).

Edited by [HFC]Daronicus, August 10 2014 - 06:35 AM.

[Leonhardt]

I am in favor of MA over siege. I don't think I have to say we should move away from TDM since we already did that last season, but well there ya go.

[_incitatus]

EliteShooter, on August 10 2014 - 12:10 AM, said:

I would love the guys who suggest MA to explain to me how it can be better than siege.

My main concern with siege is the match length.  Don't get me wrong, I love a good hour long siege match.  Anything past that though and it can get old quick.  And I bet we'd see some 2 hour matches in TPG play.

Also, it might be hard for people to find time to play really long matches like that.  

Siege could be great.  I just personally like MA more and think MA matches would work better time wise.

But hey, can't we do both MA and Siege competitions if there is enough interest for both modes_

Edited by _incitatus, August 10 2014 - 08:01 AM.

[EliteShooter]

Xacius, on August 10 2014 - 03:04 AM, said:

EliteShooter, on August 10 2014 - 12:10 AM, said:

I think siege is the best possible choice; the ultimate focus in this mode is on strategy, smart and fast thinking, synced team movement and engagement, fighting over highly contested positions, and definitely a race between teams in every single objective. Basically the mode that will get the very best out of all of us.

TDM is centered around fighting mainly. MA about point control, fighting, and fast traveling. While siege contains and values all of them and contains all of them; Delivery of energy, control of the AA, and obviously fights everywhere.

TL;DR: Siege requires more thinking, and strategy than any other mode. It requires all kinds of objectives and activities. Mech variation stands out pretty well. Games can be much longer (note; only 1 match per game), and that's a good chance for teams that are trailing to recover, or teams that are leading to dominate.

All game modes are centered around fighting.  The difference between Siege and TDM is that in Siege, enemies generally only fight over one or two areas (AA and EU trees).  In actuality, it entirely removes a large portion of each map from gameplay.  In TDM, both teams can utilize the entire map.  This is not the case in Siege because it has designated zones that are either A. unsafe for one team (like near base turrets) or B. not worth being near.  

As for your TL;DR: there are two things to do in Siege.  1. Collect Energy.   2. Charge the AA.  If the AA can't be charged, then you're forced to shoot down the ship in place of number 2.  Technically, it requires more thinking and strategy than TDM, but not by much.  Not at all.  It's not even worth mentioning, really.  Both gamemodes are simple.  

Until a more competitive gamemode comes around, I doubt we'll see much of a reason to use anything other than TDM in organized play.

Actually, the timing with launching ships is something that's very important, and it can be the difference maker so easily. In siege fighting over AA might require some advanced schemes, I mean, it's nearly impossible to push a well positioned team out of AA without a varied approach, and accurate sync between flankers, suppression units, and front-line units.

But, xacius, please, may I know how many siege games you played, just look at the stat whenever you have time to launch HAWKEN. And thank you.


Myself, I have 397 siege wins, and 255 losses. That's a total of 652 siege games. So I should know the mode well enough (definitely others might know more about it than me, but most of my siege games were those long competitive kid of games with much better players than me). I have built a good experience playing amazing people (mostly pre-ascension), people who used voice-chat, and showed me how competitive siege games, are like no other. And I want everyone to live such an experience.

Edited by EliteShooter, August 10 2014 - 10:03 AM.

[I2DI]

Sorry for that, but... OMFG SIEGE!!!1
The reasons were mensioned, don't want to waste time repeating them.

[Leonhardt]

EliteShooter, on August 10 2014 - 12:10 AM, said:

TL;DR: Siege requires more thinking, and strategy than any other mode. It requires all kinds of objectives and activities. Mech variation stands out pretty well. Games can be much longer (note; only 1 match per game), and that's a good chance for teams that are trailing to recover, or teams that are leading to dominate.

I would love the guys who suggest MA to explain to me how it can be better than siege.

Siege having more strategy available then MA_ Well I don't think that is the case and I will give you the reason why short and sweet.

My siege strategy on 90% of maps will not be to hold the AA no once we have the AA we will camp the most direct routes to the AA and launch ships at your team until we win. It will be quick and it will be painful. Taking the AA is cake and keeping you pinned inside 1/4th to 1/5th of the map is really very easy in that game mode on most of the maps available especially since I know exactly where you are gonna spawn, how much time I have to heal/how long it takes you to get back, and when you have spawned. Knowing those 3 things I can make sure you never get close to the AA or EU for most of the game.

In MA if I try to do that I have to take all 3 points clear your team for a full wipe and cover/defend about 70% of the map which is too spread out for my team to do. In siege I only really have to defend 1 point so placing my team between the AA and your spawn my team can keep you from even getting close.

Edited by Leonhardt, August 10 2014 - 01:08 PM.

[Ker4u]

Quote

My siege strategy on 90% of maps will not be to hold the AA no once we have the AA we will camp the most direct routes to the AA and launch ships at your team until we win

You won't be able to defend  aa in 4v6, and  collect energy at the same time, especially in late game when you need 800+ eu to launch.

Recently i won a siege game where my team never fully had aa.
We launched ships faster, made ambushes on enemy collectors forcing  main stack to leave aa, and than had few free missile launches, but always lost it afterwards since their team had better individual players  But  their base still got damaged  while only our ship was launched. And just by suicide rushing the aa  we won on 7th ship.
Difference in regions regarding siege is actually quite interesting , much more popular in europe, where it's not rare when all players are 2000~ mmr, and in USE it's mostly  tdming beginners,  and base-sitting snipers .

Edited by Ker4u, August 10 2014 - 01:34 PM.

[EliteShooter]

Ker4u, on August 10 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

Quote

My siege strategy on 90% of maps will not be to hold the AA no once we have the AA we will camp the most direct routes to the AA and launch ships at your team until we win

You won't be able to defend  aa in 4v6, and  collect energy at the same time, especially in late game when you need 800+ eu to launch.

Recently i won a siege game where my team never fully had aa.
We launched ships faster, made ambushes on enemy collectors forcing  main stack to leave aa, and than had few free missile launches, killing turrets on ship early, but always lost it afterwards since their team had better individual players. This way their base got damaged  while only  single ship was launched. And just by suicide rushing the aa  we won on 7th ship.
Difference in regions regarding siege is quite interesting actually, much more popular in europe, where it's not rare when all players are 2000~ mmr, and in use it's mostly  tdming beginners

Totally right. Good american players rarely play siege, and they look at it from one angle, a simple look that has no depth, the kind of look the considers it simple and boring, a look that takes away the strategical part and considers it a repetitive process, a one-way to be done kind of mode. And that's all false.


The thing is, it's pretty simple, try both modes in the pre-season, and teams can chose. If you all chose MA then be it, people hate to think really, all they want is keep boosting all over the place, and killing separated groups ... I know how everyone thinks ... meh ...

[deidarall]

Quote

Totally right. Good american players rarely play siege, and they look at it from one angle, a simple look that has no depth, the kind of look the considers it simple and boring, a look that takes away the strategical part and considers it a repetitive process, a one-way to be done kind of mode. And that's all false.

Actually I would claim that siege is the most complex gamemode, and yet it is still boring as hell. Also I like how you just say "AMERIAN PLAYERS LOOK AT IT LIKE THIS AND THEY ARE WRONG" Also sure you have many way to go about siege, but to be honest siege to myself is a slow paced dull deadlock grind of painful pointless objective changes that go on for far too long.

Quote

If you all chose MA then be it, people hate to think really, all they want is keep boosting all over the place, and killing separated groups .

And I like you, I really do, your such a cute little guy you. I mean people that favor MA clearly just HATE to think. Now you be a good little man and read some yaoi, does wondering for the dark little sad part of you mind.

Look just because people favor MA over siege does not mean they wish to have thoughtless gameplay, the fact that you even said that makes me laugh.

[Leonhardt]

Ker4u, on August 10 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

Quote

My siege strategy on 90% of maps will not be to hold the AA no once we have the AA we will camp the most direct routes to the AA and launch ships at your team until we win

You won't be able to defend  aa in 4v6, and  collect energy at the same time, especially in late game when you need 800+ eu to launch.

Recently i won a siege game where my team never fully had aa.
We launched ships faster, made ambushes on enemy collectors forcing  main stack to leave aa, and than had few free missile launches, but always lost it afterwards since their team had better individual players  But  their base still got damaged  while only our ship was launched. And just by suicide rushing the aa  we won on 7th ship.
Difference in regions regarding siege is actually quite interesting , much more popular in europe, where it's not rare when all players are 2000~ mmr, and in USE it's mostly  tdming beginners,  and base-sitting snipers .

The strategy isn't to just camp the base entrances the entire time. You only camp it after launching and taking the AA. Of course now that you mention it if we were really mean we could just send one A class to get enough EU to put us ahead in the ship launch race and continue to camp. As long as there is a tech to keep us refreshed it wouldn't be too hard to at least keep the enemy team from getting near the AA or EU.

EliteShooter, on August 10 2014 - 01:36 PM, said:

Ker4u, on August 10 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

Quote

My siege strategy on 90% of maps will not be to hold the AA no once we have the AA we will camp the most direct routes to the AA and launch ships at your team until we win

You won't be able to defend  aa in 4v6, and  collect energy at the same time, especially in late game when you need 800+ eu to launch.

Recently i won a siege game where my team never fully had aa.
We launched ships faster, made ambushes on enemy collectors forcing  main stack to leave aa, and than had few free missile launches, killing turrets on ship early, but always lost it afterwards since their team had better individual players. This way their base got damaged  while only  single ship was launched. And just by suicide rushing the aa  we won on 7th ship.
Difference in regions regarding siege is quite interesting actually, much more popular in europe, where it's not rare when all players are 2000~ mmr, and in use it's mostly  tdming beginners

Totally right. Good american players rarely play siege, and they look at it from one angle, a simple look that has no depth, the kind of look the considers it simple and boring, a look that takes away the strategical part and considers it a repetitive process, a one-way to be done kind of mode. And that's all false.


The thing is, it's pretty simple, try both modes in the pre-season, and teams can chose. If you all chose MA then be it, people hate to think really, all they want is keep boosting all over the place, and killing separated groups ... I know how everyone thinks ... meh ...

If you want I am sure we would be happy to show you how the strategy works. Its not like I am only theory crafting here. We have done it before against teams who practice only siege. I am not just brushing siege aside like you seem to think. If you know of strategies that work then please show them to me and I will change my position.

[Xacius]

EliteShooter, on August 10 2014 - 01:36 PM, said:

Ker4u, on August 10 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

Quote

My siege strategy on 90% of maps will not be to hold the AA no once we have the AA we will camp the most direct routes to the AA and launch ships at your team until we win

You won't be able to defend  aa in 4v6, and  collect energy at the same time, especially in late game when you need 800+ eu to launch.

Recently i won a siege game where my team never fully had aa.
We launched ships faster, made ambushes on enemy collectors forcing  main stack to leave aa, and than had few free missile launches, killing turrets on ship early, but always lost it afterwards since their team had better individual players. This way their base got damaged  while only  single ship was launched. And just by suicide rushing the aa  we won on 7th ship.
Difference in regions regarding siege is quite interesting actually, much more popular in europe, where it's not rare when all players are 2000~ mmr, and in use it's mostly  tdming beginners

Totally right. Good american players rarely play siege, and they look at it from one angle, a simple look that has no depth, the kind of look the considers it simple and boring, a look that takes away the strategical part and considers it a repetitive process, a one-way to be done kind of mode. And that's all false.

Lmao.  I'm going to break down your assessment and show you something.  

1. "Good american players rarely play siege..."
Here, you're generalizing with no real evidence to back up your claims.  

2. "...and they look at it from one angle, a simple look that has no depth."
OBJECTION!

You've claimed that the "Good" American players look at siege from a simple viewpoint that lacks depth.  You're essentially stating that our view of siege is narrow-minded, and therefore false.  

3.  "...the kind of look the considers it simple and boring..."
You got one thing right.  Siege is, as a whole, is simple and boring.  It's a predictable King of the Hill with minimal resource management.  All of the important fights happen in the same three locations: AA and energy silos.  The only interesting element is choosing when to launch a ship or when to hold off and wait.  Do not mistake this for a "narrow-minded" viewpoint.  I've played a considerable amount of Siege, and the successful strategy is almost always the same.  Launch ship.  Take AA.  There is minimal variation as to how those objectives are completed, partly due to the map design.  If there were multiple AA's that had to be moved to, say because of a limited amount of missiles, then it could be more interesting.  As it stands, however, the gametype is as predictable as it is bland.  

4. "...a look that takes away the strategical part and considers it a repetitive process, a one-way to be done kind of mode..."
Launch ship.  Take AA.  If you can't take the AA, then shoot the ship.  It's a simple game mode.  Is there something more that I'm missing_  If so, please share your wisdom.  

All in all, you made up a set of circumstances to suit your argument, attempted to undermine our viewpoint by considering it as "narrow-minded," and failed to back up your statements with logic or evidence.  

EliteShooter uses "post on forums."
It's not very effective.

Edited by Xacius, August 10 2014 - 04:02 PM.

[Sylhiri]

Did Xacius just pull a AJK_

Edited by Sylhiri, August 10 2014 - 04:17 PM.