Winning a standoff

[Stalker]

This might not apply to open games but I think it would be a simple yet extremely valuable feature for all no-respawn leagues.  One of the biggest unsolvable problems is how to make sure people actually fight and give battle when they wish to hide and "win" that way instead.  The only solution available is basically an honor system which is of course fully abused because there is no precise way to seperate ambushing, waiting or hiding.  One team claims its an ambush, their opponents claim they are hiding and refusing battle.

If there were a single cappable flag location on the map, somewhere in a wide open space that cannot serve as a defensive position that a team can "own" by having a mech in close proximity it would put an end to the idea of camping in a hole and waiting the clock out to "win".  I don't know if there is much work involved in doing something like that but it would solve a major issue for leagues by having a method to determine the winner of a stalemate situation, in this case the owner of the Flag location.

[Ghiest]

Or point system based on damage which is what the money system is based off already I believe.  In old CTF days waaaay back in the UKCCL Quakeworld CTF if it was a draw the team with the highest +spread of kills to deaths would win.  Some leagues would just class it as a draw that would award 1 point each like football er.. soccer matches in leagues today.

[Stalker]

Umm. no. 

That simply encourages the idiots to sneak in a few shots to get points on the board and then run to hide in a hole somewhere.

The only certain result is the total destruction of the enemy force.  The only certainty available if that doesn't happen is based on who controls the field of battle and who is hiding to avoid a fight.  With a flag you can capture to prove you own the field, you have a result.  Every other type of stalemate can be abused, and is.

[DruidChiken]

Stalker u have some good points and the hiding especially from the defending team has always been an annoyance but these scenarios would only happen in a TD match using the Solaris maps not the ToA battles

but the problem with having the single capture point is that it limits all the action to that one area of the map and it would soon become very boring to have to replay the same thing over and over and never get to explore other strategies or even the fun in fighting on the different map terrians

[Stalker]

The idea of having the single capture point in the open is so a team can't camp that location, they'd be exposed to fire from all sides.  It would only become a game winning feature if the timer ran out without one side being destroyed, then the stronger or more confident unit moves to cap the flag in the last few minutes to get the win.  If this tempts out the other unit from hiding to try and fight then great, thats much better than a no-combat stalemate. 

As things stand now, you don't even get to fight at the end, the clock runs out and you have to re-drop again with no guarantee that anything different will happen.  It means the team with the least time to waist in standing around usually feels obliged to attack even when it's a bad position to try.  The whole things stinks really.

I'm sure that other solutions exist apart from mine and I'd be happy to see anything done compared to the silliness of spending hours standing around for no result.  I'm just getting the idea out there.

[(TLL)Nick]

Yeah, I like the ideas, Stalker. DruidChiken, I also like how you state that only one flag would limit the action, and would be boring. I agree.  There should be at least 2 flags for each team.

[AoP]

Yeah, I like the ideas, Stalker. DruidChiken, I also like how you state that only one flag would limit the action, and would be boring. I agree.  There should be at least 2 flags for each team.

Which would, basically, get us back to the Trial of Annihilation (ToA) game mode.


Stalker, thanks for your input. I'm sure most people who ever played first person multiplayer games online have experienced similar situations and most will as well consider this to be a frustrating experience. As far as the implementation of your suggestion is concerned, you're free to either learn LUA scripting and C++ coding yourself or find people capable of this and develop a game mode with the resources already available to you - the Crysis / Crysis Wars SDK and the respective game.
Porting that game mode to MWLL upon release respectively adding MWLL prefabs to existing maps for such a game mode will be a minor issue which we might even be able to assist with.

However, as our resources are very limited and need to be used to complete MWLL's own core features, the developer team at this time has no intentions of picking up this suggestion or working on any other game modes than those two that have been announced: Solaris Arena and Trial of Annihilation.

[Ghiest]

What's the point in not engaging the enemy?  Might as well go play solitaire ffs.  I don't see how some one could seriously play the game and just go hide somewhere on the map to not get hit.  If someone takes small pot shots at you then runs, you either take the rest of your team and take him down, or you take the objective set to your team.  As far as I know it's either take out the objective (ToA) or Solaris - destroy the other team (SA) so tell me why would you hide in either circumstance?

One of the biggest unsolvable problems is how to make sure people actually fight and give battle when they wish to hide and "win" that way instead.

Now granted I've not played many MW matches on line but I've played thousands of online clan matches and it's never ever come down to it where someone will hide and not fight ... well OK there was this one time where I was the last out of my 5 man team (rocket arena 2 I think it was) pushing for the time limit to force the win, so I hid but It was 5 v 1, but that was tactical to win the match vs overwhelming odds.  Do people seriously not actually enter into battle in Mechwarrior?  Is this a 'common' enough to say this is one the biggest unsolvable problems?

[Stalker]

If it's done correctly, you wouldn't end up with the action centered on the flag.  If it's placed in a position that is wide open, any unit that stands there will be torn to pieces by ranged fire.  So both units would have to patrol the map looking for the enemy and you get a fight that way, when people know they can't win by hiding, they stop hiding at all.

Maybe in the beginning units would try and camp the flag because they don't realise it's a bad idea but after a few games of them being annihilated they'll avoid it and search the map looking for the enemy so they don't have to go near the flag at all.

The real point of placing the flag in the open is to make it dangerous to be near it.  The only way it can be used to win the game is if the enemy is too frightened or weak to come out and fight for it.  Otherwise, standing in the open with no cover.. you're going to die.  

Do people seriously not actually enter into battle in Mechwarrior?  Is this a 'common' enough to say this is one the biggest unsolvable problems?

Yes.  When one team knows they probably can't win or they aren't as good with tactics, they'll pack on short range weapons and hide in a protected location, the only way to fight them is to basically jump in there with them, and they hammer you.

[Stahlseele]

Isn't Capture the Flag snatch and deliver home?

[PukinDog]

What's the point in not engaging the enemy?  Might as well go play solitaire ffs.  I don't see how some one could seriously play the game and just go hide somewhere on the map to not get hit.  If someone takes small pot shots at you then runs, you either take the rest of your team and take him down, or you take the objective set to your team.  As far as I know it's either take out the objective (ToA) or Solaris - destroy the other team (SA) so tell me why would you hide in either circumstance?

One of the biggest unsolvable problems is how to make sure people actually fight and give battle when they wish to hide and "win" that way instead.

Now granted I've not played many MW matches on line but I've played thousands of online clan matches and it's never ever come down to it where someone will hide and not fight ... well OK there was this one time where I was the last out of my 5 man team (rocket arena 2 I think it was) pushing for the time limit to force the win, so I hid but It was 5 v 1, but that was tactical to win the match vs overwhelming odds.  Do people seriously not actually enter into battle in Mechwarrior?  Is this a 'common' enough to say this is one the biggest unsolvable problems?

The main problem is the few Bull_ rules of NBT and many past MW "leagues" in general (not just pointing out one).  NBT league play RULES involve the whole planetary capture, economic, mech factories, etc....there are rules which state that during a certain type of "battle", if the defender (or attacker..I forget ) is NOT completely destroyed, then the opposing force wins automatically.  Keep in mind that these are time limited games (why I don't know, I always thought it stuyyypid)...so a defending team can hide, even just keep one mech alive...and avoid their planet from being taken over.

Of course, this is a small problem that has been recognized by many players of NBT, and as a whole, is overlooked for the many good features of the league.  No league is perfect, and you can't please everyone.  My advice to Stalker (who is very respected in the NBT forums) is to become a league admin and voice these concerns he has, and get the rules changed.

Don't get me wrong, I think the NBT rules are some of the best out there....only a few kinda don't make sense to me, but who am I to judge?

Existing leagues all have pros and cons...its up to us as players/unit leaders to decide which league is best for our unit.  So join wisely.

[Ghiest]

Yes.  When one team knows they probably can't win or they aren't as good with tactics, they'll pack on short range weapons and hide in a protected location, the only way to fight them is to basically jump in there with them, and they hammer you.

Inability to engage in combat and ambushing as a tactic are completely different things.  This is also where fully customizable mechs are a bad thing for the game, to where you can do either fully load up on ranged or short ranged weapons for specific tasks it's the whole min-maxing thing.  With pre-built variants you will still see it to a certain extent but not as much I think.  And that's the route that MW:LL is going for the first beta I think.  Hiding and ambushing is as bad as camping (in fact it is camping) I can see why with a fully customizable mech it can be a real plague, but with ToA maps I see it being less prevalent with air cover and small fast moving targets for scouting, hiding will be allot less prevalent than in previous games, especially with draw distances turned up you can see a fair distance from the air.

[raskapopolis]

there was a team mission in MW2, i can't remember the map name, where the winning team was the one that kept a mech within a couple of hundred metres of a nav point for a set number minutes. obviously the point was the get everyone to converge on the one place and ultimately the last man standing won it for the team.

as for camping generally, you'll never get rid of it, you just learn who you like playing against and who you don't 

[PukinDog]

Won't the aerotech aspect of MWLL reduce the chances of teams camping???...aerotech are the ultimate scouts...heavily armed ones at that...its gonna be hard to hide, IMHO.  Just call in the target...I think a lot of us forget about that.

I plan on having fighter support on every map I can...

So maybe this is a moot worry?

[TuRbOlAg]

Won't the aerotech aspect of MWLL keep teams from camping...you basically have the ultimate scouts...and heavily armed ones at that...its gonna be hard to hide, IMHO.

True.  Most well rounded battle groups will have at least one Aerotech or battle armor to scout around if the opposing team can't be located.  I'd volunteer for that role.