122 replies to this topic

[Felbombling]

Below is a link to the Town Hall from last night. If you want a window into how frustrating game design is, listen to the 01:40:00 - 01:50:00 segment. Russ gets a question on possible unit size restrictions. Listen as excitement and optimism is turned into confusion and exasperation.



Not having access to the chat window on the evening, my guess is that the players want either A: a schedule for teams for the evening or B: some sort of guaranteed reward for even showing up. If anyone was there last night, please enlighten me/us as to what was going on in chat. I would be really interested in what was going on or what the larger groups really want.

Thanks!

Edited by StaggerCheck, 28 October 2015 - 02:33 PM.

[GRiPSViGiL]

Confusion and exasperation always clouds those who have no clue what they are doing.

[Kushko]

GRiPSViGiL, on 28 October 2015 - 11:16 AM, said:

Confusion and exasperation always clouds those who have no clue what they are doing.

Maybe you should actually listen to the segment in question before joining the hate train leading to Clueless Town.

From what im hearing Russ is actually trying to come up with changes that will have a positive effect on CW, while the vocal minority is stomping their feet and acting like children not willing to listen to anything.

[CDLord HHGD]

We could theorycraft on what the unit size limitation could be...

I will ALWAYS vote for the lore-friendly answer.

Inner Sphere
Lance - 4
Company - 12
Battalion - 36
Regiment - 108

Clan (omitting non-mech orgs)
Point - 1
Star - 5
Binary - 10
Trinary - 15
Cluster - 20 to 75
Galaxy - 40 to 375

So perhaps the answer is 120? Call it a "reinforced" regiment or cluster?

IS = Regiment (108)
C = Galaxy (108)

Edited by cdlord, 29 October 2015 - 05:25 AM.

[Davegt27]

[Mazzyplz]

i want to make a video i will do so this week and hopefully russ will see it.


what there needs to happen is that unit coffers should become relevant; and having a big unit would drain exponentially more coffer cbills.

[Xetelian]

GRiPSViGiL, on 28 October 2015 - 11:16 AM, said:

Confusion and exasperation always clouds those who have no clue what they are doing.

Reminds me of a comment he made when people asked about better quirks for the IFR when it was released. He got all excited and said "Does the IFR have a center torso energy slot?" Because the new one in the gift store did but so do all the non primes so there was nothing new being offered but the question or complaint about it being weak was answered and they moved on.


I want the manager of the game to know a little more about the mechs he's releasing and at least check the hard points on one or two of them before commenting.

I feel like its the blind leading the blind up in this *****.

Edited by Xetelian, 28 October 2015 - 12:47 PM.

[StalaggtIKE]

Half of the people want more in-game freedom, the other half are asking for more restrictions. Most have such a narrow perspective of only what they want, they miss how much it clashes with the other.

The only thing both can agree on is that PGI can do no right.

I felt bad for him.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 28 October 2015 - 12:55 PM.

[GRiPSViGiL]

Kushko, on 28 October 2015 - 12:06 PM, said:

Maybe you should actually listen to the segment in question before joining the hate train leading to Clueless Town.

From what im hearing Russ is actually trying to come up with changes that will have a positive effect on CW, while the vocal minority is stomping their feet and acting like children not willing to listen to anything.

We have been in this same place on this never ending treadmill of suck for over three years now. Team death match is all you have to offer us after what you sold us? How many more phases will it take for CW to matter? Or better yet....every drop was suppose to matter, give me something for longevity sake. This has been more of the same concerning town halls and development, limited to no info for anything and we are to expect them to turn this ship around. Naw, all faith is gone at this point. Well not all I am still creeping the forums holding onto that last sliver.

Edited by GRiPSViGiL, 28 October 2015 - 01:13 PM.

[Big Tin Man]

In short: what the larger groups want in CW is more non-pug opponents. Russ's frustration is born from a couple of large groups who roam around looking for a fight, but can't find one because they're the only game in town outside of pugs. Then when Russ suggests limiting unit size (i.e. break up the big groups so smaller groups can fight each other), the whole room went nuts, because nobody wants to break up their superunit. Russ's frustration is based on everyone wants to be in a big group and bully someone, but when there is nobody to bully, they're upset that they can't find a fight. It's called having your cake and eating it too. MWO doesn't have the population to pull that off.

We have to remember that Russ's mindset is already in CW3, where having your own planet tag has some meaning, and there aren't as many planets to fight over. If they limit unit size, and units break into splinters of themselves, MS_3 or 228d will eventually get sick of missing out on the rewards MS_1 and 228a are reaping, and break off to fight and get their own rewards. Player circulation in CW is a good thing.

My vote is for units being of regimental size (108 players). It's not that radical of a step for most groups, and with all of the stated CW3 changes coming to condense the action, I don't think a massive change to unit size is truly warranted at this time. Let CW3 drop before cutting unit size any further.

[JaxRiot]

Ya the poor guy is definitely frustrated and I cant blame him. I would be too.

Even if they limit the Unit sizes to say 50, and make controlling a planet under that Units tag actually worth something to the Unit, the Units will still form alliances and help each other control the planets. In the end it will still be what we have now.

But what else can he do? Make it so people can only drop with people that have the same Unit Tag and put a cap on Unit sizes and limit the number of attackers/defenders per planet?

To me, thats the only way that CW is going be what they want it to be. No more Pug stomps because in order to drop in CW you have to be in a Unit, and with limited attack/defends per planets per Factions along with the smaller Unit sizes, the Units will be more diverse among the Factions.

Edit- But then he would alienate the solo/casual player from CW. Which is bad since the solo/casual player is the bulk of MWO. They would have to make Unit Rewards in CW very attractive to entice people to join Units

I really shouldnt talk though. Im not a big fan of CW so I dont do it much and really should just mind my own business

Edited by JaxRiot, 28 October 2015 - 01:18 PM.

[Deathlike]

It doesn't fix stuff.

You can still create premades with ANYONE.

You can create faction groups with ANYONE IN THE SAME FACTION.

Unit limits solve NEITHER.

[Felbombling]

If you must fight players of your skill level all night long, your earnings suffer while on the losing side. So that seems to be it in my eyes... the right to fight stiffer competition versus the inflated earnings during PuG stomping.

[Adamski]

Every time Russ brings up limiting unit size, people shout him down; and that's because its a bad idea that wont solve the core problem.

The core problem isn't unit sizes, its faction populations. PGI had a very weak faction balancing mechanism in CW Phase 1, then instead of improving it, they removed it for Phase 2. So now the populations are extremely out of whack and the map shows it.

Units band together into mega units & alliances so they have a larger pool of skilled players to meet the required 12 man threshold.

4v4 should help with that, but so will adding faction bonuses / penalties based on faction population CW participation.

[Deathlike]

Adamski, on 28 October 2015 - 01:24 PM, said:

Every time Russ brings up limiting unit size, people shout him down; and that's because its a bad idea that wont solve the core problem.

The core problem isn't unit sizes, its faction populations. PGI had a very weak faction balancing mechanism in CW Phase 1, then instead of improving it, they removed it for Phase 2. So now the populations are extremely out of whack and the map shows it.

Units band together into mega units & alliances so they have a larger pool of skilled players to meet the required 12 man threshold.

4v4 should help with that, but so will adding faction bonuses / penalties based on faction population CW participation.

What mechanism are you talking about?

I don't remember ANY sort of faction balance mechanism... and the "rewards" loosely helped (although for it arguably be applied to clans for a long time helped propagate what eventually happened).

[Adamski]

Remember those 75%-125% Contract bonuses that were dependent on what faction you were in, where the smaller / weaker factions got the largest bonuses?

Those disappeared shortly before the Tukkayid event and PGI never bothered to put them back in.

[Big Tin Man]

Deathlike, on 28 October 2015 - 01:17 PM, said:

It doesn't fix stuff.

You can still create premades with ANYONE.

You can create faction groups with ANYONE IN THE SAME FACTION.

Unit limits solve NEITHER.

Agreed, however limiting the prize of holding the [soon™ to be a thing of value] planet tag to a small fraction of the group may just cause people to realize being in an alliance with 500 people and doing nothing but making more alliances and holding hands isn't the best way to find a fight, and it's not the best way to get everyone paid.

For example: Why would MS players in the EU want to get no planet tags and directly compete against other MS branches for the same cookie, when they aren't even playing at the same time? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to go to another faction and try to get a cookie of their own?

This is about balancing faction population in CW, and making the larger units spread out and fight themselves.

Adamski, on 28 October 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

Remember those 75%-125% Contract bonuses that were dependent on what faction you were in, where the smaller / weaker factions got the largest bonuses?

Those disappeared shortly before the Tukkayid event and PGI never bothered to put them back in.

They're still there, they are just now all equal and haven't been adjusted for months.

[badaa]

GRiPSViGiL, on 28 October 2015 - 11:16 AM, said:

Confusion and exasperation always clouds those who have no clue what they are doing.

or it could be hes trying to gives us what we want, then we went on to tell him how were going to **** it up.

[Kiiyor]

StalaggtIKE, on 28 October 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

Half of the people want more in-game freedom, the other half are asking for more restrictions. Most have such a narrow perspective of only what they want, they miss how much it clashes with the other.

The only thing both can agree on is that PGI can do no right.

I felt bad for him.

That's battletech fandom in a nutshell.

There's a legion of crusty and gnarled fans stretching waaaay back to the first titles, fueled by nostalgia and recollections of awesome games who's faults they generally overlooked in the excitement of new technology and progressively better realized battlemech warfare, all with their own ideas and a hazy mental image of what their perfect mechwarrior game looks like.

It's the clarity of those ideas and the ability to express them that is often blurred. Some people have a fairly clear idea of what they want MWO to be, while others have a much harder time expressing it, yet have a vague notion of a recollection of an idea that they will still defend to the death. Others use the good bits of older titles as a frame of reference for the things they want implemented, despite the fact that older games often got away with far more than newer ones because the technology of the day placed far more restrictions on game development than it does with modern titles. We expect more.

The most hardcore BT and MW fans are like those old men that sit together drinking moonshine and lamenting the good ol' days. The only thing they can really agree on is that they can't really agree on anything.

[Deathlike]

Adamski, on 28 October 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

Remember those 75%-125% Contract bonuses that were dependent on what faction you were in, where the smaller / weaker factions got the largest bonuses?

Those disappeared shortly before the Tukkayid event and PGI never bothered to put them back in.

PGI gave up on CW when it was clearly obvious they had no idea how to properly incentive/manipulate units to be in a certain faction... let alone those loyal to one.

Big Tin Man, on 28 October 2015 - 01:30 PM, said:

Agreed, however limiting the prize of holding the [soon™ to be a thing of value] planet tag to a small fraction of the group may just cause people to realize being in an alliance with 500 people and doing nothing but making more alliances and holding hands isn't the best way to find a fight, and it's not the best way to get everyone paid.

Currently, there isn't really anything that penalizes big units or incentivizes small units... or even the factions.

Collecting "most planets" in a CW phase gets you nothing of consequence either.

There's no leaderboard, but even then, what's the point if you get no rewards?

Quote

For example: Why would MS players in the EU want to get no planet tags and directly compete against other MS branches for the same cookie, when they aren't even playing at the same time? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to go to another faction and try to get a cookie of their own?

It doesn't make a difference, since every faction has no intrinsic value... other than being "Clan" or "IS".

Quote

This is about balancing faction population in CW, and making the larger units spread out and fight themselves.

You need an incentive. PGI has provided none.