239 replies to this topic

[Red Beard]

Haeso, on 08 December 2011 - 03:56 PM, said:

I was more of a voice of reason in this thread than any instigator of hysteria. I was fair to both sides of the argument

I hope you know that that is not the case. I put my opinion on the table back in the first few pages of this thread, and I will defer to Metro's voice of reason here.

[Red Beard]

Agasutin, on 08 December 2011 - 03:59 PM, said:

Instead of crying about Haeso, cry about LP, get back on topic?

Well, there is no reason to "cry" about LP, although I am guessing that you meant that figuratively.

Also, it's tough to take any advice from Haeso's "lackie".


Mason, I know you're a lurkin'...

Please let this thread live, we will need it after next week's Q n A!

Edited by Red Beard, 08 December 2011 - 04:03 PM.

[metro]

>VDB< Redbeard....


...so Paul directed us to this. it will answer alot of the questions floating around. Make sure everyone knows where to find these FAQ's on the DEV site. Under the Game tab.

So will LP be that big a deal, if this irons out the wrinkles?


Mech Warfare:

We want to make sure we bring the roots of the MechWarrior® titles back to the surface and also incorporate the basic rules from the BattleTech® Universe. Players will be able to customize their BattleMechs with weapon and armor upgrades as well as customize their cosmetic appearance in the MechLab. This means players can look unique or fall in line with their Merc Corp colors and truly represent themselves in combat. The next part of Mech Warfare is controls/piloting a BattleMech. Since our key platform is the PC, it only makes sense to really bring the simulation control system back for seasoned players, with the option to have easy access configurations for newer players. When dealing with controls, we really want to bring skill back into combat rather than heavily assisted combat as seen in most modern day first person shooters. The interface between the MechWarrior® and the BattleMech is being revisited as well. A new 3D HUD system is being designed for the neurohelmet pilot information display. The view point of the game is from the pilot (MechWarrior®’s) point of view. Players will be able to look around their cockpit and even customize the interior to suit their tastes.

Role Warfare:

When it comes down to play style for any given player, we want to make sure that we have as many options as possible to cater to as many player types as possible. This is where things get really interesting. Everything from choosing a BattleMech to how a MechWarrior® is trained, will allow a player to truly customize their own personal game experience. What is a player’s preferred role when playing MechWarrior®? Scout? Attacker? Defender? Commander? Whatever it is, a player will be able to train their MechWarrior to specialize in their style of gameplay. Players are highly encouraged to participate in team based gameplay. The fast manoeuvrable scouts will be able to relay information back to the commander units who in turn relay that information to the attacker and defender units. As players advance their MechWarrior in a role, more skills and abilities related to their role will become available. Remember, a team who plays together will always win together.

Community Warfare:

MechWarrior® in all of its incarnations has always had a loyal following of players in one of the strongest on-line communities in gaming history. Piranha-Games hopes to bring this community together in a friendly conflict of universal control. This may sound a little odd, but it is the fun competitiveness that will keep the game alive and kicking for years to come. Utilizing the BattleTech® Inner Sphere, we plan to have skirmishes amongst the Great Houses in BattleTech® lore. Allowing the player to have an active part in this conflict is one of our key directives in designing this game. Players will be able to create, manage and customize their Merc Corp’s player base and appearance, while banding together to really delve into the Inner Sphere conflict where House alignment reigns supreme. Merc Corp leaders will bid and fight for occupation rights to some of the most valuable planets across the Inner Sphere and challenge other Merc Corps for control of planets reaping large rewards.

Information Warfare:

Evolving the MechWarrior® experience required a new layer of gameplay. Instead of large open expanses and circle strafing parties, we wanted to examine the core play experience of the previous MechWarrior® titles and see if we could bring a more tactical/strategic experience to MechWarrior® Online™. Relying more on line-of-sight and incorporating information technologies, we feel that information warfare will bring a new level of realism to the fight and help enforce the idea of team based multiplayer even more. Another aspect of Mech Warfare, something that we can do with new technology, is urban combat. The battlefield is no longer open areas with mile long sightlines. . Tactical manoeuvres will be required now more than ever and the key to success is using InfoTech alongside great team play. The newly implemented Battle Grid will give commanding units a bird’s eye view of the battlefield and scouts will be able to feed real time recon information to them. The battlefield commander will be able to call in air strikes, artillery strikes and other support unit requests.

Edited by Metro, 08 December 2011 - 04:04 PM.

[Agasutin]

I only see LP as a stepping stone before Merc companies can branch off and start occupying border worlds, and the occasional dog treat/ pat on the head from continued service to a specific house.

[MaddMaxx]

or this little ditty.

Quote

"

Disclaimer
We’re committed to releasing information about BETA ready concepts only, however some ideas and concepts are still subject to change after testing.

[Haeso]

Heh, it doesn't really answer any of the questions raised in this thread. It more points to where those answers will come from. It's still very open ended until we hear more. It will be connected to role somehow, but beyond that we do not know. Perhaps as I mentioned it's as simple as earning more LP as a commander, or requiring ranks in commander to go above a certain house rank. Which would ultimately be the same thing, except it's time spent playing as a commander instead of scout, attacker or defender.

Edited by Haeso, 08 December 2011 - 04:09 PM.

[Red Beard]

Much respect, Metro. Allow me a few "moments" to read it through more than once. I want to glean as much as I can.

[Halfinax]

Actually based on Paul's hint that the section of Role Warfare is what we should be referencing in terms of how LP will be implemented it's a simple leap of logic that he was telling us that how well you perform in your role (whether it's commander, attacker, defender, scout, etc.) will have a direct impact on LP, and that will have a feed back loop into the perks you unlock with LP.

In other words someone that runs the role of Scout well will get rewarded with more LP (spotting enemies) , and with that LP the Scout will unlock additional perks for their role of choice. Obviously the same could be said for each role.

Edited by Halfinax, 08 December 2011 - 04:22 PM.

[Mason Grimm]

Halfinax, on 08 December 2011 - 04:20 PM, said:

In other words someone that runs the role of Scout well will get rewarded with more LP (spotting enemies) , and with that LP the Scout will unlock additional perks for their role of choice. Obviously the same could be said for each role.

Sort of like a "class based reward system"? Interesting concept and would certainly allow for immersion and specialization of a pilot/player style.

[Haeso]

Halfinax, on 08 December 2011 - 04:20 PM, said:

Actually based on Paul's hint that the section of Role Warfare is what we should be referencing in terms of how LP will be implemented it's a simple leap of logic that he was telling us that how well you perform in your role (whether it's commander, attacker, defender, scout, etc.) will have a direct impact on LP, and that will have a feed back loop into the perks you unlock with LP.

Yes that's the original assumption we all have, what are you getting at? I think you misunderstood what I was getting at if this is directed at me. If every role earns LP, then it's just time based like people were concerned about - unless there is more to it. Without making more assumptions or having more information, we can't go further. So we make assumptions and debate under the pretense of 'if this is true', or stop posting entirely.

Quote

In other words someone that runs the role of Scout well will get rewarded with more LP (spotting enemies) , and with that LP the Scout will unlock additional perks for their role of choice. Obviously the same could be said for each role.

But what does that have to do with getting to the highest ranks of LP? Directly, nothing. If a scout earns LP for scouting and a command role earns LP for 'commanding' unless the commander has some unknown bonus, or you require command levels to get beyond a certain point in LP ranks. (which would still be time = rank = faction influence.)

We do not have enough information, and the concern arises from the assumptions that there isn't more to it - twice it has been said there's something, once it was role warfare and once indirectly 'we wouldn't allow such a grind' as a reference to WoW. Which is why I'm not worried myself, just debating with what we know right now. Whether one makes the assumption the hidden pieces of information fit together to make this not an issue, or the assumption it doesn't, isn't important to where this thread has progressed.

It has quite elaborately explained the problems if there isn't more to the system. So it is now more likely there will be more if the assumption there wasn't, was true. Or it may prove to be a 'useless' thought experiment, but I wouldn't classify a thought experiment as useless myself.

Edited by Haeso, 08 December 2011 - 04:36 PM.

[Jack Gallows]

Mason Grimm, on 08 December 2011 - 04:27 PM, said:

Sort of like a "class based reward system"? Interesting concept and would certainly allow for immersion and specialization of a pilot/player style.

It'd also promote people taking the time to get good at what they're doing, not just log endless hours into the game. Should have a few general unlocks based on LP, and then role specific unlocks from LP. It would need to be watched, however, because you don't want it being too punishing if you want to be able to fill more then one role over time, should something happen that requires you to swap focus. Gaining role specific LP is fine, until it locks you out of the other roles if you ever had the idea to do something different.

Haeso, on 08 December 2011 - 04:34 PM, said:

But what does that have to do with getting to the highest ranks of LP? Directly, nothing. If a scout earns LP for scouting and a command role earns LP for 'commanding' unless the commander has some unknown bonus, or you require command levels to get beyond a certain point in LP ranks. (which would still be time = rank = faction influence.)

Brian also said "Not sure if this helps, but Mercenary Corp ranks have nothing to do with loyalty points. Second, your assuming that rank allows you to access command options, this is not accurate."

The LP rank system is (for what we know currently,) unlocking extras and perks, which we need also remember this is a free to play game. You might be able to buy off a week of decay or what have you, to stop your rank from diminishing if you can't log in, or they may make it so the decay isn't that harsh as people may assume it to be.

So, I'm going to think that LP is for gaining perks from your specific faction (like, maybe I unlock the Davion Guard colors for my mechs at a specific LP with House Davion,) and gives you whatever "rank" the points equate to, but they won't be giving anyone the right to sit in the commander seat. I think that'll be left to the players, and they'll decide who gets to do it.

Edited by Jack Gallows, 08 December 2011 - 04:42 PM.

[Halfinax]

Haeso, on 08 December 2011 - 04:34 PM, said:

Yes that's the original assumption we all have, what are you getting at? I think you misunderstood what I was getting at if this is directed at me. If every role earns LP, then it's just time based like people were concerned about - unless there is more to it. Without making more assumptions or having more information, we can't go further. So we make assumptions and debate under the pretense of 'if this is true', or stop posting entirely.



But what does that have to do with getting to the highest ranks of LP? Directly, nothing. If a scout earns LP for scouting and a command role earns LP for 'commanding' unless the commander has some unknown bonus, or you require command levels to get beyond a certain point in LP ranks. (which would still be time = rank = faction influence.)

We do not have enough information, and the concern arises from the assumptions that there isn't more to it - twice it has been said there's something, once it was role warfare and once indirectly 'we wouldn't allow such a grind' as a reference to WoW. Which is why I'm not worried myself, just debating with what we know right now. Whether one makes the assumption the hidden pieces of information fit together to make this not an issue, or the assumption it doesn't, isn't important to where this thread has progressed.

It has quite elaborately explained the problems if there isn't more to the system. So it is now more likely there will be more if the assumption there wasn't, was true. Or it may prove to be a 'useless' thought experiment, but I wouldn't classify a thought experiment as useless myself.

Being better at your role will net you more LP, If you get 10 LP a round in your role an hour, and another guy plays for 10 hours but only gets 1 LP an hour then the field is equalized. Playing more will get you more LP, but being skilled will get you more LP in the time you play. There is no way to prevent people from playing more and less effeciently to still over reach you in LP, but I don't really know what the giant concern is. They will also get more C-bills, more XP, and be getting better over time. I just don't see away to mitigate people playing more, and I honestly don't understand why it's being used as some foil. What do you want to limit the amount of time each person can play a day? What difference does it really make that someone can play more than you, and how is that relevant to the mechanic at all?

Do you get equally concerned when another guy works more hours than you because they don't have as much responsibility outside of work to worry about earning more money than you do? It's a strawman argument and has no real baring on the game mechanic.

[Haeso]

Jack Gallows, on 08 December 2011 - 04:36 PM, said:

Brian also said "Not sure if this helps, but Mercenary Corp ranks have nothing to do with loyalty points. Second, your assuming that rank allows you to access command options, this is not accurate."

That has to do with Merc Corp ranks, not LP. Not the point of the thread, at least that's as I read it. Could you provide the location of that quote for context?

And as this quote explains it, highlighted is the important bit, rest is context to make sure it's clear, rank = time = control. Time = Reward isn't considered a problem by anyone here that I've seen. It's that time directly leads to command. That's a fake and hollow command structure if ever there was one.


"As a Faction Player, loyalty points are earned by playing and winning matches. As the player accumulates loyalty points, they will gain a military faction rank at pre-determined loyalty point totals. If a player loses LPs by decay or negative actions, they will be demoted.
Gaining ranks earns special privileges and items, including membership to special units, unit skins, and bonuses to C-Bills and XP. These are all non-permanent and subject to the player maintaining a certain rank level. At the highest possible levels, players can begin to influence their faction by controlling which planets are targeted in territory conquest."

Quote

The LP rank system is (for what we know currently,) unlocking extras and perks, which we need also remember this is a free to play game. You might be able to buy off a week of decay or what have you, to stop your rank from diminishing if you can't log in, or they may make it so the decay isn't that harsh as people may assume it to be.

This isn't really relevant to the concerns, unless you're saying you can purchase LP, not prevent LP from decaying.

Quote

So, I'm going to think that LP is for gaining perks from your specific faction (like, maybe I unlock the Davion Guard colors for my mechs at a specific LP with House Davion,) and gives you whatever "rank" the points equate to, but they won't be giving anyone the right to sit in the commander seat. I think that'll be left to the players, and they'll decide who gets to do it.

One of those perks was explicitly stated to be the ability to choose the target planets for your factions which is where the concern originated combined with the time = rank equation. Time = Rank up to a certain point is fine, beyond a certain point it is generally not considered fine. Is that more clear? You shouldn't be a general just because you've spent a lot of money or time playing, you should be a good leader to rise that high, hopefully that gets things across a bit better.

Halfinax, on 08 December 2011 - 04:43 PM, said:

Being better at your role will net you more LP, If you get 10 LP a round in your role an hour, and another guy plays for 10 hours but only gets 1 LP an hour then the field is equalized. Playing more will get you more LP, but being skilled will get you more LP in the time you play. There is no way to prevent people from playing more and less effeciently to still over reach you in LP, but I don't really know what the giant concern is. They will also get more C-bills, more XP, and be getting better over time. I just don't see away to mitigate people playing more, and I honestly don't understand why it's being used as some foil. What do you want to limit the amount of time each person can play a day? What difference does it really make that someone can play more than you, and how is that relevant to the mechanic at all?

See above - it's not about time = reward, I and most if not all players are okay with that to some extent. It is solely the nature of the reward - the ability to command your faction, rather than just in-match perks, is something that should not be solely time played.

Quote

Do you get equally concerned when another guy works more hours than you because they don't have as much responsibility outside of work to worry about earning more money than you do? It's a strawman argument and has no real baring on the game mechanic.

No, but I might if he got promoted to manager even though he's a moron that is willing to work nights. I wouldn't have a problem with a pay raise for him, though.

Edited by Haeso, 08 December 2011 - 04:56 PM.

[Garth Erlam]

This is a reminder to keep it civil so we can keep dialogue going. That's dialogue not harassing, though. Note the difference.

[MaddMaxx]

Quote

"Gaining ranks earns special privileges and items, including membership to special units, unit skins, and bonuses to C-Bills and XP. These are all non-permanent and subject to the player maintaining a certain rank level. At the highest possible levels, players can begin to influence their faction by controlling which planets are targeted in territory conquest."

Quote

"No, but I might if he got promoted to manager even though he's a moron that is willing to work nights. I wouldn't have a problem with a pay raise for him, though."

I have to ask in all seriousness. How did quote 1 somehow indicate that quote 2 was even a remote possibility, except in the minds of those who just fear the unknown?

"Come on...Man!"

Edited by MaddMaxx, 08 December 2011 - 05:07 PM.

[Haeso]

"As a Faction Player, loyalty points are earned by playing and winning matches."

"At the highest possible levels, players can begin to influence their faction by controlling which planets are targeted in territory conquest."

Unless you're speaking a different language than me, that's not a leap by any means, though the quote was taken very much out of context here by you.

Time is directly related to LP gain, levels are tied to LP amounts. Ergo, high command is made up of those who play the most.

Obviously the analogy is a little silly put into that context, it wasn't meant to be directly compared to LP, it was meant to be directly compared to his own little silly analogy.

Quote

"Do you get equally concerned when another guy works more hours than you because they don't have as much responsibility outside of work to worry about earning more money than you do? It's a strawman argument and has no real baring on the game mechanic.

[Paul Inouye]

Basically my point is this. We haven't released all the information regarding LP. We also haven't released any information besides mile high level details on Role Warfare. In the QnA we will be addressing what LP is exactly and how it works within the game's overall design. I've seen a lot of people here think that LP is going to dictate who makes the calls on how you play. This is not the case and as I said, will be covered in the QnA.

Please everyone, I truely appreciate the passion of all of you but let's not get overheated quite yet. Wait until the QnA session before blowing your lid and if that does happen, I'll be more than happy to give you Matt N's private cell number. Again, kidding about Matt's cell number.

Let's just keep it sane and grounded for now. Otherwise I'm releasing Garth with his forum flame thrower he's been working on.

-Paul

[Haeso]

It's been pretty sane, if not civil, for most of the thread now. Besides, of all the dead horses we could beat, this one is the freshest and doesn't smell quite as badly as the Pinpoint vs Cone of fire, salvage and armor penetration horses.

Edited by Haeso, 08 December 2011 - 05:30 PM.

[Halfinax]

Haeso. It says influence on what planets to target. Not control over the Faction. I imagine it would be something along the lines of The Great House (devs) saying "Hey guys we need one of these 5 planets to be taken which one do you want?" The guys with the high LP influence (so 200 or so) get to vote and the one that wins the vote is the planet that is targeted. They aren't going to be controlling diplomacy or ranks or who gets what role or any such thing. PGI has been clear that they will determine who is at war with who, and what planets are core, faction, and periphery.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic, and if I am coming off that way I apologize to all involved.

Edited by Halfinax, 08 December 2011 - 05:43 PM.

[GaussDragon]

Halfinax, on 08 December 2011 - 05:42 PM, said:

Haeso. It says influence on what planets to target. Not control over the Faction. I imagine it would be something along the lines of The Great House (devs) saying "Hey guys we need one of these 5 planets to be taken which one do you want?" The guys with the high LP influence (so 200 or so) get to vote and the one that wins the vote is the planet that is targeted. They aren't going to be controlling diplomacy or ranks or who gets what role or any such thing. PGI has been clear that they will determine who is at war with who, and what planets are core, faction, and periphery.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic, and if I am coming off that way I apologize to all involved.

+1
I have yet to disagree with you on anything. I'm just going to stop posting and let you do it on my behalf instead.

Edited by GaussDragon, 08 December 2011 - 05:49 PM.