130 replies to this topic

[Phlyk]

Harusee, on 10 March 2013 - 06:36 PM, said:

I disagree with that statement. The european and other communities have been complaining about their play experience for a long time and now that PGI is offering you your very own playground for a better experience, you are apparently all bent on how horrible it is of them to offer you the choice! really?

As for destroying the community, I believe there are enough players in the primary time zones to support it, but maybe I am wrong, the EU server will die and you will be back to playing on the NA server. So you can support a better play experience for regional players or stubbornly stay on the NA server with a bad experience so you wont be stuck on a server with no population which is what it sounds like you are really complaining about.

Hi Harusee,

I'd like to address your comments regarding this issue and invite you to vote in the Server Split thread, the link is in my sig.

Whilst there is no doubt that playing on a more local server will offer better performance in terms of latency, I find that with my connection (mediocrely fast Internet based in UK), I get a ping of 100-120, which is perfectly playable, especially with state-rewind. So I'd just like to state that not every non-US/CA player complains about the current game performance.

With regards the size of the population, we are unable to know how many active players there are. But if the split goes ahead as stated in this ATD if EU server does 'die' (ie. low player count, but still open) we will be unable to return to the US server as our accounts will be locked.

What I am actually complaining about is being forced to decide who I want to play with. I have nothing against localisation, it would be great to have local servers to play on, I just want the choice per session of which I want to use.

The second thing I am complaining about is, if I am obliged to make an account per region to continue playing with my overseas clanmates, that I will have to repurchase/regrind everything I have on my main account. This if nothing else makes it seem like a money grab.

[M0rpHeu5]

I am unhappy with these answers because they reveal that this game is heading in a derection deferent than what i wanted.

[SgtKinCaiD]

Harusee, on 10 March 2013 - 06:27 PM, said:

OK, first latency on the internet is BEYOND human control at a point so they cant fix the fact that your signal takes 2 to 4 times as long as mine to get to the server. SO they offer you a regional server so you can have a play experience similar to mine but the caveat is you have to play with others that are on that server and this is a slap in the face?

You might try saying thank you and decide if you want to play with lag or play regionally instead of giving them grief for trying to help your experience out. sheesh, what a bunch of entitled children some of your are.

Several people already response to you but i will go further : don't talk when you don't know the problem ...

I live in Bordeaux, France. The South-West fo France is not very well equipped in terms of internet infrastructure and stuff like that. Guess what ? I play with a ping between 100-130ms, it never stops me to kill a light even with ballistic weapons. Some of my teammates even managed to get ping under 100ms. The ingame problems we face actually are more related to ECM and ELO Ratings not ping.

I made a list for you to understand the real problems of splitting community :
- the EU community is way down the size of the NA community, splitting it means that the EU community will slowly dwindle and die due to the lack of players.
- the EU community can say goodbye to tournaments, events, etc. as PGI is not big enough to support this kind of worldwide community management.
- many teams are already composed of people from different countries, they will have to part ways with several of their members as they can't play together.
- many EU players have invested a lot of time and money in this game (personally, i have more than 2500 matches under the belt, more than 20 mechs). It's not to have a secound account to farm again and buy MC again.

Plus, we got a post in "ask the devs #32" from Bryan Ekman that clearly contradicts the respone of Paul Inouye, thus the slapping.

Is it enough for you ?

Edited by SgtKinCaiD, 11 March 2013 - 07:47 AM.

[TexAce]

I all I can see is "NO" Oo

Edited by TexAss, 11 March 2013 - 02:51 AM.

[Peter von Danzig]

SgtKinCaiD, on 11 March 2013 - 01:53 AM, said:

I live in Bordeaux, France. The South-West fo France is not very well equipped in terms of internet infrastructure and stuff like that. Guess what ? I play with a ping between 100-130ms, it never stops me to kill a light even with ballistic weapons.

Same here. Living in a western part of Germany, I have a ping between 116-128. I NEVER drop below and it NEVER gets higher. It's pretty fine for me (and I am using mainly SRM6).

I think the problem is that our friends in eastern parts of the world (Asia, Australia) suffer from high ping. I think everything more than 200 is just crap for those people using ballistics or missiles.

One of the core reasons I love playing MMOs is the community thing. You can play in a group of us amrican, russian and japanese gamers at the same time. But there are some difficulties PGI has to face like maintanance times, event times and so on. I can understand them to seperate people due to these problems.

M0rpHeu5, on 10 March 2013 - 11:21 PM, said:

I am unhappy with these answers because they reveal that this game is heading in a derection deferent than what i wanted.

I am unhappy with these answers because they reveal nothing. :-)

Edited by Peter von Danzig, 11 March 2013 - 04:02 AM.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Still nothing about ECM or broken game balance, but to be fair, they did make a thread specifically for it and are promising us a Command Center update about it. Hopefully after our months of seemingly fruitless complaining and waiting; they will finally be doing something about it. I want ECM to not be the most OP thing in the game. I want BAP to actually have a value to it. I want LRMs to be a viable role again. I want a reason to take an Atlas K or Raven 2X over a D DC or 3L. Currently, none of these things are true, when they all should be.

[Deathlike]

Raven 2X is just inferior based on the engine cap alone. A Cic outside of the 3C would be far more useful than the 2X (you don't get the missile slot, so meh to that).

[BlueSanta]

Sorry miSs, but I'm going to have to disagree with you. If I have two questions and both are better than someone else's one, my two should get answered. If you're really concerned about informing the community and providing meaningful feedback, that's what you'd do. You included a bunch of garbage questions this time just because those people asked a single question. That's nonsense. You make the rules--make better rules. I submitted multiple questions that were a heck of a lot better than most of these.

[Akdar]

The part that I agree with from BlueSanta's post is "You make the rules--make better rules." You imposed a limiting factor into your discussion with zero cost benefit. If someone has more than 1 good question why limit that in anyway?

As a suggestion you could make slightly different rules to make this even easier for you guys to see where the forums would like you to discuss. "Only ask one question per post. Instead of asking the same question again, if you would really like to see something answered, like the posted question and we will evaluate with emphasis on the questions with the most like votes."

I'm sure you all are terribly busy but something I would like to pass on to you is "Perception is reality"

If the majority of the forum reading customers believe that this was a half ***** performance, it doesnt matter how long it actually took you, or how many 18hr work days it took you to complete your other work prior to getting enough time to work on this. For all we know you could have had a team of people researching these questions and had 15 meatings in order to discuss at great length how best to say "We can't answer that" and "More info to follow." and "No." But the very simple fact is look up at the OP and understand how thrown together those answers seem. There is very little new info... very very very little infact.

If I were a teacher and this was handed in by a student I'd say to take it back and do it again. You don't get to push off your other obligations to redo a crappy job. You take it back and redo it.

If I ever tried handing in something this poor quality to my boss (I never woult tbh) I would certainly expect him to say to redo it and not push off my other obligations to do so. Infact... he'd probably expect me to do a much much better job on redoing this (since you get another try at it) and expect a much much better job on the next Ask the Devs also.

So take that for what it is... Helpful advice from a paying customer. Because with out the paying customers you have no income.

[Joe Mallad]

Viterbi, on 11 March 2013 - 10:00 AM, said:

Ask the Devs is a feature, not a service. We try to make this feature fair and accessible for all by limiting the questions to one question per member in order to answer to as many members as possible. Please also note this feature is returns every two weeks, and that you may participate each time.

We didn't mean to turn this into a meta-discussion, we were just trying to address the concern. There remains material in the responses that may be discussed in this thread. Back on topic please...

And we all understand that but it really feels like because you guys have this new layout where you allow people to fill this section up with as many questions as they can within a greater amount of time rather than the past every week Ask the Devs... you are getting way more questions than you now have time to answer. And I know its hard to answer them all so maybe you should put a cap on how many pages of questions can be asked before you lock it? There was a whole lot of really great questions asked in this past ask the devs and honestly, not very many of the great questions were answered. Some of the questions that people asked about things we already have or just have gotten... we did not need answered with "Already have it." And then we get other questions answered with contradictions to past questions lol.

OR... better yet.

When we get the questions answered, you have them broken down into categories as in which questions pertaining to which sections of the game were answered right?
So why not just do the formatting like that. In the next ask the devs, have IDK... Map related, Graphics related, Mech related... so on and so forth. And let us put our 1 question into each category (if we want). So if you have 10 categories, i can ask 1 question in each but if i only want to ask 1 question in say 6 categories, that's on me. And then assign someone to answer the questions from each category. You know... someone that knows what they are talking about in that 1 category.

Edited by Yoseful Mallad, 11 March 2013 - 10:43 AM.

[Xigunder Blue]

Went thru the Q&A list and counted up the responses in the following way:

NO
Maybe
Eventually
YES
Partial

He be the basic results:
NO - 33
Maybe - 11
Eventually - 13
YES - 2
Partial - 1

There were a few specific replies that did not fall in any category listed (such as servers)

Edited by Xigunder Blue, 11 March 2013 - 12:20 PM.