8 replies to this topic

[Hennessey]

I realize this is echoing what has been posted many times before... but:

Why go through all of the effort of creating both 'Training Grounds' and 'Test Servers' when both of these functions, and much more depth could have been added by simply allowing private matches into the game in the first place?

It would seem to me that it would be a win-win-win-win (and then some):
1. New recruits could be shown the ins and outs of how to really play the game by being trained in a controlled environment, and without the stress of letting their team/PUG down.

2. The player base consists of numerous 'free' testers who have made it their mission to give detailed responses regarding every facet of the game. Therefore, specific data like 'exactly how much armor did my alpha take off of you', 'did that shot hit the correct hit-box I aimed for', and 'where are all the locations of "sticky" rocks on this map', etc... could be answered in a much more thorough and less constrained manner.

3. The veterans, and people who are simply tired of the current game-modes would have a reason to be excited again:

-You want an escort game? Make one with however many people you can get! (up to whatever the current maximums are)

-Free for all king of the hill? Go for it!

-Jenner/Spider dance-off? Bring it!

Adding essential features (which ironically are making it into the 'Training Grounds') like Map selection are no-brainers, but other things would be much more important to really make it work: Mech size allowed, no *insert weapon type(s)* allowed, no JJ allowed, and respawning, for instance.

But, the most important one in my opinion is to allow options for control of the time duration of the match. Obviously you don't want people taking up server space by creating a game, and just going AFK, but at the same time, a good free for all with respawns could go on for say an hour before people start looking for something else to do. And, I think an hour maximum would be plenty for most people.

4. So, now you're probably thinking <Sarcasm>"Great! Now everybody is in these private matches using OUR servers WE have to pay for! Thanks a truck-load Hennessey!!!"</Sarcasm>

Believe it or not, PGI would very likely make MORE money and sooner, by implementing private matches ASAP.

Reason being, if I cannot make C-bills or gain XP in a private match, then my only option is to spend real money for equipment, mechs, flare, and to convert what XP I do have into GXP.

I would gladly drop my $20-$30 for a Spider, a great new cammo, some flashy paint, and a whole set of TAGs so that I was ready for the Jenner/Spider dance off (bad example probably, but seriously... I would). On top of this, and most importantly, I would be able to get more people interested in the game because of all the reasons listed above. More people inevitably means more profits.


Personal note:

The irony is that I was very happy with the game when I started playing back in August of last year, and the ONLY thing I felt was missing was the ability to drop with who and how I wanted (private matches). I understand that CW is a huge goal you are working on for launch, but I feel (obviously my opinion, but like if you agree), that a delay in CW would be completely understandable, and completely forgiven if the community could have their (our) private matches ASAP.



***Edited to put the emPHAsis on the proper sylLAbles...***

Edited by Hennessey, 19 July 2013 - 09:19 AM.

[Jarl Dane]

Not to sound condescending but private matches really is no a brainer.
You get more community involvement, more active players and more reason to buy MC.

Private Matches kept Mech Assault 2 alive for years after its short self life expired and its devs abandoned ship.

[Hennessey]

Thanks for the support. The question is up on Ask the Devs 43 right now if you'd like to vote for it before it closes.

[Hammerfinn]

1. They're developing a tutorial. And you can drop with your friends now... just not against them! If that's stressful for them, that's really you and your team's fault.

2. The devs have access to that information NOW, it's only US who can't see that sort of thing.

3. Ummm... Maybe? So all the veterans go play on the private servers? See point 4....

4. Not to sound condescending, but do you know what it costs, in resources and bandwidth, to host a game? Should PGI devote their resources to a couple players exclusively? Your argument seems a bit naive. Maybe YOU would pay more money if you could drop against the people you wanted to, but how many others would simply exploit the option?

I'd be fine with a small fee for private matches, and realistically speaking, no matter how much you want it, you won't get it unless you're willing to pay for it.


I can understand the attraction of the mode you describe; however, there is some misinformation here. The testing ground is host-side, that is to say, it's running on YOUR computer, without contacting the server. That's a far cry from an easy port into a private, multi-player game-mode.

TLDR: attractive, but impractical and unimplementable idea.

[Typhoon Storm 2142]

I voted all 3 options because this poll is broken.

[Roland]

Quote

4. Not to sound condescending, but do you know what it costs, in resources and bandwidth, to host a game?

Given that a bunch of us hosted MW4 servers for the better part of a decade, ya.

Turns out, it's really not that much.

[Hennessey]

Typhoon Storm 2142, on 19 July 2013 - 01:22 AM, said:

I voted all 3 options because this poll is broken.

Fixed. Thanks for letting me know.

[Hennessey]

Hammerfinn, on 18 July 2013 - 09:30 PM, said:

1. They're developing a tutorial. And you can drop with your friends now... just not against them! If that's stressful for them, that's really you and your team's fault.

2. The devs have access to that information NOW, it's only US who can't see that sort of thing.

3. Ummm... Maybe? So all the veterans go play on the private servers? See point 4....

4. Not to sound condescending, but do you know what it costs, in resources and bandwidth, to host a game? Should PGI devote their resources to a couple players exclusively? Your argument seems a bit naive. Maybe YOU would pay more money if you could drop against the people you wanted to, but how many others would simply exploit the option?

I'd be fine with a small fee for private matches, and realistically speaking, no matter how much you want it, you won't get it unless you're willing to pay for it.


I can understand the attraction of the mode you describe; however, there is some misinformation here. The testing ground is host-side, that is to say, it's running on YOUR computer, without contacting the server. That's a far cry from an easy port into a private, multi-player game-mode.

TLDR: attractive, but impractical and unimplementable idea.

Thanks for the response, just wanted to explore some of these comments a bit:

1. That is my point. They are using their resources to make things like tutorials, and not something that would bring more to the whole game. Plus, you're right, I can drop with friends now, but only if I have four or less total, or all eight (soon to be twelve?). If me and five others just want to blow each other up, then I guess we're SOL?

2. The Devs wouldn't be making threads like this: http://mwomercs.com/...feedback-12231/ if they already had that information, and threads like: http://mwomercs.com/...-hit-detection/ show that the community is actively trying to test every aspect of the game and give feedback. Testing of many features would be much more thorough with a private match.

3. Very likely most people would split their time, as private servers would probably be used for specific things like private tourneys, training, scenario gameplay, and general messing around and kill all type games. However, we would still be inclined to play regular matches (and CW whenever that gets made) to keep the C-bills up, and gain XP on our variants, etc. I realize I didn't put it in there, but I believe most people are under the assumption that there will be no XP/C-bills/ELO rating gained from private matches, and it makes sense to do so.

4. I don't pay a cent to drop in a PUG match, so I really don't see where the argument is coming from here. Plus, as I stated before, I believe people would actually spend more real money when playing private matches to offset the C-bills they wouldn't be making (per last sentence of above paragraph). And on that same note: What is there to exploit?

I have no issue with paying a fee, or using my premium time in exchange for private match time, and quite frankly that's about the only reason I would activate it, or buy more. But, this idea that you have to pay to play seems counterintuitive in a F2P model where I can drop right now for nothing.

I did not give any misinformation. I simply didn't elaborate on what I thought most people already knew. The 'Testing Grounds' are indeed client side, but they took time and resources to develop that, and it's really not that impressive if you really look at it. The 'Test Servers' however, are not client side, and they took time to develop that as well. Again, my whole point was: Why not spend the time and resources on a real feature that actually adds to the game as a whole?

Lastly, I don't honestly believe that a private match is either impractical or unable to be implemented. That's a feature that most games have had since Doom for crying out loud. Essentially the only change that would have to be made currently is to let me group up as normal, and have an option for 'Private' in addition to the 'Assault' or 'Conquest' options, and then only let the members of the group join that game. Options for picking teams and what not could be added in later, as I believe most folks that will use this feature will be willing to organize themselves accordingly until more options are added.

Oh! And, by the way: To those who think that CW should take precedence, thanks for your feedback! [Troll]Please tell me details about what it's going to be like and when we should expect it! [/Troll] ;P j/k

[Hennessey]

Sorry, just noticed that a few folks voted both that they would wait, and for CW first (before I fixed it). Not sure if that was intentional, or accidental, but it's hard to get an accurate perception based on these numbers.

Also, I'd really love to hear from someone that is supporting CW first. That's a hard position to defend in my opinion considering how little is currently known about what we're going to get and when. So, any information/opinions would be appreciated.