740 replies to this topic

[D34K]

In principle, this project is much appreciated -- but is really just a missed opportunity. Publicly, the reaction from PGI will be bland, predictable, non-committal appeasement. What do you expect?

It needs to be backed with specific consequences for PGI, such as people pledging to cease all MC or Premium Time purchases until the concerns are addressed. If that happens with immediate effect, PGI have a ticking clock to work to until there are real business consequences to their next decisions.

[Stalkerr]

I wish the MWO Forums had an Out of Office message

I've been pretty much away this weekend, but thanks everyone for your messages! We're trying to set another event up soon via Mecha Lingua, so keep your eyes out for messages from Cease to Hope or myself.

This was a great event, and they'll keep getting better from here on out!

[N0MAD]

First let me say i really dont care who the goons are, so this is not personal, so apart from gratification and the ego boost from being the center of attention what is the point of this whole exercise exactly?. So you got a few dozen people (i know you say they represent masses) to attend a little chat and came up with a few paragraphs that you forwarded onto some one that for the past year has shown little to no interest in community imput and you are claiming a Great event?. So let me ask this, to what end and what result are you aspiring to? What result are you expecting?. How many times and in how many different ways do you have to be told by these people that you are a vocal minority, on an Island, not the target clients before you get the message? Also what are the repercussion if any of your imput if it is ignored, this is the paramount question, what are the repercussions?. What is going to motivate PGI to actually do something?, without any repercussion there is no motivation.
So after a year of peoples imput, polls etc being ignored this little chat and leter is going to change everything,, i see...
Others are taking a more pro active stance, we are denying PGI our custom in protest to their product, its a product few of us are happy with (including yourselfs, that is why you had this litle gathering) now im not saying dont buy their wares thats a personal decision each has, but if more did then they would have a situation where at some point sooner than later some one at PGI would say "ohh poop they are not buying into this, we beter have a good look at what we are doing or we are going down the poop hole".
Now i know some of you have good intentions with this, so to those i say, good luck.

[fil5000]

N0MAD, on 28 July 2013 - 05:46 AM, said:

First let me say i really dont care who the goons are, so this is not personal, so apart from gratification and the ego boost from being the center of attention what is the point of this whole exercise exactly?. So you got a few dozen people (i know you say they represent masses) to attend a little chat and came up with a few paragraphs that you forwarded onto some one that for the past year has shown little to no interest in community imput and you are claiming a Great event?. So let me ask this, to what end and what result are you aspiring to? What result are you expecting?. How many times and in how many different ways do you have to be told by these people that you are a vocal minority, on an Island, not the target clients before you get the message? Also what are the repercussion if any of your imput if it is ignored, this is the paramount question, what are the repercussions?. What is going to motivate PGI to actually do something?, without any repercussion there is no motivation.
So after a year of peoples imput, polls etc being ignored this little chat and leter is going to change everything,, i see...
Others are taking a more pro active stance, we are denying PGI our custom in protest to their product, its a product few of us are happy with (including yourselfs, that is why you had this litle gathering) now im not saying dont buy their wares thats a personal decision each has, but if more did then they would have a situation where at some point sooner than later some one at PGI would say "ohh poop they are not buying into this, we beter have a good look at what we are doing or we are going down the poop hole".
Now i know some of you have good intentions with this, so to those i say, good luck.

I'd be more than happy to believe this was a vocal minority if there was any evidence of that. Presumably we will know if we ARE a minority by whether or not anything happens as a result of this - PGI know how many active users they have and they know how many people this event represented. If it's not enough for them to care about then they'll ignore us and continue on.

In terms of repercussions - it wasn't necessary to make this into an ultimatum and would have been counterproductive. Most of the groups that have signed have already said that their active membership is diminishing because of the state of the game and yes, people aren't spending money on the game any more. Many goons have asked for (and received) refunds on Project Phoenix, and hardly anyone is buying MC. Making threats to PGI would have made the whole thing seem like an angry rant and got it stuck on the crank pile.

Everyone involved in this has good intentions, as none of us want to see the game fail. If PGI don't want to listen, that's fine, we'll go off and throw money at something else and they'll build the game they want for the audience they want, because it won't be for us.

[Stormwolf]

Technoviking, on 27 July 2013 - 08:42 PM, said:

I can't sign the letter because Battletech canon systems are what make this game great. (Not math, systems. If it said BT MATH, that'd be different)

I was a bit torn up about this too, but I signed it anyway.

We can still make our case if the devs actually start listening.

[N0MAD]

fil5000, on 28 July 2013 - 05:59 AM, said:

I'd be more than happy to believe this was a vocal minority if there was any evidence of that. Presumably we will know if we ARE a minority by whether or not anything happens as a result of this - PGI know how many active users they have and they know how many people this event represented. If it's not enough for them to care about then they'll ignore us and continue on.

I dont know if your are part of the group who organised this so this question may not be revelent to you but, how many people do you think you represent or how many people were represented at this chat?

[fil5000]

N0MAD, on 28 July 2013 - 06:22 AM, said:

I dont know if your are part of the group who organised this so this question may not be revelent to you but, how many people do you think you represent or how many people were represented at this chat?

You'd have to ask Stalkerr that one. I know we asked each unit leader present how many people they had in their unit and how many were active.

[fil5000]

Stormwolf, on 28 July 2013 - 06:03 AM, said:

I was a bit torn up about this too, but I signed it anyway.

We can still make our case if the devs actually start listening.

Thanks - I'm sure that if this is in any way successful it'll split apart into different groups once the points we all agree on are dealt with, but in the short term there's enough common ground.

[Protection]

Zharot, on 27 July 2013 - 09:54 PM, said:

This is all we know about epics. They haven't said anything since.

What the ****? That doesn't even feel like a fleshed out thought. It's like 3 am "I dunno, maybe I'll combine ice cream and leftover chicken" sort of thought.

D34K, on 27 July 2013 - 11:19 PM, said:

In principle, this project is much appreciated -- but is really just a missed opportunity. Publicly, the reaction from PGI will be bland, predictable, non-committal appeasement. What do you expect?

It needs to be backed with specific consequences for PGI, such as people pledging to cease all MC or Premium Time purchases until the concerns are addressed. If that happens with immediate effect, PGI have a ticking clock to work to until there are real business consequences to their next decisions.

We've tried this before, but then PGI responds with some sort of grab deal on a brand new hero mech or whatever. Even when some of us take a hard stand, others just jump on the promotion, especially more casual players that are less concerned with the game. I'd like to have more leverage as well, but I doubt that we are going to get it.

[N0MAD]

fil5000, on 28 July 2013 - 06:36 AM, said:

Thanks - I'm sure that if this is in any way successful it'll split apart into different groups once the points we all agree on are dealt with, but in the short term there's enough common ground.

I need to ask, what is it you consider success?. Do you consider it for instance a reply from PGI stating that "its being looked at", seriously did you guys have a target you were looking at with this and if so what is this target, what is it you are looking for from PGI and if you do have a target what sort of timeframe are you working on?.
I am really interested in finding an answer to what you guys want to achieve(and dont say, make the game beter pls) and how long you will persist with it. Any campaign must have a goal and a timeframe, otherwise what is it.

[RG Notch]

Protection, on 28 July 2013 - 06:46 AM, said:

What the ****? That doesn't even feel like a fleshed out thought. It's like 3 am "I dunno, maybe I'll combine ice cream and leftover chicken" sort of thought.



We've tried this before, but then PGI responds with some sort of grab deal on a brand new hero mech or whatever. Even when some of us take a hard stand, others just jump on the promotion, especially more casual players that are less concerned with the game. I'd like to have more leverage as well, but I doubt that we are going to get it.

That's what being a vocal minority entails, no matter how vocal, still a minority. We'll find out just how much of a minority when PGI reacts to this like it does to all the offers from the vocal minority to fix their game. They'll say they have forwarded this to the appropriate people and then nothing.
It's actually the perfect strategy. They don't have to do anything and the people involved think they are being listened to. It's not like this has happened before right?
Its like some one said in here, if this wasn't a minority PGI would have listened before. But seriously, don't let over a year of them ignoring these concerns stop you. This time it really will be different. Really...

[Tegiminis]

Who cares?

Seriously, who cares. Stop dumping your meaningless observations about PGI in the thread; we don't care what you think about "how successful it will be". Contribute something to the townhall regardless. Whether or not PGI listens is not the point; the point is to air out grievances with the way PGI is handling community discussion. If they listen, great. If they don't listen, whatever. At least we came together as a community to put forth an organized, intelligent effort to #savemwo. Make your voice heard in a collective effort.

PGI doesn't even need to be part of this discussion, although it would be great if they were. This is about a group of disgruntled-but-loyal fans coming out and talking about what problems they have. We all want MWO to succeed, and this townhall is comprised of some of BattleTech's staunchest fans and supporters.

Edit:

Also, 600+ signatures is a not insignificant portion of the playerbase, especially when you consider that most of those are players that were among the most active. I'm unsure as to MWO's concurrency, but my guess is that it's in the 5k-10k range. Taking 600+ rabid fans out of that concurrency is devastating to a game's longevity. Especially when those are the people who, like me, bought Founder's Packs, MC, and pre-ordered Project Phoenix. They are the "whales" of F2P monetization, and removing 600 of them is pretty bad!

Edited by Tegiminis, 28 July 2013 - 07:33 AM.

[Quincy80]

N0MAD, on 28 July 2013 - 06:22 AM, said:

I dont know if your are part of the group who organised this so this question may not be revelent to you but, how many people do you think you represent or how many people were represented at this chat?

The quoted number was 5500-6000 players as I recall.

Technoviking, on 27 July 2013 - 08:42 PM, said:

This was actually a pretty good discussion. There was some chest puffing, and some people that were pretty full of themselves picking on PGI. Most of the talking was eerily similar to the forums, a lot of practiced complaints, and well thought out dickish digs and puns, attempts to create buzz words, and few solutions. Try to curb that if you have another, imo.

That said, the solutions that did come out were pretty good.

This was deliberate. The goal was to highlight the problems in this town hall. It was stated in the stream.
The point is that we were not really focusing on telling PGI how to make their game, we were pointing out the problems that we see. Another reason this was done was to prevent any divisive proposals that would stop people from signing.

Also, BT equipment you were championing is over a decade in the future of the universe. As far as I am aware PGI has implemented every piece of equipment from the period, with 4 exceptions. MASC, Supercharger, Mech-Mortars and Command Consoles(which have a placeholder).
Excluding stuff like listen-Kill missiles.

Wilburg, on 27 July 2013 - 03:29 PM, said:

That´s exactly what never will happen with open Hardpoints. We all know how much fun it is (Trial Tournaments, 3025 Tournaments, etc.) but all take it as "Fun Events", the competitive part keeps being PPC/Gauss-Fest. That´s where I don´t see the reasonable approach ... there MUST be a way of having both: the fun of unique mechs with their pros and cons together with competitive matches. I think about something in the middle of un-modified stock mechs and efficiency-builts, something like upgraded mechs in decent manners ... (in my little world ^^)

You apparently didn't read the quote and lost out on context.
The point being that the terribly designed canon mech mirror match simulated the effect of the internal hitpoint buff that was being discussed by lowering the DPS of the mechs.
Increased HP leads to increased time to kill.

[Wilburg]

Quincy80, on 28 July 2013 - 07:45 AM, said:

You apparently didn't read the quote and lost out on context.
The point being that the terribly designed canon mech mirror match simulated the effect of the internal hitpoint buff that was being discussed by lowering the DPS of the mechs.
Increased HP leads to increased time to kill.

I´d need some help here, I don´t get what you mean.
As far as I understood the mentioned quote, you meant, that the stock-mech fight was fun (more demanding with heat management, torso twisting, etc.). Right?

Edited by Wilburg, 28 July 2013 - 08:07 AM.

[Quincy80]

Wilburg, on 28 July 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:

I´d need some help here, I don´t get what you mean.
As far as I understood the mentioned quote, he meant, that the stock-mech fight was fun. Right?

Gwaihir, on 26 July 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

I think, thematically, one of the things that I would most like to see is for mechs to spend far more time in a seriously damaged to crippled state, which a large internals buff would help with.

When a lot of us think about mech combat, we tend to think about limping around with half a machine left, only a couple of weapons, and bashing on each other until finally the last enemy falls. That doesn't really happen now, we generally go from "Everything's good!" to "Red CT/Side torso armor" to "Deep red internals/dead"

e: A larger ratio of internals to armor buff also indirectly helps LBX weapons, MGs, and other crit happy weapons with spread, like SRMs.

This is what I was quoting. More time near dead is fun.
The Trial mech fight was a case of having fun in a long fight while crippled.

[Wilburg]

Quincy80, on 28 July 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

This is what I was quoting. More time near dead is fun.
The Trial mech fight was a case of having fun in a long fight while crippled.

Ok, so I got this right and I had read the quote before. But where did I take it out of context? I was just asking why not making this part of the content (Stock-Mech mode or 3050 mode) or finding a way where longer fights with damaged mechs become possible.

[JTAlweezy]

Just got my fingers crossed that PGI listens to the voice's of the customers and people who are new players, evualuate the game as it is instead of assuming this is how its supposed to be. thanks to WOL for making this happen. I need my money to be worth something.

[Gwaihir]

Much larger health pools (specifically weighted towards more internals health vs armor) and extending the critical hits system to engines, gyros, and actuators would do it. I'm going to copy and paste another feedback idea that I'd written up a while ago, but which is still relevant, I think. A lot of this is pie in the sky stuff at the moment, but, hey, this is what I think about.

Engines, XL Engines, and Crits.
Engine crits, if introduced in the same way critical hits for other equipment functions, will greatly exacerbate the issues with snipers and player time to live as outlined above. Even if engines have a lot of HP, you're still making it a dice roll whether one gauss shot to your atlas's open CT takes you out instantly, vs having to chew through all 62 internal health your CT has. RNG deaths like this are exactly the (very good) reason that through armor crits are not and should never be in MWO.

Suggestion: Instead of having X damage needed to flat out destroy an engine (and your 'Mech), instead have damage done to your engine progressively increase your base heat level (Similar to standing in the caldera on Caustic Valley).

Mechanics wise, it could work in gradations of damage taken (Numbers are just examples, actual balance might need them to be different):

5 damage taken: +5 base heat, -.3 heat dissipation per second
10 damage taken: +10 base heat, -.6 heat dissipation per second
15 damage taken: +15 base heat, -.9 heat dissipation per second

And so on. This should probably be capped at about +20 to +25 base heat, and -1.2 to -1.5 heat dissipation per second for a fully crippled engine. As an additional balancing factor, Standard engines should require more damage taken to bump up their heat generation, compared to XL engines. Whereas an XL engine would start to generate extra heat after taking 5 damage, a standard engine might take 10 damage before it starts generating the same amount of extra heat.

The other part of this is, XL engined 'Mechs should not be destroyed by side torso loss. Instead, they should suffer the equivalent of three engine hits worth of heat generation, putting you most of the way to a fully crippled engine. This has a few really important effects on balance, some immediate, and some related to Clan XL engines down the line. Right now, whether or not a 'Mech can use an XL engine is entirely dependent on it's model and hitboxes for the side torsos. This was a factor that did not matter at all in tabletop battletech, of course, since hit locations were all random. But, here in an online FPS game, we can aim, and the results are devastating for 'Mech balance: Big chunky 'Mechs like the Atlas and Awesome are flat out never allowed to equip an XL because of how huge their side torsos are, and how vulnerable they are to instant death and removal from the fight if they use an XL. When competitive fights are generally decided on which team can get the first kill and then snowball the match from there, this is a big deal.

The down the line Clantech factor relates to this- With the current system, Clan XL engines would not die to side torso loss, vs the IS engine that would. That's a huge factor in the utterly imbalanced nature of Clantech, and putting the system in place to avoid that imbalance now, would be a very good thing. With the above system, a Clan XL engine would just suffer slightly less heat accumulation than the IS engine, which is far less imbalanced than "Dead 'Mech vs not dead 'Mech."

Gyros and Actuator Crits.
Along the lines of the above engine suggestions, Gyro crits could have similar debilitating, but not lethal, effects on your mech. Same for actuators, both arms and legs.

Suggestions:
Each Gyro crit lowers the effective mass of your ‘Mech, making it easier for you to be knocked over in collisions.
Each arm actuator crit significantly slowing down your arm aim speed, perhaps adding reticule sway.
Each leg actuator crit very mildly slows down your run speed and turn speed.

[Stormwolf]

Gwaihir, on 28 July 2013 - 08:37 AM, said:

Much larger health pools (specifically weighted towards more internals health vs armor) and extending the critical hits system to engines, gyros, and actuators would do it. I'm going to copy and paste another feedback idea that I'd written up a while ago, but which is still relevant, I think. A lot of this is pie in the sky stuff at the moment, but, hey, this is what I think about.

Engines, XL Engines, and Crits.
Engine crits, if introduced in the same way critical hits for other equipment functions, will greatly exacerbate the issues with snipers and player time to live as outlined above. Even if engines have a lot of HP, you're still making it a dice roll whether one gauss shot to your atlas's open CT takes you out instantly, vs having to chew through all 62 internal health your CT has. RNG deaths like this are exactly the (very good) reason that through armor crits are not and should never be in MWO.

--snip--

I think that it would be better if we created a new thread for discussions about ingame mechanics/components. That way we can focus on one subject at a time while not cluttering up this thread with several discussions at once.

[Alois Hammer]

Stormwolf, on 28 July 2013 - 06:03 AM, said:

We can still make our case if the devs actually start listening.

Sadly, I'm afraid the fatal flaw in this entire plan is right there for all to see.

Tegiminis, on 28 July 2013 - 07:27 AM, said:

Also, 600+ signatures is a not insignificant portion of the playerbase, especially when you consider that most of those are players that were among the most active.

And a whopping "600+" people compares to the 3000+ "No 3pv votes" that the devs wrote off as an insignificant minority how?

Seriously, good luck- I hope it works for y'all. But we've seen this sort of thing play out before, and so far it always has the same ending: "We've heard your concerns, and are now going to do whatever we want anyway so thanks for wasting your time again in the vain belief that we give a [REDACTED]."