245 replies to this topic

[jper4]

i voted split queue. but i've also noticed (PUG only) when playing there's maybe one or two people tops on my side with it and shortly thereafter i see in the all chat:"how do i turn off this 3PV?" almost never see anyone on the other team with it either, so not sure where all these 3PV users are all hiding out at.

[tuomaa]

Kushko, on 29 August 2013 - 03:55 AM, said:

Why cant people understand that community segregation is bad. Isnt it enough that 12man will be 1PV only? And maybe even CW. Wont it be enough to have the community split in 3 modes, 2 of which being 1PV only?

Perhaps it's just that some of us would like to play exactly the same game as their online opponents are playing. Even if it is just a match or two a day, without commitment to gather up group of 12 persons.

As to what the game is/can be:
- I personally would like to play the game where I get to be the pilot of an awesome giant robot with big guns, meaning I sit in the cockpit and drive around with that hulking vehicle.
- Some people like to play a game with giant robot dolls, looking them from outside. That's fine by me, let them also enjoy that with likeminded people.

[Farpenoodle]

Honestly, I just want a lobby where the players in it can decide what they want to play. Lol.

[EvangelionUnit]

Wolfways, on 29 August 2013 - 12:52 AM, said:

What's wrong with hero mechs? (not that i have any)

give founders mechs, say +25% is a big thing
fast forward a few month, hero mechs, give +30%
fast forward a bunch of hero mechs, sell phoenix pack with +30% cbill +10% loyalty

you see ? what comes next? 30% $$ 10% loyalty 10% gxp ?
also, they are more or less more trash then others hardpoint wise, why didn't they just give a paintjob and the cred bonus to standard variants ?

i have the YLW, as only hero, and i still hate the day when i said to my two buddys they should get the PB awesome ...
maybe because it was just good at this time

Edited by EvangelionUnit, 29 August 2013 - 04:25 AM.

[Naotaka]

Tolkien, on 29 August 2013 - 12:52 AM, said:

the sleazy loaded question

You know Tolkien, for someone who is accusing others of being sleazy and asking leading questions you are not really proving you are a paragon of level-headedness. Keep it classy, friend and fight the fight without letting your emotions get the better of you.

[New Day]

They won't remove it. It's done, it's finished, get over it.

[Talrich]

Even with this poll, I find myself wanting another option. I actually think the 3PV queue should allow switching views so that people train up for 1PV, but there should also be a 1PV only queue. I think having the mixed queue be the default but marking the locked 1PV as "hardcore" is slightly prejudicial terminology but is acceptable.

[Uh you havent met Stabem]

Personally atm i don't care. In principle i would say yes for separate qeue. But since it's entirely unnecessary i would say let the Dev's focus on something more pressing. Something that actually needs attention.

Edited by hellhoundlover, 29 August 2013 - 04:46 AM.

[zorak ramone]

Tolkien, on 29 August 2013 - 12:52 AM, said:

Bump - the sleazy loaded question in the PGI poll is [redacted] since they already know damn well what the community wants.

Thank you for preserving this picture.

Bump for great justice.

NamesAreStupid, on 29 August 2013 - 04:34 AM, said:

They won't remove it. It's done, it's finished, get over it.

The removed collisions and repair-and-reload. They can remove 3PV, or minimally create separate queues.

This is all just an act of stubbornness and will on the part of PGI at this point.

[Uh you havent met Stabem]

zorak ramone, on 29 August 2013 - 04:49 AM, said:

Thank you for preserving this picture.

Bump for great justice.

Please do keep in mind that they added 3PV to extend the player-base and possibly there in-game experience.

So instead of making a elephant out of a mouse, honestly who cares.

[Levon K]

Liquid Leopard, on 29 August 2013 - 03:51 AM, said:

Third person view might not give the user an overall advantage, except that one can switch views at will.

I might not mind having 1PV and 3PV players together IF one had to pick a view and stick with it for the entire match.

I think this is the fairest solution at the moment. If there are strengths and weaknesses to 3PV, then forcing people to make the decision before entering the match would help mitigate the advantages of swapping to 3PV to get a better view. Then PGI can keep their 3PV (which is obviously meant for a different target market) and the 1PV players can keep their skill-based advantage.

I think 1PV should be treated (and implemented) as a "Pro" mode, and of course a Pro player would excel in 1PV over 3PV.

If a non-pro player would excel using 3PV (until they got better), then I also support this as it would narrow the gap between the Pro's and Pro's-in-training

PGI has their reason for not splitting the queues. I think you should stop aggravating them so much about it. Your focus should be to accept 3PV as a useful tool in game, and the goal should be to balance the views so that 3PV gives an advantage to new players and is a disadvantage to experienced players.

[Tolkien]

Naotaka, on 29 August 2013 - 04:33 AM, said:

You know Tolkien, for someone who is accusing others of being sleazy and asking leading questions you are not really proving you are a paragon of level-headedness. Keep it classy, friend and fight the fight without letting your emotions get the better of you.

You're right that I might seem angry, but a lot of that is more a feeling of being let down. Like most of the people around here I funded as a legendary founder since I was very excited by a new mech warrior game, and doubly so since I loved the old MPBT3025 which was the last game to have a 'community warfare' element to it. Things looked great when it was clear the founders program had brought in 5 million dollars since that seemed to be enough money to squeeze out a AAA title (or at least a single or double A title). As development has moved from closed beta to now though there have been a lot of disappointments.

1) Community warfare was supposed to be in 90 days after open beta. Wow, that didn't happen and here we are at 3x that amount of time, about to launch and still nothing. Worse than nothing since they have let it slip that only the first phase of CW will be in at launch. (And this assumes it will make it in by launch)

2) It's been in development for how long and I can't create a lobby to scrimmage with friends? I know UI2.0 has been the blanket answer since they don't want to waste effort making UI1.0 support it but it still is a let down that so far along even this 1998 level of in game lobby is not supported.

3) ECM was a topic that bothered me to no end. Not so much about how they were trying new things but how it was the swiss army shotgun of information warfare. Sure enough they spent the next 4 months gradually nerfing it, with the most recent being the removal of ECM making your teammates disappear/blocking IFF. I am disappointed that this excessive amount of after the fact tweaking probably diverted developer resources needed for things like making the command console do something. It's still just a 3 ton crit absorber.

4) The Craven 3L was broken for months due to the unholy combination of ECM, streaks doing up to 7x their intended damage due to dodgy splash damage code, and the legs being un-hittable (in addition to the lack of HSR early on). So while the death of the Craven is a feather in their cap (pun intended) they had no business going open beta without working hit detection, and didn't do enough testing to notice that their great idea for splash damage was horrifically bugged. Another small loss of confidence in the process.

5) Role warfare was supposed to have skill trees for different combat roles but not only is it not in yet, but we even have some skills like pinpoint that don't do anything right now.

6) Collisions were removed because Paul got dragon bowled. lol, funny how that got them to move fast on the issue, but it's not on the horizon to come back soon. I don't mind this one so much but it's still an example of over-reaching and under-delivering that always makes me a little sad.

7) The clans were supposed to invade this summer when the calendar reached the appropriate date, but lo and behold the timeline has been paused for months now. Another missed milestone and another disappointment.

8) The game was originally marketed as *EXPLICITLY* first person view. you can still find media from early 2012 where they explained it was a sim game, or a first person view only game. There are posts I'm sure you've seen screengrabs of by the devs stating emphatically that first person view was a core design element. I'm disappointed in them for taking money from people by selling them a vision, then not offering refunds when they change the vision fundamentally.

I'm disappointed I can no longer give them money (received a phoenix refund) based on what they have promised the community they will do. They have proven through this 3pv debacle that they will do whatever they think will get them more users/money in the future even if they have to break the promises they just finished making.

From now on I'm disappointed to say I can't give them money based on what they promise, only on what they actually deliver.

Edited by Tolkien, 29 August 2013 - 05:10 AM.

[Deathlike]

I'm pretty convinced if that PGI continues on the track they are on.. and the "core community" continues to rail on them until AND after launch day... PGI will "eventually" get the message, whether they agree to it or not.

Because... you don't want people with pitchforks and torches on Launch Day.

I'm starting to think everyone that cares about the direction of the game needs to continue on this "marathon", as long as they are being respectful like you would see in a demonstration/rally. That is the only way... otherwise... that island would include PGI, when the game ends up going away...

[iHover]

I went ahead and voted, not that I think it will do any good. PGI completely ignored the past poles and all other community input on 3pv. Instead relying on ESP or some other method to determine that the unheard community that didn't voice their opinion wanted it. Tolkien many of us (myself included) feel the same way.

[Wolfways]

EvangelionUnit, on 29 August 2013 - 04:24 AM, said:

give founders mechs, say +25% is a big thing
fast forward a few month, hero mechs, give +30%
fast forward a bunch of hero mechs, sell phoenix pack with +30% cbill +10% loyalty

you see ? what comes next? 30% $$ 10% loyalty 10% gxp ?
also, they are more or less more trash then others hardpoint wise, why didn't they just give a paintjob and the cred bonus to standard variants ?

i have the YLW, as only hero, and i still hate the day when i said to my two buddys they should get the PB awesome ...
maybe because it was just good at this time

Ah i see. I didn't realize the founder mechs had a lower percentage. That kind of sucks
Not sure about the hardpoints being worse though (although a lot of people on the forums say they are). I just buy mechs if i like how they look

[Wolfways]

Talrich, on 29 August 2013 - 04:37 AM, said:

Even with this poll, I find myself wanting another option. I actually think the 3PV queue should allow switching views so that people train up for 1PV, but there should also be a 1PV only queue. I think having the mixed queue be the default but marking the locked 1PV as "hardcore" is slightly prejudicial terminology but is acceptable.

Unless i'm mistaken i think the "Separate queue for each" means 1 queue for 1pv only, and 1 queue for mixed 1pv and 3pv. At least that's how i read it. I don't think i've seen anyone asking for 1pv to be removed from 3pv.

[Naotaka]

Thanks for your comments Tolkien and thanks for posting them non-accusatory. I don't agree with all of them, but then again there is no need for that. We hould be able to disagree and still play the same game.


Now one thing we need to keep in mind is that we all want this game to improve and all want the game to do financially well. That only works if we are a welcoming community that doesn't go absolutely bonkers whenever our expectations aren't met.. Critical views are good, excellent even if brought in a calm manner.

Let's keep in mind the whole player base, from noob to hardcore pilot to grizzled old vet who doesn't care about a thing apart from seeing an old fashioned nice mech that gives him a tear in his eye. They all need to play that game. Few of them actually hang around here to fill these polls.

Let's see what happens and let's hope this Community Warfare really turns out as awesome as we all hoped.

[Wolfways]

hellhoundlover, on 29 August 2013 - 04:52 AM, said:

Please do keep in mind that they added 3PV to extend the player-base and possibly there in-game experience.

So instead of making a elephant out of a mouse, honestly who cares.

Maybe the people who were sold something they weren't expecting?

[Wolfways]

Levon K, on 29 August 2013 - 04:58 AM, said:

the goal should be to balance the views so that 3PV gives an advantage to new players and is a disadvantage to experienced players.

How do you make 3pv not give experienced players an advantage without removing the ability to look over cover risk free? The only solution is to remove it.

[soarra]

Wolfways, on 29 August 2013 - 05:27 AM, said:

How do you make 3pv not give experienced players an advantage without removing the ability to look over cover risk free? The only solution is to remove it.

If we are stuck with 3pv maybe once you hit a certain elo level you lose access to 3pv, Or you cannot switch modes in game.
I would still like it to only be used as a tutorial and a replay cam.