100 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

Funkadelic Mayhem, on 27 September 2013 - 02:29 PM, said:

Cant you just be grateful they are taking their time to do it right. No you would rather QQ and have it pushed out unpolished and lacking.


I have no problem waiting 6 months for Phase 1. They are going to make this awesome!

I get it, you founders are impatient and want it now or already. Life sucks then you die, get over it. QQing it not going to change anything.

Good for you. Can't you just play the game you enjoy instead of bashing those that are talking about issues they have with the game on the public forums that were set up for people in the community to discuss the game both good and bad?

[Sandpit]

keith, on 27 September 2013 - 02:36 PM, said:

desgin time. well if anyone played in NBT. http://www.netbattletech.com/nbt-mp3/ if i remeber right the automation for that league took around year to 2 years to make up. that is basiclly what CW wants. ever world of IS named able to PA, send in mechs and garrsion them, send around DS. mind that was made with 1 or 2 programers. i'm sure MWO has a bigger budget then something made for MW4 with ppl to have fun with. though if PGI makes it just as much fun as that league, MWO will last 5+ years.

This is the main issue. Most detractors want to know why it is taking this long. The developers are very tight lipped and ever missed deadline over the oats couple of years has just added to that frustration while resources and time used to implement things like 3pv and ghost heat were added. I promise you had they made cw their priority and had a simplistic IS map up some time during either of the beta periods a vast majority of complaints wouldn't be voiced at the moment and then they could have worked more on balance and "features" like 3pv and ghost heat

[Funkadelic Mayhem]

Sandpit, on 27 September 2013 - 02:36 PM, said:

Good for you. Can't you just play the game you enjoy instead of bashing those that are talking about issues they have with the game on the public forums that were set up for people in the community to discuss the game both good and bad?

So you can bash PGI, but when the tables are turned... oh I get it lol

btw... where was the bashing?

[Elwood Blues]

I expect we'll be able to form units pretty fast after UI 2.0 and set up private matches. Everything else will be at least 6 months after that, maybe. With just those features, though, private leagues will be much easier to run. That will keep us pretty busy for a while.

[Sandpit]

Even if that's the case it's still not going to alleviate the repetition of the game at the moment. If they can't or won't implement cw all they had to do was give the players lobbies and allow private drops. The community would have taken care of the rest and people would have happily battled for control of the IS while waiting but that ship has sailed at this point. It will be interesting nonetheless to see what units will be able to do within their factions. I'm still concerned with how they will balance certain things within cw provided we get it

[Johnny Z]

Sandpit, on 27 September 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

Even if that's the case it's still not going to alleviate the repetition of the game at the moment. If they can't or won't implement cw all they had to do was give the players lobbies and allow private drops. The community would have taken care of the rest and people would have happily battled for control of the IS while waiting but that ship has sailed at this point. It will be interesting nonetheless to see what units will be able to do within their factions. I'm still concerned with how they will balance certain things within cw provided we get it

Was thinking the same thing. How to balance the players fighting for each house without a landslide.

Seems the obvious choice would be the houses doing the worste, with less players would pay more for merc contracts bringing in more players. This might not make sense considering they are losing, but the fact they have less troops to pay means they might have more creds to throw around.

Just a quick guess at how they might balance the faction player numbers.

[Elwood Blues]

Sandpit, on 27 September 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

Even if that's the case it's still not going to alleviate the repetition of the game at the moment. If they can't or won't implement cw all they had to do was give the players lobbies and allow private drops. The community would have taken care of the rest and people would have happily battled for control of the IS while waiting but that ship has sailed at this point. It will be interesting nonetheless to see what units will be able to do within their factions. I'm still concerned with how they will balance certain things within cw provided we get it

Their CW plan sounds pretty ambitious and will be difficult to balance with multiple factions running around. I don't doubt that is what they want to do, but the more they work on it, the more I expect they will obstacles that will push back the planet domination aspect. I think they should give that project the "When its ready" release date. UI 2.0, units, private matches, and even maybe a Solaris type setup are all relatively easy to setup because they don't require balancing. They know roughly what the time frame is for those (now that they have a little experience with this project.

[Riptor]

Elwood Blues, on 27 September 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

I expect we'll be able to form units pretty fast after UI 2.0 and set up private matches. Everything else will be at least 6 months after that, maybe. With just those features, though, private leagues will be much easier to run. That will keep us pretty busy for a while.

And if you want to actually use private matches in any meaningfull way you will need a premium account wich is akin to a subscription.

Wasnt this game suposed to be free to play? Werent we suposed to only pay for "convinience?" and not for entire game features?

Guess that was their position at the time.

[Elwood Blues]

Riptor, on 27 September 2013 - 04:05 PM, said:

And if you want to actually use private matches in any meaningfull way you will need a premium account wich is akin to a subscription.

Wasnt this game suposed to be free to play? Werent we suposed to only pay for "convinience?" and not for entire game features?

Guess that was their position at the time.

I think they have stated that private matches will not earn C-Bills. That may be how they keep it so you are still mixing it up with everyone else and keep experienced players from just hiding in private matches. After that, I'm not sure if I want to bother speculating. Lets not get angry about something that we don't have details of, yet.

[Corvus Antaka]

Scromboid, on 27 September 2013 - 03:27 AM, said:

I think we will see the full implementation of CW, if the game is still around, sometime in mid 2015. Just being realistic.

FWIW, they have been 'working' on community warfare for almost 2 years - http://mwomercs.com/...mmunity-warfare

Lastly, the fact that Bryan is throwing his own engineers under the bus right now is a VERY VERY bad sign. You do not start eating your own unless there is a MAJOR problem in your own house. Not only is it ethically wrong, but it never helps to point fingers at your team when trying to progress forward with a goal.

1. might be right on the timeline. from my understanding phase 1 could hit for x-mas.

2. that blog just lays out a rough outline. we did get more info at the presentation, also "prestige" points, and other details.

3. throwing engineers under the bus? everytime anyone at PGI says something, there just has to be some melodrama over every little thing. I just took that he was making a joke, and no doubt -it is most likely an extreme engineering challenge.

Just because PGI released info on CW 2 years ago doesn't mean they have not progressed since then with CW. Yes, questions remain, given reviews coming in PGI knows as well as we do core gameplay is good, balanced and fun, but we all know CW & the future must come as fast as PGI can put it together in a stable manner.

I see CW, solaris and private matches as future "expansion content". We have been lucky enough to play mechwarrior for a year already through a very tough beta that took a lot of creative balancing. After only 2 years we have a stable product to play with very solid gameplay.

Everything now is just speculation beyond this. Will it go fast or slow? given the communities actions on 3PV and other controversies, I am unsurprised PGI was as careful as they were with the presentation, any type of new info and no doubt half of you will rabbit off to every corner of the web waving your "PGI lies" signs, because they had to change something to improve the overall picture.

PGI has to step up to the plate. But in the meantime,we still have a solid mechsim to play, and from now until the spring we will watch and see if PGI will make this happen.

[Sandpit]

Johnny Z, on 27 September 2013 - 03:54 PM, said:

Was thinking the same thing. How to balance the players fighting for each house without a landslide.

Seems the obvious choice would be the houses doing the worste, with less players would pay more for merc contracts bringing in more players. This might not make sense considering they are losing, but the fact they have less troops to pay means they might have more creds to throw around.

Just a quick guess at how they might balance the faction player numbers.

That's actually an interesting idea although I would go in the opposite direction. Have lower fees and added incentives to marc units that take contracts from struggling factions so the more skilled marc units could come in temporarily and help even out the battlefield so to speak. One thing I liked about mpbt was that if you got a lance together and assaulted an enemy planet you landed on the planet and waited for a defending force to jump into your lobby and then you launched into battle. If defenders were present but refused to defend then the attacking force began to leach control % in very tiny increments every couple of minutes or so. It gave players an incentive to jump into games and defend or attack planets. They also had it set up so that no matter what no faction could be completely overrun and lose all of their planets. I think it would be interesting if they incorporated something that allowed marc units to charge their own prices so that top units could charge more just like it would be in a real campaign setting. The merc handbook actually had an excellent system setup for how to handle payment and hiring of units. My faith-o-meter is still running on the low end for now though. They need something and fast

[Heffay]

If the house battles are based on fronts (and each front has 2 sides), doesn't that mean that you technically can't go beyond the front? All you can do is control boths of the fronts for your House. I think that is how they plan on preventing an entire House from losing all their planets.

A House can have lost both fronts, but still have resources to defend. And they'll probably award extra money to mercs and lone wolves to help fight back when they can.

Are there any Houses that have more than 2 borders?

[Sug]

Johnny Z, on 27 September 2013 - 03:54 PM, said:

Was thinking the same thing. How to balance the players fighting for each house without a landslide.

Seems the obvious choice would be the houses doing the worste, with less players would pay more for merc contracts bringing in more players. This might not make sense considering they are losing, but the fact they have less troops to pay means they might have more creds to throw around.

Last year there was a pie chart showing the % of players in each faction. It pretty much looked like a map of the innersphere, with Cappellen having the smallest pop and Steiner/Davion about equal to each other.

[Sandpit]

Sug, on 27 September 2013 - 04:46 PM, said:

Last year there was a pie chart showing the % of players in each faction. It pretty much looked like a map of the innersphere, with Cappellen having the smallest pop and Steiner/Davion about equal to each other.

This is usually how it goes due to the novels and popularity of those factions. It's both a blessing and a curse because you have more players in those factions but you also tend to be the faction that gets flooded with new players which can lead to heavy losses in rapid succession sometimes

[Riptor]

Elwood Blues, on 27 September 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

I think they have stated that private matches will not earn C-Bills. That may be how they keep it so you are still mixing it up with everyone else and keep experienced players from just hiding in private matches. After that, I'm not sure if I want to bother speculating. Lets not get angry about something that we don't have details of, yet.

'They allready stated that they will have you need a premium account to use any of the options for private matches. Or atleast planning because "servers for private matches cost money" ?!?!?!? (And normal match server dont?)

That means atleast the guy hosting the game will have to pay for PGIs overprized premium time... not really fair now is it?

Also i didnt even talked about cbills/XP so i have no idea why you brought that up :/

Heffay, on 27 September 2013 - 04:46 PM, said:

If the house battles are based on fronts (and each front has 2 sides), doesn't that mean that you technically can't go beyond the front? All you can do is control boths of the fronts for your House. I think that is how they plan on preventing an entire House from losing all their planets.

A House can have lost both fronts, but still have resources to defend. And they'll probably award extra money to mercs and lone wolves to help fight back when they can.

Are there any Houses that have more than 2 borders?

Davion has borders both with the DC and Capellan. DC with Rasalhague and Davion, Steiner with Rasalhague and FWL and FWL has borders with steiner and Capella.

All factions kinda meet at terra more or less.

Wich means capellans wont be able to fight DC and vice versa and FWL wont be able to face off against davion.

Davion and Steiner are the only real allies during that time with the other factions either not able to attack each other or having non agression treaties like FWL and the Capellans had if i remember correctly.

Really it was Steiner + Davion vs the rest of the inner sphere.

Edited by Riptor, 27 September 2013 - 06:14 PM.

[Sandpit]

Riptor, on 27 September 2013 - 06:08 PM, said:

'They allready stated that they will have you need a premium account to use any of the options for private matches. Or atleast planning because "servers for private matches cost money" ?!?!?!? (And normal match server dont?)

That means atleast the guy hosting the game will have to pay for PGIs overprized premium time... not really fair now is it?

Also i didnt even talked about cbills/XP so i have no idea why you brought that up :/

In a f2p model this isn't uncommon. It's not that they don't already have servers it's that they have to set up servers specifically for private matches on demand and such. It's a tradeoff but it's also nice to have as well because you SHOULD get less congestion on the server since you're paying for a select server for your private usage. BF3 has actually done this and was quite popular and successful. You are able to set up the rules and such for your server. So if you have a league for mwo outside of cw (if we ever get it) you can actually set up the server to play by the rules specific to your league. If this is what they're talking about I am definitely all for it. If it's just a cheap ploy to get players to have an extra function within CW then once again pgi misses the mark and seemingly makes a cheap money grab

[Riptor]

Sandpit, on 27 September 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:

In a f2p model this isn't uncommon. It's not that they don't already have servers it's that they have to set up servers specifically for private matches on demand and such. It's a tradeoff but it's also nice to have as well because you SHOULD get less congestion on the server since you're paying for a select server for your private usage. BF3 has actually done this and was quite popular and successful. You are able to set up the rules and such for your server. So if you have a league for mwo outside of cw (if we ever get it) you can actually set up the server to play by the rules specific to your league. If this is what they're talking about I am definitely all for it. If it's just a cheap ploy to get players to have an extra function within CW then once again pgi misses the mark and seemingly makes a cheap money grab

Name me three arena type f2p games that charge for private matches.

Then you can claim "its pretty common"

I cant remember a single current one that demands you to have a premium account to use private lobby if that feature is available.

Also comparing BF3s server system to private matchmaking? Yeah no.. doesnt work that way.. apples and oranges here.

Owning a server is owning a club.. while mwos private matches are more akin to a party held in your apartment that you asked your landlord for permission for beforehand.

MWO is not giving you your own servers for once and you are only allowed to "change" options like map and drop weight limits. They wont allow you to use mutators or other fancy stuff.

Still the whole argument about having to charge you for this feature because of server cost is... bull {Scrap}...

If you are using the private match option you just participate in a match with "custom" rules instead of a pug match... the server load will still be the same once the match is underway..(might be even less since you dont use the matchmaker to even find a match for you) its not like its doubled because you launch a custom game. A place in a custom match puts the same burden on the server as if you launch in a pug game or do i see that wrong?

Edited by Riptor, 27 September 2013 - 06:29 PM.

[Sandpit]

Riptor, on 27 September 2013 - 06:19 PM, said:

Name me three arena type f2p games that charge for private matches.

Then you can claim "its pretty common"

I cant remember a single current one that demands you to have a premium account to use private lobby if that feature is available.

Also comparing BF3s server system to private matchmaking? Yeah no.. doesnt work that way.. apples and oranges here.

MWO is not giving you your own servers for once and you are only allowed to "change" options like map and drop weight limits. They wont allow you to use mutators or other fancy stuff.

You don't know that..... I'm all for calling out pgi on their shoddy performance, communication, and blatant deceptive business practices but you have no more details than anyone else at this point which means none so you don't know what private match servers will entail because none of us do. How can you not make the comparison between the bf servers and this? As far as making a list I'm far to lazy to do the search at the moment but I'll look into it. Maybe I was wrong on that one but I'm sure I've seen it in a few different games

[Riptor]

Sandpit, on 27 September 2013 - 06:25 PM, said:

You don't know that..... I'm all for calling out pgi on their shoddy performance, communication, and blatant deceptive business practices but you have no more details than anyone else at this point which means none so you don't know what private match servers will entail because none of us do. How can you not make the comparison between the bf servers and this? As far as making a list I'm far to lazy to do the search at the moment but I'll look into it. Maybe I was wrong on that one but I'm sure I've seen it in a few different games

But name those different games or else your "its common in the industry" is nothing but hot air.

Thing is its not... i cant remember from the top of my head any current game that has private/custom matches to demand premium account.. and that includes PS3 game gundam battle operation (its pay2win and pay2play up the bazoo thought)

And i am pretty sure that i can say that they wont give you the option to host your own server for private matches. First it was never even hinted at, second they talked about private matches being an additional feature of the lobby system and third it would be to much for pgi to handle and im very sure that they do not want people to have their own private servers.

In BF3 you could tinker with the software and even use mods (could be wrong on that one) and PGI sure as hell wont allow for that as awesome as it would be.

[Heffay]

Weird, you have no idea if they plan on making premium time required for private matches yet talk about it like it's a fact. Yet when people mention that CW is planned within 6 months you freak about about how we can't know that.

The hypocrisy is amazing.