565 replies to this topic

[venomman2]

Paul and PGI,

Really appreciate the wealth of information dropped today. We've had some very strong communication from your side since launch and I think it's been a very positive influence on the game and its community. Having said that, I have some specific feedback in regards to the topics you covered;

Community Messaging: I'll be happy with whatever AtD format regularly addresses the community and any concerns there-of. If video is the way to go then I say do it. It could even be done live, bloopers and all!

UI 2.0: It's become clear via recent dev updates and PTS iterations that PGI has solidified their approach to launching UI 2.0 Their path forward from launch has all the symptoms of a project tracking very closely to its Design Timeline. (Gantt Chart anyone?)Any development blunders aside, I'm comfortable believing that UI 2.0 will release on-schedule, I'm just not sure when that is

Community Warfare: Pretty much the same as UI 2.0. It sounds like PGI has a plan they can follow.

Gameplay: *ANY* new game mode is welcome, even if it's just TDM. The thought of a Solaris arena still gives me goosebumps and I can't wait to hear more about an asymmetrical match-type.

Battlemechs: I think the role module could work but I'd like you to consider a different approach; make a module that increases XP gains for specific equipment related to a role. For example, a Commando may take the Scout module which increases bonuses from TAG, NARC, and UAV. Or a Raven 3L takes the information warfare module which increase bonuses for ECM, Counter-ECM, or BAP. Then say the brawler modules boosts XP bonuses for pulse lasers and SRMs when you destroy a component/mech with those types of weapons. I'll write something in the suggestion forum

Clans: I won't even begin to speculate on what is going to happen here si I'm just waiting patiently for whatever happens. But at some point in my MWO career I'd like to pilot a Cougar.

[Quinton99]

I think the best thing I can say about this is that my feelings are mixed.

First off, this is the kind of communication that the community has been dying for since the beginning. Well done.

As for the content...

1. I don't like the video format. It makes everything on the internet eminently ignorable. If I see a video that's longer than 2 minutes I won't even click play. The popularity of vines would suggest I'm not alone on this. That being said, go for it. What's the worst that could happen? I'll read the transcripts if I'm so desperate to be in the know on whatever softball, asked-and-answered questions are getting "answered" this week...

2. UI 2.0 is taking way too long and bottlenecking other efforts, and what's worse is that based on the test it's not even that good. I'm excited for some of the changes (like being able to sort my mechs) and the rest either feels like window dressing, or makes me recoil in horror (seriously, the new mech lab looks painful). At best it's "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss". Think about how everyone feels every time facebook changes something and realize that's how people are going to feel about UI 2.0. We'll all get used to it, but there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

3. CW is still just a concept. Players do not care about engineering aspects like how much load is going to be placed on servers. It's like explaining how the sausage gets made. We get that you have to do it, but hearing about the guys with pocket protectors and slide rules isn't helping. That being said the matchmaker fixes sound promising. Keep on plugging, that is something that is visible and important to the players at large.

4. Speaking of the visible/important balance: Glass? Really? This is like when the mech startup sequence got implemented but the HUD bugs persisted. Sure, they have nothing to do with each other, but even if the implementation of this visual fluff took one guy 20 minutes to put together (which I'm betting it didn't) it still reinforces a certain perception, and that perception is that PGI is polishing brass on the titanic. We don't care about glass, or startup sequences, or new sounds for lasers. You could release this game on the Quake 1 engine with Garaud shading and if it had anything like CW or even the lobbies we've been wanting for so long we'd play the hell out of it. When you give us features like this it makes us think that you're willing to spend time and resources on the window dressing at the cost of the foundation. Even if it's not true it *looks* like it's true. Seriously, you may want to avoid continuing to add "features" like this in the future, or at least slipping them in as an "oh by the way" with major content releases or bug fixes.

5. New game modes are great! I think a lot of players are going to learn why the cap mechanic is so important to Assault after their third straight match of "find the powered down spider before 15 minutes is up" on Skirmish though...

6. Mech fixes/quirks/module stuff is all good. I'm an Awesome fan, I've become an Orion fan, and while I first scratched my head at the Atlas retune, I think it was for the better. The Awesome still isn't quite right, but it's a massive improvement. Keep pressing down this road.

7. Clans: This is a prudent stance to adopt, but by the sounds of it you shouldn't really even be keeping any association with Battletech at this point. IS tech, while at a pretty decent balance right now still has issues (DHS might as well just be a standard 1.5M cbill surcharge). I sincerely hope we're not even still pretending that New Years Eve 3051 is still approaching. Take the time to get this right, and don't even throw out any time based estimates, or people will just use them against you.

8. HPG Manifold looks cool. Please don't double the rate of its appearance like you've done with other new map releases or we'll burn out on it. The "I haven't seen the new map yet!" crying will end in a day or two, and then we'll just burn out on it.

TL;DR: There is no TL;DR. Reading is an important life skill, as is attention span.

[codynyc]

i am so done with the carrot that was suppose to be released in august. Im done with this game. These devs promise the world and deliver nothing but money grabs week after week. As it is i can only play a match or two before im bored out of my mind.


- ill come back next December when they will promise the clans are a few months away.

[mekabuser]

k, new map. good. new gamemode. good..
everything else.. deja vu? and idk what.
based on the ui20 feedback thread the statement from paul seems almost surreal.
Every bit of feedback points towards the new ui being a POS ..

thats what you all have been working on.. wow.

Copy smurfys for the mechlab. and do whatever the hell you want with the rest of it.
As it is your UI kinda sucks for mechbuilding. I havent used it in a year. I straight up copy my smurfy builds.

cruising thru the reddit for mwo, I honestly dont have any faith in what pgi plans for cw. Give us lobbys for private matches and you will have a satisfied fan base . We can take care of our own CW.

finally, I dont think the devs realize the position they are in here with star citizen.
not at all.

[Tyr Gunn]

Quinton99, on 02 December 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

1. I don't like the video format. It makes everything on the internet eminently ignorable. If I see a video that's longer than 2 minutes I won't even click play.

YouTube wants you to know that they disagree.

Quinton99, on 02 December 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

3. CW is still just a concept. Players do not care about engineering aspects like how much load is going to be placed on servers.

WRONG AGAIN! I'm a player. I care. This stuff can be and is interesting. At least to me. Am I on an island here?

Quinton99, on 02 December 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

It's like explaining how the sausage gets made.

Actually, I think everyone should know learn how sausage is made.

Quinton99, on 02 December 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

4. Speaking of the visible/important balance: Glass? Really?

I remained interested in what you had to say until this point. You acknowledge one has nothing to do with another but are a part of the same glorious thing; then argue that perception should have forced them to hold off on beautification features that have nothing to do with system features.

Funny guy. Wrong, but unintentionally funny. Don't presume to speak for the entire community with blanket generic statements like, "Players/We don't care." Own your statements. You don't care how sausage is made. You don't care to read about engineering. You don't want shiny things.

[N0MAD]

So here is my take on the Project Update.
The UI2 preview was such a failure in design and community participation that crowd control measures
need to be applied. We do this by rehashing all the old subjects/features talked about (promised)
over the last 2 years, hoping the community will be in awe.

Community Messaging:
We have seen comments that other developers are doing it (is it SC?) and people seemed impressed
so we will try it.
IF we can get it together, STAY TUNED.

UI2:
Currently working on a release candidate (candidate implies more than one)which is to bring
the functionality of the current UI with the improved flow and experience (obviously didnt read the feedback on the test) as well as the new store interface (aha what would we possibly do without the store).
A large part of the dev studio is involved in this process (so a small part of the dev team is involved doing ALL the rest?)
We would like to take this opportunity to thank the community for the feedback so far on UI 2.0
(all 140 of you who were bothered.)
Our target is to launch UI 2.0 as soon as possible (no time or date given) and iron out the kinks
over the next few months(after the non date given release).
I can tell you this, it will be buggy (well TYVM for such quality)
This means we’ll be splitting the UI2.0 team to have some people working on nothing but bug fixes
(so who is going to be left working on the rest of the project )

Community Warfare:
Blah Blah Blah, roadmap, layouts, preperation, not in real development yet, STAY tuned, its all under the hood.
Match maker, blah blah blah, we will fill you in with more detail, as these tasks move into production.

Gameplay:
A new game mode is being added. Skirmish will be released mid-December which is essentially Team Death Match (we have taken away the capture points, viola a new game mode)
The Attack/Defend Mode, blah blah blah, Stay tuned.

BattleMechs:
First drafts,looking at, may, plans, as soon as possible.

Clans:
Design has started to focus on Clan Tech. It is at this time that we must stress once again that we will not
be bringing Clan Tech into the game as it was originally written. ( clan Mechs that are not clan mech but look like them).
We will make sure that Clan Tech does have a unique flavor when compared to InnerSphere Tech but not to the extent of everything just being over powered out of the gate.( we cant balance IS mech so we not even going to try to balance clan tech)
Currently on the hot-seat is a discussion as to how Clan BattleMechs will be customized.
(since IS mechs are currently using the Clan Omni system what the hell are we going to use for the clan system)

Player Experience:
Cracked glass will be..immersive, really it will be very cool.

The Next Map:
Yay second (or maybe third) new map in nearly 18 months ( no night/day versions does not make a new map).

So considering the Major part of the dev team (shall we asume 2/3 as the word MAJOR was used) will be working on fixing (that mess called) UI2 (and half of those working on UI2 bugs fulltime) and the team is what 40 people including non developers, i asume 6 to 10 people working on the rest of the project.
That really inspires me to think things will be rolling out real soon.
OHHH MY.
Good luck with that.

Edited by N0MAD, 02 December 2013 - 07:55 PM.

[xengk]

Community Messaging:

Spoiler

We are currently changing some of the avenues for community information updates and plan to get this stuff out ASAP. One of the changes is to the Ask the Devs format of Q and A.

Current plans are to shift the regular forum updates to a video format which will hopefully be a little less time consuming as the current method of communication. Our first video is targeted for mid-December if everything works out as planned. Stay tuned for updates around that time.

Adopting SC's video format of communication?
Im fine with this as long as the information shared with the community are useful and free up you guy to work on the code more than pouring over forum text.

UI 2.0:

Spoiler

We are currently working toward a release candidate of UI 2.0 which is to bring the functionality of the current UI with the improved flow and experience as well as the new store interface. A large part of the dev studio is involved in this process and the hard work of all involved is now showing a better polished version of the UI as each milestone is put up on the Public Test Server. The upcoming Public Test Server build of UI 2.0 will include the updated Pilot Tree screens, Mech Efficiency screen, the XP>GXP conversion tool and the preview version of how Artemis will be working in MechLab.

We would like to take this opportunity to thank the community for the feedback so far on UI 2.0 and with each new build, we have been implementing a lot of the community’s feedback into UI 2.0. With each release we put on the Pubic Test Server, we gather both detail metrics from the servers as well as valuable feedback in the feedback thread. It is this information that allows us to make sure we are hitting key points in the delivery of UI 2.0 to make sure we’re on target for its live release.

Our target is to launch UI 2.0 as soon as possible and iron out the kinks over the next few months. I can tell you this, it will be buggy (not game-breaking) and we’ll be addressing both internal requirements and your feedback on a week by week basis. This means we’ll be splitting the UI2.0 team to have some people working on nothing but bug fixes, and the other group will be working on core feature items and updates. The bug team is the team that will be doing to a weekly cycle and we’ll be able to track updates a lot faster as we push the fixes into the normal patch process.

I understand that UI2.0 is what holding back future content development like CW, so having this out of the door will only help get the other things moving.
Even if it is buggy, as long as the weekly tweak is delivered, it is still alot better than it never seeing the light and being an obstacle at releasing new contents.
I wasn't able to join the PTS for UI2.0, but hopefully the community's feedback on layout and interface gets implemented. The months spend on developing UI2.0 was for the coding, layout should be easy to modify as long as the backend framework is complete.

I have installed enough released candidate software to know it will be a bumpy ride.

Community Warfare:

Spoiler

The first set of features for Community Warfare have been broken down and reviewed by engineering. The systems engineers have a roadmap and schedule in which they will start addressing the needs of all new systems required by Community Warfare and are working on the core layout for faction/unit gameplay. What this sums up is… engineering has done all project management breakdowns and specs for the upcoming feature and code clean-up and preparation is being worked on in a special new branch build (much like PTS). Some of the core new features, like database sharding for improved load handling, have been completed and are in that branch now.

We will update as each feature of Community Warfare enters development so you will know what order to expect things to start appearing. Right now all development is heavily, under the hood.

Another feature that will be updated is the Match Maker. A full analysis has been performed on the current system and fixes/updates are now planned. This is not a trivial update and may be included with the release of Phase 1 Community Warfare. Tonnage limits, grouping, Elo calculations are all reliant on these changes and we will fill you in with more detail, as these tasks move into production.

Im not a very technical person, so from I gather here, there is already an early alpha build for CW?
Would like to know more detail on how the new Match Maker will work, when they are ready for sharing.

Gameplay:

Spoiler

A new game mode is being added. Skirmish will be released mid-December which is essentially Team Death Match. The inclusion of this mode is the first game mode specific step toward Community Warfare and the game modes that will be required for planetary control and community conflicts. It’s also a way for us to gather metrics on what may eventually turn into a Solaris game mode further down the line.

The Attack/Defend Mode is in progress and we have some functioning turrets that will be fortifying Forward Operating Bases in the mode and the game mode is being investigated for any retrofit issues with the older maps. This game mode in particular will have to take into consideration special rules or functionality for Community Warfare and how defensive positions operate and are possibly upgraded. This will be the first game mode to see a potential “respawn” system. We will update when we prep this mode to go live.

New game mode are always welcome.
The only concern I have is that will Skirmish make Assault mode obsolete.
Would like to know more on "Respawn", will be like the previously proposed "Dropship mode" or a shared team respawn counter.


BattleMechs:

Spoiler

All BattleMechs are going through micro-tuning in terms of their hit boxes, quirks and abilities. We have just completed the first draft of upcoming new modules and pilot talents that will allow us to further refine the roles that the various BattleMechs partake in. We are also looking at chassis/role specific module slots being added to BattleMechs so that they do not occupy general module slots which can be considered as generic modules. As an example, players who equip a specialized Scouting module may receive higher XP/CB gains when performing scouting actions and players who equip a specialized Brawler module may receive higher XP/CB gains when performing support actions etc. Our plan is to start ramping up generation of these new modules and talents as soon as possible.

Yes, bring in more quirks for mech variant. Just make sure they are listed out in the new UI.
From my understanding the new role modules will function like multiplier for ingame rewards. IE; scout module will multiply existing Tag and spotting reward, brawler module will multiply component destruction reward and maybe a buff to damage->Cbill calculation.

Clans:

Spoiler

Design has started to focus on Clan Tech. It is at this time that we must stress once again that we will not be bringing Clan Tech into the game as it was originally written. Game balance is going to take precedence over any values/behaviors found previously in other MechWarrior/BattleTech titles. Yes, there will be growing pains but we will make sure that Clan Tech does have a unique flavor when compared to InnerSphere Tech but not to the extent of everything just being over powered out of the gate.

Currently on the hot-seat is a discussion as to how Clan BattleMechs will be customized. We will update everyone once the final call has been made and who knows, maybe one of the planned BattleMechs will be announced soon™!

Break TT lore if you have to, to balance Clan Tech for the game.
Not going to speculate too much on Clan mech customization.
But I do not want hardpoint size limitation, it will turn each match into a mirror match of exactly the same mechs loaded with exactly the same weapons.

Map Gameplay Elements:

Spoiler

New layouts have been done for spawn locations and base/resource collector locations across all maps. The motivational drive was to keep the spawn locations fair and at the same time have players able to enter combat sooner. This is more evident on the larger maps.

Meaning that spawn zone and resource cap will be place closer to the middle for large maps? Time to encounter will be shorter now, but most of the map will goes to waste.
Will see how things turn out.

Player Experience:

Spoiler

The art team has proven technically that {LT-MOB-25}-pit glass is now functional. This means a little more immersive effect when you’re sitting in the cockpit of your BattleMech. I’ve seen the effect and it’s very cool and non-intrusive so expect to see this coming soon with the next few new BattleMechs appearing on the battlefield. Previously released BattleMechs will be retrofitted over the coming months with their own glass treatments.

Bullet decal and melted glass on cockpit window, or even smashed window when the head is damaged down to Internals.
Sound cool, but make sure not to obscure or distorts the player's view too much.

The Next Map:

Spoiler

The new map HPG Manifold has gone through some major polishing since you last saw a sneak peak of it and is ready for release.

[Sug]

Alistair Winter, on 02 December 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

I don't really understand why people are so happy that PGI is talking about CW, UI 2.0, matchmaking, clans, etc. Yes, they are addressing important issues, but I'm not seeing any new information that I haven't heard at least once already. In most cases, several times. So why are we still cheering every time PGI says they're still working on CW?

I'm happy about the game modes and changes to existing maps. That's very important stuff and will keep me interested in the game if it's executed well. But almost everything else in this post was basically stuff we knew already. Just saying.

That's how I felt about that presentation at the launch event. It was literally a recap of the article pcgamer did on MWO a year before.

I'd like to buy things to support this game but I need more than a "we're still working on it" every six months.

[Solis Obscuri]

• Ugh, it's been this long since we had a new game mode and all we're offered is TDM?
  
• If UI 2.0 is going to be released buggy, why wasn't it just released buggy back in Open Beta? Open Beta felt like a ten-month cycle of features being released "finished" without much regard to feedback, and now we seem to be moving back into beta testing.
  
• Glad to hear some progress is being made in Community Warfare.
  
• New spawn/resource locations are good. Should improve replay value on old maps, at least for a while.
  
• Why do you think shooting and editing video is going to be less time consuming than typing out answers to forum questions?

Edited by Solis Obscuri, 02 December 2013 - 08:06 PM.

[Doctor Proctor]

Great update with a lot of information!

[Thuzel]

SmithMPBT, on 02 December 2013 - 03:15 PM, said:

So the engineers will "soon" begin cleaning up the game code in preparation to eventually begin the actual coding of CW?

They're thinking about putting together a steering committee to plan discussions on that.

[N0MAD]

Doctor Proctor, on 02 December 2013 - 08:06 PM, said:

Great update with a lot of information!

So i take it you have not read any of these forums before..
welcome.

[Deathlike]

I have the sad vision that UI 2.0 in some form of its current incarnation will be forced upon us... bad mechlab and all.

Nothing says "bad idea" like the current state of the UI 2.0 mechlab... despite the obvious issue that it is incomplete, it is woefully backwards in "proper mechlab/UI designs".

I can already see people ragequitting over it.

[Lightfoot]

Well, I think DHS 1.4 and Heat Scale needs a revamp at least before you start looking at Clan tech. MWO has too many heat nerfs running and it has ruined the functionality of many Energy reliant mechs. For example the AWS-9M stock version needs to run in a reasonably competitive fashion before you start designing Clan tech. Clan mechs include many famous Energy-Boating designs which MWO will not handle. Supernova, Novacat, Behemoth, to name a few.

Energy weapons already generate lots of Heat and it is their Battletech inherent weakness so Heat Scale and DHS 1.4 becomes a double-nerf that does not nerf Ballistics or Missiles.

Like it or not, to get all the Mechs to be competitive either some Energy heat values need to come down or DHS 1.4 needs to be increased until all the Mechs work. Heat Scale and and the damaging Heat Cap are there to prevent over-boating and penalties for over-boating could be more drastic, so long as stock Energy configs compete against Ballistic.

When players start playing competitively in CW they will only take the best combat tested mechs and right now that is an all Ballistic-boat team. That's bad for obvious reasons.

[Tekadept]

Now this "info" is out all I am wondering is how long will the silence go on till the next "update"

[Deathlike]

Tekadept, on 02 December 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

Now this "info" is out all I am wondering is how long will the silence go on till the next "update"

Soon™.

[Selbatrim]

hey PGI. thanks for the update. Happy to know you are working on roles so will add my thoughts.

Do not make certain chassis fulfill a particular role with chassis specific modules. That is limiting. Certainly find a way to reward scouts and cappers. ideas like xp and cbills for first spot of target? allow scouts to relay visual information. if we can see someone with the naked eye they need to pop up on grid even if their type/variant is shielded by ecm. don't make us type/say it.

let us manually ping the battlefield to indicate locations of enemy we can't see rather than try to type coords.

reward time spent capping, not just cap victory.

[A Man In A Can]

Thanks for the update. Much appreciated.

[HellJumper]

sorry to say this but you are one of the worst developers out there..

i just dont understand why you people bother to go into LAUNCH mode when all of the actual stuff was going to come about 1 year later?? having the BETA tag was going to give you a lot of protection but you people removed it on purpose and now you got no more excuses..

once again you failed at the UI launch ( i remember it was something like 1 month after release?? or was it 3 months??) hmmm anyway..now you are telling that UI2.0 will take up few months..great going..

CW is not even in development?? WOW fail. you guys have just started to schedule it..nice going again..

Clan mechs... i presume more clan mech packs coming in soon.

why do you even bother making promises?? jsut say..we will add feature in next 2 years..no time lines and no communication..thanks guys..i used to put in money into the game but not any more. not till i (like many other players) get the stuff you had promised for oh like 1.5 years now....

[Fabe]

Rarity HD, on 02 December 2013 - 03:44 PM, said:

[

Respwans? No.... just...no.

Relax, it most likely will not be the standard unlimited respawns from other games but the 'dropship mode' thats been talked about since before closed beta. The ways it'll work is we choose 4 mechs to take with us and once they're gone you're out.

Honestly I think the only way any sort of objective based game mode will work is with some sort of respwawn other wise it's too easy just to play every mode like deathmatch and wipe the other team out. With respawns even limited ones there might be more incentive to go for the objective.

Edited by Fabe, 02 December 2013 - 08:49 PM.