344 replies to this topic

[Bagheera]

I am Bagheera's complete lack of surprise.

[SmurfOff]

Damocles, on 02 April 2014 - 07:42 AM, said:

Matchmaker for solo players. (adds to CW)

player made match join lobby with chat for groups (Not CW)

So basically Community Warfare is for people who have no friends.... Do they have irony in Canada?

[Chemie]

just make a channel on comstar for 12-man group leads to be on. When you invite that one player, you get their 12-man.

Then you can force a balanced ton limit versus current 12-man random queue which is useless when group drop with so much weight.

Problem is most units have a hard time even pulling together 12 players now a days.

maybe need an 8-man channel too then.

[Damocles]

SmurfOff, on 02 April 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

So basically Community Warfare is for people who have no friends.... Do they have irony in Canada?

eh i had a 3rd option for groups to use CW but when i went to type it out i remembered...*** it. We shouldn't have to explain to them what kind of a total screw up it would be to never implement a real lobby.

Edited by Damocles, 02 April 2014 - 07:47 AM.

[MisterPlanetarian]

Bah. Sucks

I just hope we get unit lists/lobby/leaderbords when CW's actual components hit.

http://mwolobby.com/ will be that much more important for now and props to the site creators for their ability to forsee this. Besides, I did not see any mentions of a match list in the writeup so it's not entirely unexpected but dissapointing none the less.

Edited by MisterPlanetarian, 02 April 2014 - 07:48 AM.

[DaZur]

While I understand the implied concern and the implications... I guess I kind'a expected private matches to be exactly that... "private".

I just assumed private matches would be essentially by invite only, not too far removed from our present implementation mechanics save the match-making accouterments.

Damn my tepid assumptions!

Edited by DaZur, 02 April 2014 - 07:51 AM.

[Featherwood]

500$ golden lobby anyone?

[PropagandaWar]

I have canned air for sale! Only two days old! Any takers! Any takers...... Screw it. Movin on.

[Pygar]

Roadbeer, on 02 April 2014 - 07:35 AM, said:

How?
How is not putting in something that has been in almost every PvP game (and every MW game since MW2) as well as basic internet tools that have been around since... well, the internet, better for the game as a whole?

I dunno, maybe PGI is worried that so many people will go into private matches and never come back, that new players won't be able to find random matches.

Edited by Pygar, 02 April 2014 - 07:54 AM.

[Roadbeer]

Pygar, on 02 April 2014 - 07:51 AM, said:

I dunno, maybe PGI is worried that so many people will go into private matches and never come back, that new players won't be able to find random matches.

And why do you think so many people will be running to private matches?
Could it be because that they don't support groups larger than 4 and less than 12?
Almost everyone I know, just wants to play with their friends who are online. All of them, not just 3 of them until they can build to 11 more.

[DaZur]

Pygar, on 02 April 2014 - 07:51 AM, said:

I dunno, maybe PGI is worried that so many people will go into private matches and never come back, that new players won't be able to find random matches.

There is probably some truth to that premise... Players desirous of the topology of private matches would likely not return to the general pool anytime soon.

That said if you believe their recent denoted metrics... players who are desirous of structured team matches are the statistical anomaly.

[Bagheera]

Pygar, on 02 April 2014 - 07:51 AM, said:

I dunno, maybe PGI is worried that so many people will go into private matches and never come back, that new players won't be able to find random matches.

Well, if they believe their own words, then they should only expect 16% of the players to use private lobbies.

[AlmightyAeng]

DaZur, on 02 April 2014 - 07:55 AM, said:

There is probably some truth to that premise... Players desirous of the topology of private matches would likely not return to the general pool anytime soon.

That said if you believe their recent denoted metrics... players who are desirous of structured team matches are the statistical anomaly.

Unless they don't play daily and need/want cbills to buy mechs. In which case, private matches, however, fun, are a detriment to game advancement.

[DaZur]

Ghost Badger, on 02 April 2014 - 08:00 AM, said:

Unless they don't play daily and need/want cbills to buy mechs. In which case, private matches, however, fun, are a detriment to game advancement.

Ah... Forgot about that.

I'll fix it...

They would not be desirous to return to the general player-pool except to do some menial labor for minimum wage?

Edited by DaZur, 02 April 2014 - 08:29 AM.

[Pygar]

DaZur, on 02 April 2014 - 07:55 AM, said:

There is probably some truth to that premise... Players desirous of the topology of private matches would likely not return to the general pool anytime soon.

That said if you believe their recent denoted metrics... players who are desirous of structured team matches are the statistical anomaly.

Yeah, I don't believe the metrics...in fact I run with a house that is already doing "tournament" style play as much as is possible w/out a private match system- I'm pretty sure that if they had the right tools to make it easier, they would do more.

[Jon Phoenix]

Wintersdark, on 02 April 2014 - 06:54 AM, said:

I desperately wish we could post games matches looking for additional players, listed something like:

Game mode - player count/free space - map - rule set

But I'd be shocked to see something like that this year (despite its being a common feature in every multiplayer game of this sort going back decades)

Your parenthetical sure said it. I still can't understand why these guys can't make a multiplayer game like everyone else does and has been done for 20 years.

-Jon (nods)

[Bagheera]

Guys, they can't even make an LFG lobby, anyone surprised by this tweet hasn't been paying attention.

[Wintersdark]

Bagheera, on 02 April 2014 - 07:59 AM, said:

Well, if they believe their own words, then they should only expect 16% of the players to use private lobbies.

I suspect it'll be less.

Let's say me and my 4 buddies want to play together. Currently, we just run two groups, a pair and three, but that's decidedly not ideal. Private matches will let usbplay together at last, yay!

Except that no, they won't, unless we happen to know 19 other available players who can join us. It's not enough to just get your own team of 12, you need to find an opposing team too!

So... We'll just keep dropping public, and PGI will, in its wisdom, assume that's because we don't want a group of 5.

[Roadbeer]

Wintersdark, on 02 April 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

I suspect it'll be less.

Let's say me and my 4 buddies want to play together. Currently, we just run two groups, a pair and three, but that's decidedly not ideal. Private matches will let usbplay together at last, yay!

Except that no, they won't, unless we happen to know 19 other available players who can join us. It's not enough to just get your own team of 12, you need to find an opposing team too!

So... We'll just keep dropping public, and PGI will, in its wisdom, assume that's because we don't want a group of 5.

Well, now you won't be able to sync (as 2 groups, I've pointed out elsewhere how much easier the 3/3/3/3 system is going to make syncdropping, but I won't get into that here).

But as to the rest of what you've said...

[Davers]

Roadbeer, on 02 April 2014 - 06:49 AM, said:

https://twitter.com/...366627624251392

Yay! We get to use 3rd party software to find matches in the Private Queue.

Way to phone it in PGI.

So we have to use third party sources to find out we need to use third party sources to find groups?