795 replies to this topic

[van Uber]

dimstog, on 11 April 2014 - 01:09 AM, said:

On the other hand, if destroying a mech took a little bit of time, the 5 minutes it takes to go into a 2-9 stomp, might actually take 10 minutes, and maybe the other team might have the time to turn the odds around a bit, not winning, but not leaving the game feeling hopeless and stomped.

Introduce damage resist modules, much like EVE-online, complete with stacking penalties and you would have your prolonged engagements, plus some added depth.

But the TT crowd would never accept it....

[Magna Canus]

Well it would seem that "bleating" as Craig so lovingly put it, has in some form "paid out". Not quite what everyone wanted, but it is a start. Seems PGI is going to hand over some of the new player handling to organized groups (already saw Roadbeer sign on).

[Sarcasm] This will help us "evil pre-mades" further our agenda of converting solos to Faction Minions at last! [/Sarcasm]

http://mwomercs.com/...86-be-featured/

So get out there and represent your units and help reestablish Team player influence in the broader player base!

[Craig Steele]

Magnakanus, on 11 April 2014 - 02:33 AM, said:

Well it would seem that "bleating" as Craig so lovingly put it, has in some form "paid out". Not quite what everyone wanted, but it is a start. Seems PGI is going to hand over some of the new player handling to organized groups (already saw Roadbeer sign on).

[Sarcasm] This will help us "evil pre-mades" further our agenda of converting solos to Faction Minions at last! [/Sarcasm]

http://mwomercs.com/...86-be-featured/

So get out there and represent your units and help reestablish Team player influence in the broader player base!

If I were you I'd stop patting myself on the back and go read the actual post and the comments from posters subsequently.

You'll see than that it has nothing to do with 5 - 11 game play enablement as this thread has droned on and on about and you will also see both supporters and knockers of the proposal that it does cover.

Imagine that, some people have a view that's not the same as yours?

But hey, some guys just want to see the world burn right?

Haters gunna hate

[Demuder]

o0Marduk0o, on 11 April 2014 - 01:53 AM, said:

You know the armor values and weapon damage. How shall 4 mechs need 20 seconds to destroy another mech, if the single mech isn't torso twisting or moving back to cover? Direct fights are usually a matter of seconds and there is nothing wrong with it.

But that's exactly my point, the values and mechanics are so borked up (or down) that no amount of torso twisting will save you once you make that first mistake. I am not saying that it should save you either, but I believe death just comes too instantly. In fact a lot of "whining" -which I would call positive feedback- about weapon balance/mechanics and armor values on the forums is exactly about this, that actual piloting skill is trumped by pinpoint alpha, poptarting and such. Whether such gameplay is right for a Battletech IP game is a matter of discussion. Whether one likes this type of combat is probably a personal choice. However, I do believe it's the major reason for the stomps.

Personally, I know that going around that corner will be a mistake and sometimes I do it just for the heck of it, in hope that my fellow pugs will be inspired (since PGI hasn't even bothered to implement a "FOLLOW ME!" shortcut) and push, avenging my death instead of hugging the corner and hoping for a quick alphastrike kill.

van Uber, on 11 April 2014 - 02:26 AM, said:

Introduce damage resist modules, much like EVE-online, complete with stacking penalties and you would have your prolonged engagements, plus some added depth.

But the TT crowd would never accept it....

Being a former EVE player myself, I thought about that as well. It works quite well for EVE (and even WoW, hehe) but I don't think it is needed for MWO for a number of reasons. However, what the "TT crowd goes for" is the least of them, considering how far PGI has strayed from the TT model anyway.

Edited by dimstog, 11 April 2014 - 02:52 AM.

[Magna Canus]

Craig Steele, on 11 April 2014 - 02:44 AM, said:

If I were you I'd stop patting myself on the back and go read the actual post and the comments from posters subsequently.

You'll see than that it has nothing to do with 5 - 11 game play enablement as this thread has droned on and on about and you will also see both supporters and knockers of the proposal that it does cover.

Imagine that, some people have a view that's not the same as yours?

But hey, some guys just want to see the world burn right?

Haters gunna hate

LOL, I knew posting would bait you in Craig, especially when dropping your name.

Actually a bit off topic and out of context here Craig since I had not spent a thought on 5-11 with the post, just joy that there is potential out there to breathe new life into team play, signed, sealed, and sanctioned by PGI.

So if you want to continue to beat the dead horse that's fine. I thought you were done so I filed that way in the archive. You know, taking your word at face value.

[Craig Steele]

Magnakanus, on 11 April 2014 - 02:55 AM, said:

LOL, I knew posting would bait you in Craig, especially when dropping your name.

Actually a bit off topic and out of context here Craig since I had not spent a thought on 5-11 with the post, just joy that there is potential out there to breathe new life into team play, signed, sealed, and sanctioned by PGI.

So if you want to continue to beat the dead horse that's fine. I thought you were done so I filed that way in the archive. You know, taking your word at face value.

w/e

Funny how whenever I show you you're wrong you were "just posting" or "just saying" nowadays, as you said it's an interesting defensive mechanism isn't it.

But now doubt it's amateur psychology hour so you'll have something to say again.

Go ahead. Troll away.

I got some time free.

[Joseph Mallan]

Magnakanus, on 11 April 2014 - 02:55 AM, said:

LOL, I knew posting would bait you in Craig, especially when dropping your name.

Actually a bit off topic and out of context here Craig since I had not spent a thought on 5-11 with the post, just joy that there is potential out there to breathe new life into team play, signed, sealed, and sanctioned by PGI.

So if you want to continue to beat the dead horse that's fine. I thought you were done so I filed that way in the archive. You know, taking your word at face value.

A link please so i know what you are talking about... I haven quiet read anything that does what you mention.... yet.

[Magna Canus]

Craig Steele, on 11 April 2014 - 03:00 AM, said:

w/e

Funny how whenever I show you you're wrong you were "just posting" or "just saying" nowadays, as you said it's an interesting defensive mechanism isn't it.

But now doubt it's amateur psychology hour so you'll have something to say again.

Go ahead. Troll away.

I got some time free.

Ah, ok. So I see you really really want to pick up the 5-11 discussion again. I don't have any time today to sift through all the comments on the announcement, but I will try to make time on Monday.

I do so love our FWO matches (Forum Warrior Online), almost as fun as a real match would be. =)

So since you have some time today do some "Repair and Rearm" and we can meet again on the field on Monday.

Joseph Mallan, on 11 April 2014 - 03:17 AM, said:

A link please so i know what you are talking about... I haven quiet read anything that does what you mention.... yet.

It's the new "Be Featured" thing PGI has cooked up. Has me in a good mood again. =)

http://mwomercs.com/...86-be-featured/

[Craig Steele]

Magnakanus, on 11 April 2014 - 03:21 AM, said:

Ah, ok. So I see you really really want to pick up the 5-11 discussion again. I don't have any time today to sift through all the comments on the announcement, but I will try to make time on Monday.

I do so love our FWO matches (Forum Warrior Online), almost as fun as a real match would be. =)

So since you have some time today do some "Repair and Rearm" and we can meet again on the field on Monday.

Oh dear, you misread?

No no, I said you can troll away if you want, I have some time free.

It isn't that I want to re ignite the convo of 5- 11, it's pretty much done to death.

As it stands right now its not here, it will be available when the Launch comes in a specific format but "Teams" don't want to use that (according to this thread), they'd prefer to game the system so they can play against PUG's with all the advantages of comms and optimal loadouts against a weaker team for their own personal (and varied) reasons. And if the PUG's don't like it they can join a team or leave the game.

That's pretty much it isn't?

We can wax lyrical until the early hours about justifications and reasons but at the end of the day, that's what the thread is about right? How "Teams" can get their 5 - 11 man teams into the PUG environment where they will enjoy an in game advantage and be rewarded for it.

[Joseph Mallan]

I didn't see anything that mentioned dropping 5-11? just PGI willing to sponsor MechCorps?

[van Uber]

dimstog, on 11 April 2014 - 02:50 AM, said:

Being a former EVE player myself, I thought about that as well. It works quite well for EVE (and even WoW, hehe) but I don't think it is needed for MWO for a number of reasons. However, what the "TT crowd goes for" is the least of them, considering how far PGI has strayed from the TT model anyway.

It depends, I agree it does not have to be implemented, but there are some argument for it. By the same reason PGI doubled the armour (a move that also CCP made, preceding the introduction of resistances in EVE), i.e. compensating for pinpoint damage. One might argue that the increased armorvalue was not enough to hit the sweet spot for Mech endurance and that instead of increasing armour further, introducing resistance meta game would be more fun.

[Joseph Mallan]

I didn't see anything that mentioned dropping 5-11? just PGI willing to sponsor MechCorps?

Craig... Why does it have to be a PUG OR team environment? It is a Team based game where the better team wins. and the better team will have better coordination within their team. They will have better communication on the field. They will have better synergy with their fellows and most important they will want to drop again and again likely increasing their desire to spend some money to get...X Mech to fit in with a new Meta for the group or Unit colors and decals (once available).

I thought the game was about MechWarriors and the best warriors can work as a unit.

[Craig Steele]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 April 2014 - 03:35 AM, said:

I didn't see anything that mentioned dropping 5-11? just PGI willing to sponsor MechCorps?

Craig... Why does it have to be a PUG OR team environment? It is a Team based game where the better team wins. and the better team will have better coordination within their team. They will have better communication on the field. They will have better synergy with their fellows and most important they will want to drop again and again likely increasing their desire to spend some money to get...X Mech to fit in with a new Meta for the group or Unit colors and decals (once available).

I thought the game was about MechWarriors and the best warriors can work as a unit.

I was just summarising the thread?

We all know teams do have an advantage with comms and optimal synchronised loadouts.

We all know PGI are trying to limit the impact of that advantage on the PUG's game experience by capping teams at one per side at a max of 4 members.

This thread is about gaming the system so that one team has is fighting with advantages against an opponent without the same advantages.

How would you propose random PUG's have the same advantages as a pre made team with optimal synchronised loadouts?

[Magna Canus]

Craig Steele, on 11 April 2014 - 03:29 AM, said:

1) It isn't that I want to re ignite the convo of 5- 11, it's pretty much done to death.

2) As it stands right now its not here, it will be available when the Launch comes in a specific format but "Teams" don't want to use that (according to this thread), they'd prefer to game the system so they can play against PUG's with all the advantages of comms and optimal loadouts against a weaker team for their own personal (and varied) reasons. And if the PUG's don't like it they can join a team or leave the game.
That's pretty much it isn't?
We can wax lyrical until the early hours about justifications and reasons but at the end of the day, that's what the thread is about right? How "Teams" can get their 5 - 11 man teams into the PUG environment where they will enjoy an in game advantage and be rewarded for it.

Just real quick, kinda short on time today, sorry.

1) Ok, cool. Case closed.

2) 5-11 works only with private matches, no lobby, etc. already hashed out in detail. Main issue is there are no earnings in those matches as there are in our current "normal" matches. So people see it as a double penalty; pay with premium time & get no C-Bills/XP. Pretty simple and self explanatory. Think of it like telling solo's they can only get C-Bills/XP in the 12 man que.

[Magna Canus]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 April 2014 - 03:30 AM, said:

I didn't see anything that mentioned dropping 5-11? just PGI willing to sponsor MechCorps?

Yeah, same thing Craig was thinking. No, just PGI sponsoring Units/MercCorps to be the "default training experience" for new players.

Thing that makes me hopeful here is that if new players' first positive experience is Team play they will more likely want to support the team play experience which may eventually cascade down to getting 5-11 groups online again. Kind of logic puzzle, I know.

[Joseph Mallan]

Ok Now I understand where you were coming from/going! Yes, being introduced to this game on Comms, with groups will show a different if not better way to play the game. I know I went from maybe cashing it in, to being die hard 8 hours a night, just joining the Law. It was way more fun laughing and joking with others as you splash that enemy Atlas, than playing with only the stomping of heavy feet.

[Craig Steele]

Magnakanus, on 11 April 2014 - 04:02 AM, said:

Just real quick, kinda short on time today, sorry.


2) 5-11 works only with private matches, no lobby, etc. already hashed out in detail. Main issue is there are no earnings in those matches as there are in our current "normal" matches. So people see it as a double penalty; pay with premium time & get no C-Bills/XP. Pretty simple and self explanatory. Think of it like telling solo's they can only get C-Bills/XP in the 12 man que.

Sure, np about the time. Lifes like that.

2 Yes, of course, but this is still a summary

Craig Steele, on 11 April 2014 - 03:29 AM, said:

We can wax lyrical until the early hours about justifications and reasons but at the end of the day, that's what the thread is about right? How "Teams" can get their 5 - 11 man teams into the PUG environment where they will enjoy an in game advantage and be rewarded for it.

[Joseph Mallan]

Craig Steele, on 11 April 2014 - 03:44 AM, said:

I was just summarising the thread?

We all know teams do have an advantage with comms and optimal synchronised loadouts.

We all know PGI are trying to limit the impact of that advantage on the PUG's game experience by capping teams at one per side at a max of 4 members.

This thread is about gaming the system so that one team has is fighting with advantages against an opponent without the same advantages.

How would you propose random PUG's have the same advantages as a pre made team with optimal synchronised loadouts?

But that is silly when you are forming players into 12 man teams. Why would you limit the impact an organized group can have in a game meant to be organized team v organized team? That doesn't make sense. Give Unorganized PUGs Solaris to drop on. build the rest of the game around the Clan invasion as was pitched to me and and the founders... If Star Wars can have multiple planets with several instances running at the same time with 100+ players per planet... How cant PGI get us PVP and canon like combat?

[cleghorn6]

Does no one else see the potential of CW and/or factions to fill this "groups between 5 and 11" gap? It just seems so obvious to me but I haven't seen anyone mention it (to be fair I stopped reading at page 8 because who has that kind of time).

If you're faction aligned, you drop with however many you like and the rest gets filled with your faction partisans. You participate in the faction conflict du jour and continue to love your life. I honestly think that this is where the attention to the in-game comms went, that it was intended as a faction thing.

You have to remember that they're designing the finished game. With all elements present. Of which we've so far only seen a tiny fraction and are only just starting so see more. Whether you think they're competent to achieve it or not is irrelevant. They're designing the end-point. We're trying to 2nd guess step 9 of 25, without knowing anything about anything beyond step 11.

[Craig Steele]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 April 2014 - 04:34 AM, said:

But that is silly when you are forming players into 12 man teams. Why would you limit the impact an organized group can have in a game meant to be organized team v organized team? That doesn't make sense. Give Unorganized PUGs Solaris to drop on. build the rest of the game around the Clan invasion as was pitched to me and and the founders... If Star Wars can have multiple planets with several instances running at the same time with 100+ players per planet... How cant PGI get us PVP and canon like combat?

IDK, I don't write this stuff? It's not my company? LOL

Maybe its because they pitch the whole IS vs Clan wars and they feel Solo PUG's need to be a part of that because thats the marketing they made?

Maybe its because they don't want to split the population cause it will crash MM and team players have no one to play?

Maybe it's because they don't have a Solaris environment ready to go and if PUG's are 84% of the population they have no where to play?

Important thing on the 12 man thing though. It is represented here abouts that PGI are catering to the 12 man and the PUG's with this launch module, but thats not quite accurate.

The 12 man function that is here today is just not being closed, it's being relabelled so to speak. It's not a new feature (like the Premium matches) being introduced with the Launch module. IDK if it's getting some window treatments, but they certainly talk about it as if its the same function currently in game.

Towards the end of Podcast 105 #1 (when I suspect all the "Team Players" blood has already gone past listening to anymore) they talk about their expectation that 12 mans will move towards the Premium match environment as it better suits their needs, but they are not turning the current function off (atm) and will see what the patronage is.

So its not really the case to say that PGI are showing "more love" to 12 man than 5 - 11 with this module, its just the same love that they have not flicked the switch on. Although the argument is that they have getting "more love" for longer, but the Launch Module is not new love