1126 replies to this topic

[Revorn]

Why should Prems are allowed to play in a Soloque? The Word Solo means Solo, not a Group of 2-4. Better ypu call it Pugslaugther-Mode. At least it would be te Truth.


Seriously, i can only Rofl hardest.

[Heffay]

Revorn, on 14 April 2014 - 01:22 PM, said:

Why should Prems are allowed to play in a Soloque? The Word Solo means Solo, not a Group of 2-4. Better ypu call it Pugslaugther-Mode. At least it would be te Truth.

Seriously, i can only Rofl hardest.

It's the Public queue. It's for solo and small groups (2-4, limit one group per side).

Edited by Heffay, 14 April 2014 - 01:23 PM.

[Revorn]

Heffay, on 14 April 2014 - 01:22 PM, said:

It's the Public queue. It's for solo and small groups.

Seriously? Verry intresting, thanks for the Enligthning.

[Deathlike]

Paul's post is just reiterating his position, and not actually taking serious feedback.

Compared to the "neighboring thread" about technical issues... the response is a lot more productive... a dialogue. It is something that clearly doesn't exist in a Paul-feedback thread.

[Roadbeer]

Deathlike, on 14 April 2014 - 01:24 PM, said:

Paul's post is just reiterating his position, and not actually taking serious feedback.

Compared to the "neighboring thread" about technical issues... the response is a lot more productive... a dialogue. It is something that clearly doesn't exist in a Paul-feedback thread.

Or in Karl's thread down in OT.

THAT'S looking for Feedback, this is just "Hey, I don't care, so I'm not going to do it. Here's why, now discuss"

[627]

Just a little thing: light green text on a dark green background is not really the best thing to read...

[Deathlike]

Roadbeer, on 14 April 2014 - 01:26 PM, said:

Or in Karl's thread down in OT.

I actually like that thread. Even if I don't like the answers, I get a human response.

Quote

THAT'S looking for Feedback, this is just "Hey, I don't care, so I'm not going to do it. Here's why, now discuss"

Historically, this is what a Paul thread happens to be.

Edited by Deathlike, 14 April 2014 - 01:29 PM.

[Malorish]

My god, what a bunch of whining over nothing.

OMG I CANNOT QUE WITH 11 PLAYERS . . . . ONLY 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, OR 10!!!

WORLD IS ENDING. AND PGI IS ENDING IT!!!!

OH, THE HORRORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR . . . . . .

/sarcasm

Seriously if it's that big a deal, get one more player, or tell jimmy to rotate with susie every other game.

They didn't say it's never coming. In fact they said at some point they'd like to button it all up so it works better. But they do have other things they're working on.

Yes, they're very late on those things. But frankly it makes me feel better to know they're not wasting a lot of time on making the group matchmaker perfect before moving on to more pressing matters.

:-)

[Roadbeer]

Malorish, on 14 April 2014 - 01:30 PM, said:

My god, what a bunch of whining over nothing.

OMG I CANNOT QUE WITH 11 PLAYERS . . . . ONLY 2,3 OR,4,5,6,7,8,9,!!!

Fixed.

You really should read it deeper, the whole thing is an excuse for not making a group queue... period.

[Deathlike]

Malorish, on 14 April 2014 - 01:30 PM, said:

They didn't say it's never coming. In fact they said at some point they'd like to button it all up so it works better. But they do have other things they're working on.

Yes, they said that about CW... 90 days ago... and 90 days ago before that, and 90 more days...

[Sandpit]

SuckyJack, on 14 April 2014 - 11:11 AM, said:

Also, by making it player choice, that a player has to choose to drop it into a group queue from the Launch Menu instead of the regular Solo Queue you're going to get solo players in the group queue that want to communicate and work with a team.

SuckyJack, on 14 April 2014 - 10:48 AM, said:

Allowing players to choose to drop into a group queue alone lets them find groups, be put on teams of players that have an idea of cooperation and teamwork. G

Jacob Side, on 14 April 2014 - 10:48 AM, said:

How about leaving that choice up to the player. You might end up being surprised that there are players that want to fill that role. And surprised at the success of winning.
You guys make my head hurt with your design choices, give the player options and you'd be surprised at what we pick.

Pyrrho, on 14 April 2014 - 10:52 AM, said:

I don't think disallowing solo players in a group queue is a good idea. Especially not if the reason you are using is "Solo players will win more in PUG environments."

moonglum, on 14 April 2014 - 11:06 AM, said:

^^^ I just want to second, third, and fourth this sentiment.

"It's only high because it's so flipping hard to play in a group."

Rouken, on 14 April 2014 - 10:26 AM, said:

As someone who almost exclusively pugs I would join in the group queue

Rasc4l, on 14 April 2014 - 10:33 AM, said:

But I'd echo what was already said please allow single players to join the group queue if they want.

QuimMorius, on 14 April 2014 - 10:33 AM, said:

By introducing the 2-10 man que and removing the 12-man public drops will hit my 600 player unit hard as we can't drop a 12-man team against a random team for training purposes, it's not everyone that are able to participate in tournaments at fixed times.

Couldn't que be 2-12 please?

HANGMAN1962, on 14 April 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

all so could let solo players see what an ogenized group can do too.

StalaggtIKE, on 14 April 2014 - 09:55 AM, said:

This is much better. In means I can finally play with my friends.

These are just from the first 5 pages of THIS thread. Please, Paul/PGI, try to tell me again how "solo players wouldn't want or like the option to drop in group queues"

[moneyBURNER]

So many of the game's problems are artificial and false and self-imposed. PGI is refusing to allow solo players to fill out grouped matches for unjustifiable reasons.

I can accept that there can be enormous technical challenges to implement seemingly simple functionality, like a viable messaging system.

But what's the excuse for not having a cancel button for match-searching? Or a toggle-button for AMS that tries to shoot down missles in an enclosed tunnel? Or flamers that heat the user more than the target? Or having to click 30 times to buy 10 mechbays? The list goes on and on of baffling design decisions and management priorities.

[King Arthur IV]

where is poll?

[Deathlike]

How hard is it to have a special checkbox to "add me into the group queue" if a player wishes to do it? Set it off by default because, you don't want to literally throw them into the wolves and bam, it's done (well, outside of coding the MM backend, but you technically have most of that stuff done... right?)!

Restricting choices only "reduces the effort" for which a player would like to play the game. It's not a balance issue WHEN YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE GETTING INTO.

By restricting players to play with more of their friends by default, "it reduces their effort" for them to play this game.

It's simple math Paul.

Edited by Deathlike, 14 April 2014 - 01:38 PM.

[Roadbeer]

Deathlike, on 14 April 2014 - 01:37 PM, said:

Restricting choices

Is what PGI does best

[Malorish]

Roadbeer, on 14 April 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

Fixed.

You really should read it deeper, the whole thing is an excuse for not making a group queue... period.

You forgot 10 also. . . . .

I did read it. And it's not worth freaking out over. At all.

Where's CW? That's worth freaking out over. Why is the current Meta of 30 pt alphas at 1 km? That's worth a little bit of a freak out (probably not full on freak out, because you never want to go full on freak out).

But needing a certain group size to que for group oriented combat? That's not worth the freak out we're seeing here . . .

[BLOOD WOLF]

Deathlike, on 14 April 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

Yes, they said that about CW... 90 days ago... and 90 days ago before that, and 90 more days...

stop making stuff up. Also we know its coming as they have been on track with development this year(THIS YEAR, stop making excuses).

[Sandpit]

King Arthur IV, on 14 April 2014 - 01:37 PM, said:

where is poll?

yea because PGI is great about listening to polls. 3pv anyone?

[Deathlike]

BLOOD WOLF, on 14 April 2014 - 01:41 PM, said:

stop making stuff up. Also we know its coming as they have been on track with development this year(THIS YEAR, stop making excuses).

Yes, tell the people who went to the launch party that PGI never said that. That'll go over well.

Last I checked, "HPG" is still a "new map", 4 months later.

[Dimento Graven]

moneyBURNER, on 14 April 2014 - 01:37 PM, said:

But what's the excuse for not having a cancel button for match-searching?

+1 to this.

Quote

Or a toggle-button for AMS that tries to shoot down missles in an enclosed tunnel?

It doesn't appear that AMS rounds are 'obstructed' by terrain or physical objects.

So yes, while your AMS will fire at missiles that have no chance of hitting you, at least THEY ARE destroying some of the impotent missiles coming in. It's possible that a teammate outside the cave might be benefiting from that.

It's a minor issue, one I think we can live with.

Quote

Or flamers that heat the user more than the target?

Flamers are hard to make worth a damn, and translate well, in an RTS MMO where someone could theoretically boat Flamers to switch off enemies by over heating them.

Quote

Or having to click 30 times to buy 10 mechbays?

+1 to this. By the way did you note that PGI is looking to hire a GOOD UI specialist?

I found that very interesting.

Quote

The list goes on and on of baffling design decisions and management priorities.

I agree some of the decisions seem silly not to make. There's a lot issues that 'appear' to be what's known in the industry as 'low hanging fruit', quick and easy to fix items not requiring a lot of resources, but seem to linger on and on and on and on for years (cancel button for searching for a match comes to mind as a prime example).