137 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

I just missed out dropping with the gang yesterday... then wandered off to play dragon age to get ready for the release of DA3.

[WarHippy]

Lostdragon, on 30 April 2014 - 06:52 AM, said:

That would be a fair way to do it, but again, I don't see it happening because PGI wants you to have to play public matches. When you participate in public matches you are in essence "content" for the game. If there is no need to play public matches then there are players who will either never or rarely do so (and I don't blame them, I played 11 matches last night in the pug queue before I got a win), which increases wait times and the difficulty of making good public matches.

Given the way the devs and a lot of the pugs have treated the group players and made it clear they don't want them around why should the group players give a crap about the wait time or the quality of matches in the public queue? I'm a solo pug player and I would much rather have a queue where groups can drop in any size and I am used to fill the holes as needed. As it is now a lot of group players are going to stay in the private matches as much as possible because they feel unwelcome in the public queue and I can't blame them for that.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

From what \Paul was saying it seems the he had to fight to get it initially on PT and not straight in as an MC cost. Private servers cost PGI and they're a business with backers they have to answer to. These backers seem to have a substantial say in how things go.

[M0rpHeu5]

It whould be good if everyone got from Private mached their average CB/game as reward.

[CygnusX7]

Joseph Mallan, on 30 April 2014 - 09:18 AM, said:

Wait... We have an Economy???

Ding ding ding.. This is what I was getting at when I said the game is half done.
Based on what MWO currently is, yes private matches with no rewards doesnt make a lot of sense.
If the game was 90% complete it would make sense.

Edited by CygnusX7, 30 April 2014 - 10:07 AM.

[-Natural Selection-]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 30 April 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

From what Paul was saying it seems the he had to fight to get it initially on PT and not straight in as an MC cost. Private servers cost PGI and they're a business with backers they have to answer to. These backers seem to have a substantial say in how things go.

Only a couple words on this. Leased servers (as they are not located near them). Cost of operating, tax write off. Cant speak exactly how Canadian tax laws work, but if this isn't the case they might wanna move south.

But anyhow, REALLY sucks there is ZERO incentive for group play in this game. Kinda sucks being bastardized from the most of the solo population for dropping in public matches, no community events, no XP, no GXP, cost real money, and you have to set up everything yourself.

And people wonder why groups want to form up and sync drop pugs..

[Tin Man Dan]

Since there is no XP reward, no C-Bill reward, and no achievments awarded in private matches.... why not just eliminate the cost of consumables in private matches all together??

[Perihelion Jack]

The sheer idiocy of this private model just astounds me. I don't want to develop a reputation for being a troll, but this latest debacle is a shining example of how not to solidify your base of support. The people that play in groups do so so that they can play with people they know and enjoy the same game experience. Groups also make the game easier to learn for new players, which, if I understand correctly, is how growth happens in a community.

Without a persistent goal, the game is just "kill red team, get rewards, rinse, repeat", except now there are no rewards. As a player, I need to see that the time I spend in game has progressed me somehow, which it doesn't anymore. As a mercenary pilot, I won't do anything for free, much less pay MC and c-bills for the privilege of wasting time. Am I taking a planet for my faction? No. Am I earning experience points for doing the same thing I would in public games? No. Am I helping new players learn the game and build up their inventories? No. Am I going to be able retain these same recruits because they enjoy the game so I can make a team, thereby building the community? No. I am not even able to recoup the c-bills I spent on consumables. Does PGI expect me to spend money on a weekly basis on this product? Yes. Yes they do, as evidenced by the fully functional "buy MC" button so thoughtfully added to the lobby.

An example: A politician wants to be re-elected to the same office. He has had ardent, well-funded supporters from the moment he announces his candidacy, and those supporters made his election possible. Instead of establishing a position that he KNOWS his supporters would endorse, he instead chooses to say and do inflammatory things contrary to the well documented position of his constituency in the hopes of charming the rest of the electorate out of their votes. Does this seem like a solid plan? How about a company that starts up a kickstarter program, promises a lot of wonderful things, collects gobs of money from said supporters, then tells them that they are NOT the target audience, so their concerns do not matter. That is what has happened here.

I've read the (skewed?) statistics that say the premade/team groups make up roughly 16% of the player base, and that the vast majority of players are solo droppers. Why then, with the release of private lobbies, did the public queues take forever to find a match? I feel that the inverse is actually true. Everyone was trying out the private lobbies with their groups which I am convinced is the reason 3/3/3/3 public dropping was such a failure. I do not feel as if PGI is being honest about player data in the hopes that people will be tricked into spending more money because "this game is growing rapidly" According to the forums, the most ever on at once was 5982 people on Oct.15, 2013. This is NOT rapid growth. The fact that the server population has never again reached or eclipsed that mark should be the giant, flashing DANGER light.

The best suggestion that I have at this point is for Infinite Games Publishing to fire everyone in the PGI studios EXCEPT the sales department (these guys work hard, don't miss deadlines, and produce functioning assets), and ask Microsoft if they could get a refund for this intellectual property. They then could use the saved funds to pay for the entire sales team to earn a computer science degree, then re-purchase the IP and start over. At that point, at least they end up with trained employees that know how to do the job. It should only take 6 years or so; which, given the current rate of development, should put them on the same schedule they are on now. Start soon, we can wait.

Edited by Aphelion Dax, 30 April 2014 - 10:20 AM.

[Bront]

focuspark, on 29 April 2014 - 04:55 PM, said:

... but you'd have to do that with 24 mechs and 24 accounts... and I believe that pattern would be pretty easy for even the dumbest data mining tools to detect.

Private matches can launch 1 v 1.

[Baltasar]

Which is why I'm all for a flat rate with diminishing rewards. Make the 1v1 rewards terribly small. The more people you have the flat rate rises, but at least you are getting something for your time in a game that hates team players. I get enjoyment out of being actually able to play with my group for once which is a reward in and of itself but the lack of any monetary compensation for time playing the game (especially when I am already spending money to even be able to drop in select lobbies) is a let down. I'm am on the fence about compensation for consumables. I generally don't use them personally, but I can understand the frustration in it being a money sink.

[focuspark]

Bront, on 30 April 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

Private matches can launch 1 v 1.

Which is why (in a later post) I suggesting limiting the income based on the number of mechs in the opposing team. Thus increasing the difficult to auto-farm the game. Still, any data miner worth its salt would quickly identify the mining accounts.

[Blackscreen]

Tin Man Dan, on 30 April 2014 - 10:10 AM, said:

Since there is no XP reward, no C-Bill reward, and no achievments awarded in private matches.... why not just eliminate the cost of consumables in private matches all together??

I mentioned this a couple pages ago. It hasn't gained much traction...

[Sprouticus]

CygnusX7, on 30 April 2014 - 10:07 AM, said:

Ding ding ding.. This is what I was getting at when I said the game is half done.
Based on what MWO currently is, yes private matches with no rewards doesnt make a lot of sense.
If the game was 90% complete it would make sense.

Do you make money? (CB)
Do you spend money? (CB)
Does the amount of CB generated fluctuate depending upon performance?

So, yes we have an economy. Is it complex, no. But it exists and thus can be manipulated. If there was no economy, people would not ***** about how long it takes to make enough CB for new mechs!

[Blackscreen]

Bront, on 30 April 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

Private matches can launch 1 v 1.

*Only if both players have active premium time...

[Sprouticus]

I would be all for removing the cost of consumables in private matches. As much as I get the income line from private matches, consumables seems like double dipping. It also seems petty.

[Zakerystrife]

Honestly I feel that the game would severely break if they allowed cbills and / or xp to be earned in private matches... You could literally launch a 12v12 and have a coordinated match done in about 20 seconds. Everyone alpha strike, blow up, rinse repeat. XP earned, Cbills earned, sorry its just not going to happen.

If it takes a total of 3 minutes to ready up, load in, alpha and die, load back, and ready up again, then you can theoretically make 1.6 million c-bills in an hour with the suggested 120k/80k flat rate. Sorry, but no, I want to play against experienced players, not farming, un-experienced players.

While it seems harsh to not have a reward, they also don't expect you to run private matches exclusively. You could always have it so consumables weren't burned in private matches, that would solve everything, right?

[Osric Lancaster]

They said they were going to make private matches a pay per use thing eventually anyway right? Why not just keep normal rewards and set the price per match roughly equal to the 2000 cbills/mc conversion rate. Wouldn't that automatically make it more efficient to buy and sell a champion cicada or something? Eg.

2100 cbills/mc
150,000 avg c-bill payout
Say you can farm c-bills 20% faster or something doing private matches.
~15 MC per match? Or let one person 'host' both sides for 30 MC? Seems like premium time cost vs time spent playing should cover that but it could be a thing you could buy separately for those without premium. Does that sound reasonable?
I don't know, what do you guys think?

[Bront]

Blackscreen, on 30 April 2014 - 11:20 AM, said:

*Only if both players have active premium time...

NO, just the group leader needs it.

focuspark, on 30 April 2014 - 10:55 AM, said:

Which is why (in a later post) I suggesting limiting the income based on the number of mechs in the opposing team. Thus increasing the difficult to auto-farm the game. Still, any data miner worth its salt would quickly identify the mining accounts.

You're assuming they're looking for them.

Not allowing it at all means they don't need to spend resources trying to prevent abuse. So you can get other features faster as well.

[Iskareot]

Whats more sad is that you have to use premium time in the first place to play a different mode of the game. Talk about desperate bullshit.

Honestly, I am shocked to see the game go that way to get cash. Making a game (mode) usable is what it should have been from the get go.

Now, if they could set up the public games with choices... asking if you want to play with solo players or mixed or premades only and then ACTUALLY charge you for the choice... would be the day I quit and stop spending money and I would guess others too.

I really think there is some bad managment going on with this product at this point from concepts, promises and what is actually delivered as a working sold product at this point. I know that I pulled what PGI has in my firm I would have been fired long ago.

Edited by Iskareot, 30 April 2014 - 11:54 AM.

[-Natural Selection-]

Bront, on 30 April 2014 - 11:47 AM, said:

NO, just the group leader needs it.


You're assuming they're looking for them.

Not allowing it at all means they don't need to spend resources trying to prevent abuse. So you can get other features faster as well.

nope, both players need it.

both have to have premium to have the option to select "full group" to no.


*added* if we have to pay MC per match and get NO rewards I will shitcan this game and never look back.

Edited by Dozier, 30 April 2014 - 11:58 AM.