Jump to content

- - - - -

Returning To 3049 - Feedback


430 replies to this topic

#421 Snoopy

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 98 posts
  • LocationAlmost there ...

Posted 01 August 2014 - 06:35 AM

View PostIraqiWalker, on 30 July 2014 - 05:18 PM, said:

...


You are right about WarThunder, but that is not the point I tried to emphasize. Let me try to explain:

In the games I mentioned you clearly known before buying anything under which restrictions you can use it ingame. A method PGI does not maintain. Changing conditions after you sell stuff is not the best-customer relationship management. Of course a company can do this, but it then has to bear the consequences.

"Common sense" is one of the most abused phrases.
Let's try "common sense" ...
  • Do you meant common sense regarding the Poke-Mech aspect of MWO where you can buy any Mech variant (regardless of production place/Faction) and you can use any Mech you own in a match, why should it be different suddenly?
  • Or do you mean common sense regarding BT-lore were we should only have one Mech at all?
  • Or maybe common sense regarding BT-timeline that would suggest that Steiner, FRR and Kurita Factions are going to loose almost every single battle against the Clans for many years?
  • Or common sense regarding BT-lore which must lead us to the presume that we do not have access to any IS-LostTech or State-of-the-Art IS-Tech at all because we are not part of a high-prestige unit?

I do not mean to be offensive: "Common sense" is just not a good thing to support any argument.

I like you approach for limiting Tech-access for a linear RPG, but I'm not sure that it will work for a competitive online-shooter. I'm, like you, not for mixing Tech in a Mech. But having IS- and Clan-Mechs in a lance/company, why not if every facion can have this feature?

Limiting specific Mechs and Tech to only a few Factions leads to imbalance. And that is what staying 100% true to BT-timeline & -lore is. What faction will have access to the "good" Mech variants? If this question will ever happen in MWo, balance will be screwed already.

#422 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 01 August 2014 - 07:47 AM

View PostSnoopy, on 01 August 2014 - 06:23 AM, said:

After I read your message I'm not sure if you understood my contribution or my intention. English is not my native tongue, so I may not choose my words in the correct form.


That DOES change things, so I apologize for misunderstanding what you had written.

Quote

I have asked my questions to know what others think how we can obtain a balanced forces ratio between the factions (with a return to 3049), while staying true to the BT-lore.


Alright, if you're talking about in a fight between IS and Clan factions, the tabletop had it so the IS side would run with about 35% more tonnage on a side, for the simplest fix to the problem of Clan overpower, to bring the game back to a more or less even keel. For MWO, and the way the devs have built the game, I would say it's a ratio more between 1.25:1 or 1.35:1.

If you're talking about a balance between the number of Inner Sphere and Clan PLAYERS in the overall game, it's going to be impossible, and it was always going to be impossible, for Inner Sphere players to equal Clan players. The happy-shiny-twitcher tech was the destruction of this game from the moment PGI announced we were not going to get a game in 3015, but rather starting in 3049. Why? Because there are so many people, whether among the veterans of the BattleTech or MechWarrior games, or the people who want the biggest-baddest tech, even if it IS all munchkin-tech, and always has been, that even attempting to have even sides of IS and Clan, or higher numbers of IS players is laughable, at best.

Finally, if you're talking about getting a balance between House's Kurita, Davion, Liao, Marik, Steiner, the Free Rasalhague Republic, and Clan's Wolf, Jade Falcon, Ghost Bear, and Smoke Jaguar's, that still falls into the same territory as the previous paragraph, laughable. The most ardent fans of BT/MW are split between House's Kurita and Davion, while Steiner, followed by Marik and, at the bottom of the totem pole, Liao, have fewer fan numbers, though the fans seem to be more rabid. Finally, you have the FRR, who for this game are even more rabid, and not as small a faction as Liao and Marik; these are players who want to be on the front lines, to repel the Clans and try to keep the FRR, if they are able. However, the Clans are going to have the higher numbers, to be certain, and I believe the ratio will shake out to be, roughly, 66/34, or about 1.94:1 in favor of the Clans.

Quote

Regarding short-term goal: you are wrong in the assumption that I support only short-term goals. It is exactly the other way around.


Then I stand corrected.

Quote

I would like to raise the question : why should a customer spend money on MWO when PGI is known to change in-game conditions after sale of products. It is one thing to change something for balance reason, but it is a total different story to change key features of the game and changing the products you bought with money.


More importantly, PGI have a perfectly good set of development docs in Dev Blogs 0 through 5... why in the hell did they change them? Don't they realize that 99% of the community came here, purchased Founder's 'Mechs for exorbitant amounts of money -I've NEVER spent $80 on a game cover in my life!-, based almost solely off what was written in Dev Blog 0!?!?! What do we have? Almost NOTHING of what we were told -not promised, told- was going to be in this game. We were told, 'no coolant flush', we were told, 'no 3rd person view', we were told 'no Clans before Community Warfare', and now we're told, 'you're on an island'; all of these things are lies, we've actually been LIED to, and that's worse than changing little features.

Quote

Doesn't such actions / reputation do more harm to the long-term revenue if the don't get communicated before?


Over the past few days, since the modules update, a lot of my friends have begun talking about leaving the game, permanently. I have tried, over the last year since I've been playing, again, to be positive, to tell people what I know, for the sake of giving them hope for this game, and I've been lied to over and over, again, by those people. One of my players put himself on an indefinite hiatus in late-May because of the declining state of this game. It is all about what money PGI can get, NOW, not about the millions more they would get from running this game long-term. There is no consideration for the consumer, period.

Quote

I think we will have to agree to disagree on the aspect of appealing to BT/MW fans only. I do believe that the BT/MW fan base is huge, but not huge enough to run a online game (financial and number of players).


At one point, there were 25,000,000 players of the board game around the world, so are there numbers, yes. However, since the advent of Netmech 95 from MechWarrior II, there have only been an average of 73,000 players in the BT/MW community at any given time. This game is something of an anomaly, and there were enough of us BT/MW veterans, back then, to make the population swell to 550,000 in a matter of nine months time. If the game were developed for the BT/MW veterans, the way they said they were going to do it in the first place, the veterans would have built the community up to majestic proportions. The biggest mistake PGI made was that they did not do any sort of fund raiser, no Kickstarter. Unfortunately, as a result of that short-sightedness, games like Hawken, Star Citizen, any new MOBA, is going to do far better, because the game is being developed from the standpoint of the fans, who love the ideas these games have cultivated, and by those who are cultivating the ideas actually sticking to them, as opposed to PGI and IGP who have a few traditional investors who are ordering them to make money and build the game the way the investors want.

What PGI needs to do is drop IGP like a hot rock, throw a Kickstarter to pay off those who invested, including any interest that has accrued between the time the loans were made and now, and then build the rest of this game the way they said they would. I would stake the remainder of my miserable tiny life on the FACT that PGI would complete this game faster, they would do it more in-line with their own design docs, and it would make far more money in the end than it will as a result of investor pressures, now. No one person could give more than a certain amount for the Kickstarter, and no one person, or group of people, would have more control or say than anyone else. What PGI have done, here, is doom this game, and their own futures, to failure as a result of the misplaced actions they've taken from the outset. A monkey and two ducks with pencils could have managed this better than it's been managed.

The biggest thing we can all do is continue to vote with our wallets; do we keep them closed and stymie the corporate investors until they either have to shut the game down, or give into what WE want, in this community, which is what was outlined in Dev Blog 0 through 5, or do we keep spending after what the corporate talking heads want?

Edited by Kay Wolf, 01 August 2014 - 07:55 AM.


#423 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 01 August 2014 - 09:08 AM

Well, let's see if the length of time I've spent away will allow me to post this second half, because PGIs silly quote count is holding me back... thank you, PGI.

View PostSnoopy, on 01 August 2014 - 06:23 AM, said:

Having a already defined background maybe is an advantage and disadvantage at the same time.


It can be, yes... however, if PGI would do what they said they were going to do, rather than the bullshit we've been seeing in development, that background would turn back to being an advantage.

Quote

But I think that just resetting anything to BT-3049 will not improve the current situation. How will staying true to the BT-lore and BT-timeline improve the game?


The way PGI have done things, releasing the Clans before CW, using the timeline is all but a wash, I think. They should have begun with 3015, as in the original video they did for MechWarrior 5, and then built up by leaps, bounds, and expansions to the Clan invasion. by then, everything would be tried, tested, and they would have a LOT more experience running the game.

Quote

But wouldn't it be the best way to get theoretical balance between factions in CW? Each side has access to the same stuff? Nobody is restricted or has a disadvantage? You just pick the Faction you like the most, not the one with the "best" Mech selection available.


No, to all three of your questions. BattleTech has a flavor all its own, it is one of the most unique sci-fi universe's you're going to find, period. The thing a lot of people don't understand is that the flavor of the universe is what draws people the most. So, when you get rid of that flavor, your people dry up, new ones fail to come. PGI were going to preserve that flavor, they understood what it was about when they were putting together those Blogs. However, with investor's pushing, and potential money problems, and background development on at least one other game, the flavor has been slapped right out of their mouth's. The investors have doomed themselves to a loss, as PGI exhausts itself, as a company and as individuals within that company, trying to keep this game running. Their best trick, to-date, was to put up sale after sale after sale, to keep things afloat, to keep development proceeding, but that trick has dried up, now, for the most part, and I wouldn't be surprised to see they're bringing in less than $100,000 per sale, now. The ONLY trick that will remedy, even for a short time, the lack of immediate cash flow, would be to go back to the Blogs, re-develop their course to be as close to the original as possible, and drive forward. They would begin to see the return of a lot of players, and their player-base would grow from there. They will not listen, and the strategy I've outlined risks a LOT, but you don't get anywhere without taking risks, good bad or ugly, and the way I've outlined could be their damnation or, more likely, their salvation.

Quote

It is the path of least resistance and not perfect, but how can we avoid imbalance generated by following BT-lore and BT-timeline exactly?


First, you have to understand that the imbalance you speak of has NOTHING to do with following BT-lore. BT-lore is not to blame, here. It's the lack of following BT-lore, as a matter of fact, that has PGI in such trouble with ALL of the people who would help them build, and sustain, this game, and help them line their pockets, for the next full decade, until they can't line their pockets, anymore. The problem is following the game system, itself, not the lore; PGI have done the right thing by "righting" the Clans, if you will, as they were horribly over-powered in the board game, and are only about two-thirds of that power level in MWO. The Clan 'Mechs are right, here, they have the right feel, and they are powerful, but no where near what they were in tabletop. The problem is that PGI are doing things bass-ackwards, putting out things they said would never be put into the game, continually making Light 'Mechs more and more powerful, when they're already WAY OP, not giving us the four warfare pillars -we only have ONE, right now, and that's 'Mech Warfare- from Dev Blog 0, having ECM make 'Mechs effectively invisible, and then giving us bullshit like Clans BEFORE Community Warfare, and this lame-ass system for consumables, rather than separating modules for use in certain kinds of 'Mechs and/or for certain roles, like they said they would do in Dev Blog 4.

No, the BT-lore is not to blame, here... piss-poor choices at the company, whether due to pressure from investors, or other monetary concerns, are to blame.

Quote

BT-lore and BT-timeline was never about each Faction having the same options and equal opportunities. It was a story about protagonists (heros & villians) in the BT-universe.

I just do not think that a "stay true to the 3049 lore and timeline" is really easy and a good idea in a online game. Maybe it would be better to start with the 3049 map and write the further history by player/faction action and CW results.

So I repeat my main question:
What improvements will we get when we stay exactly true to BT-lore and -timeline?


There are ways to make sticking to the time-line effective, and profitable, but PGI have expressed their total lack of desire to make that happen, in the name of lining their pockets, instead.

I have tried to remain as positive as possible, to support PGI in every way I could, but this module slot system was lazy, ignored the Dev Blogs, does not introduce or aid the development of Role Warfare, one of THEIR main pillars, does not come close to supporting lore or lore-based play, and is just a really sad cop-out on their part. Until I see something REALLY good, like an extremely robust Merc Unit Creation and Management module within the next two to three weeks, I am very seriously considering taking my ball and going home. I'll go play Tactics, instead, until that one falls through, as well.

#424 Gorgo7

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1,207 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 01 August 2014 - 12:17 PM

Yes, a BT primer would be appropriate for those who know little or none of the lore given that a form of community warfare is on the way. Indeed for the whole community given that there will be changes here in game to that very lore.

#425 IraqiWalker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 9,677 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 01 August 2014 - 06:26 PM

View PostSnoopy, on 01 August 2014 - 06:35 AM, said:


You are right about WarThunder, but that is not the point I tried to emphasize. Let me try to explain:

In the games I mentioned you clearly known before buying anything under which restrictions you can use it ingame. A method PGI does not maintain. Changing conditions after you sell stuff is not the best-customer relationship management. Of course a company can do this, but it then has to bear the consequences.

"Common sense" is one of the most abused phrases.
Let's try "common sense" ...
  • Do you meant common sense regarding the Poke-Mech aspect of MWO where you can buy any Mech variant (regardless of production place/Faction) and you can use any Mech you own in a match, why should it be different suddenly?
  • Or do you mean common sense regarding BT-lore were we should only have one Mech at all?
  • Or maybe common sense regarding BT-timeline that would suggest that Steiner, FRR and Kurita Factions are going to loose almost every single battle against the Clans for many years?
  • Or common sense regarding BT-lore which must lead us to the presume that we do not have access to any IS-LostTech or State-of-the-Art IS-Tech at all because we are not part of a high-prestige unit?
I do not mean to be offensive: "Common sense" is just not a good thing to support any argument.

I like you approach for limiting Tech-access for a linear RPG, but I'm not sure that it will work for a competitive online-shooter. I'm, like you, not for mixing Tech in a Mech. But having IS- and Clan-Mechs in a lance/company, why not if every facion can have this feature?

Limiting specific Mechs and Tech to only a few Factions leads to imbalance. And that is what staying 100% true to BT-timeline & -lore is. What faction will have access to the "good" Mech variants? If this question will ever happen in MWo, balance will be screwed already.


By common sense I meant in regards to which mechs will be used by the inner sphere against the clans. No one should ever expect to field clan mechs as an IS faction until way after 3052. That's what I meant. While I understand and agree with your point in regards to making this information more apparent, I think that people should have at least suspected something like this, and asked the devs about it.

View PostGorgo7, on 01 August 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

Yes, a BT primer would be appropriate for those who know little or none of the lore given that a form of community warfare is on the way. Indeed for the whole community given that there will be changes here in game to that very lore.


They really needed to find ways to get people into the lore. That would've really sold the people who like these things, and had little to no impact on people that don't have any interest in the lore.

My friends and I play League of Legends on and off (we had a competitive team a while ago), mostly because they stopped really working on the lore. Now we get tidbits with new champions and what nots, but they used to have a great journal that really immersed us in the universe they were creating, and they had these "judgement" sessions when a new champion is introduced that shows a bit more about their personality, and now they've stopped doing those, and I'm losing interest in the game that I spent over 4 years playing, because of that.

#426 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 01 August 2014 - 08:52 PM

View PostGorgo7, on 01 August 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

Yes, a BT primer would be appropriate for those who know little or none of the lore given that a form of community warfare is on the way. Indeed for the whole community given that there will be changes here in game to that very lore.


View PostIraqiWalker, on 01 August 2014 - 06:26 PM, said:

They really needed to find ways to get people into the lore. That would've really sold the people who like these things, and had little to no impact on people that don't have any interest in the lore.
There is plenty on the lore out in the community, at large, and there are plenty of links from here to there. In the past, it was the leaders of the units, and those who loved the lore, who introduced new people to it, reinforced it in the units. The problem, now, is that the twitchers are in charge of the community, in charge of what we get, not those who actually give a damn about the game. I have often heard that sentiment has no place in business, but I'm going to tell you, PGI, right now, that sentiment is where all of your business should have come from in the first place.

Quote

My friends and I play League of Legends on and off (we had a competitive team a while ago), mostly because they stopped really working on the lore. Now we get tidbits with new champions and what nots, but they used to have a great journal that really immersed us in the universe they were creating, and they had these "judgement" sessions when a new champion is introduced that shows a bit more about their personality, and now they've stopped doing those, and I'm losing interest in the game that I spent over 4 years playing, because of that.
Now, just imagine... League of Legends is something they developed on the fly, as they were building the video game, while this game universe has fifteen years of pre-video game lore, and it's being ignored, in general.

Now, when I say lore, I don't mean the game rules, the mechanics, I mean the purpose behind the universe, the development of that science fiction world, and I refer to the people behind it, who helped to keep it alive all of these years, who made it their home, as I did, for so very long, and allowed PGI to have their shot at making this game, with BattleTech and the previous MechWarrior and MechCommander video games as a base. It's too bad those of us who are the root and source of continued life for this game are being shoved aside in favor of temporary twitchers who will spend money, and then go away, leaving destruction in their wake.

#427 ice trey

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,522 posts
  • LocationFukushima, Japan

Posted 08 August 2014 - 01:39 AM

Forget about "Rolling Back the Clock". The clock should not start until planet-conquering has been implemented into the game.

Until that time, there are still dozens of 'mechs that can be implemented to milk wallets dry.

#428 Gremlich Johns

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 3,855 posts
  • LocationMaryland, USA

Posted 08 August 2014 - 06:19 AM

View Postvortmax, on 03 June 2014 - 01:15 PM, said:

Can we roll back to 3038 instead? When there were no clans and FedCom was about to invade The Draconis Combine?

</purist>


But seriously, I'm in favor of this. Thought starting in 3049 at open Beta was ambitious anyways.

3025 would be better, only Wolf's Dragoons and their toys.

#429 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 08 August 2014 - 07:32 AM

And NONE of the Dragoons Clan toys were out at the time. I would love to see an MMORPG, with 1st person combat (like MWO) and RTS (MechCommander) elements pop up and begin in 3020, the last five years of the Third Succession War. Calculate, as much as possible, from the available TROs -some later ones of which clarify earlier dates and manufacturing periods- the numbers of each sort of chassis available, and then a server is full once those available chassis have been purchased or chosen by the Players, prompting either the opening of a new server, or repeating that list for the sake of even larger games. Each MechWarrior gets ONE 'Mech, ONE only, and they learn how to drive that, tweak it's movements, rebuild it with salvage after each game, or order new replacement parts, mountings, etc., so each 'Mech would take on a life of its own after a while.

But, wait, that wouldn't work... the twitch community wouldn't play it. Without money in the coffers... oh, but wait, the veterans would support a game such as that. Just for the chance to live in a live version of that universe, even if for only a couple of hours per day. Where each combat is unique, where training, practice, and absolute teamwork is a must, where your online friends suddenly morph into family... like Rocket Raccoon said, "Ohhhhh, yeahhhhh!"

#430 a gaijin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,003 posts
  • LocationUS Naval Base, Yokosuka, Japan

Posted 13 August 2014 - 01:02 AM

View PostNikolai Lubkiewicz, on 03 June 2014 - 12:48 PM, said:

Hi everyone!

Please provide us your feedback regarding the latest Command Chair post regarding the game timeline!

I think there's an error on http://mwomercs.com/game .

It reads, "the current year 2014 equates to 3051 in BattleTech lore."

That should read 3049, right?


BTW love the game and always happy about new content, so thanks to the entire MWO team!

#431 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 05 September 2014 - 05:39 AM

View Postice trey, on 08 August 2014 - 01:39 AM, said:

Forget about "Rolling Back the Clock". The clock should not start until planet-conquering has been implemented into the game.

Until that time, there are still dozens of 'mechs that can be implemented to milk wallets dry.

give this man a cupey doll!





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users