150 replies to this topic

[KuroNyra]

Nicolai Kabrinsky, on 26 August 2014 - 02:44 PM, said:

PS: The players who asked for CW outnumbered the players who demanded Clan mechs by about 1000:1.

Show me your number, your calculation, etc etc.

I wanted Clan Mech first. Don't speak for myselft thank you.

[Sandpit]

KuroNyra, on 27 August 2014 - 07:42 AM, said:

Show me your number, your calculation, etc etc.

I wanted Clan Mech first. Don't speak for myselft thank you.

I agree with him, there were more players wanting CW than clans. Although his ratio is off. It's impossible, that would mean there'd only be 2-3 people who wanted clans

[Gallowglas]

Nicolai Kabrinsky, on 26 August 2014 - 02:24 PM, said:

Fairly sure I could make a better map with MS Paint.

Please do and share the results. I wish to be entertained.

Edited by Gallowglas, 27 August 2014 - 07:46 AM.

[Wild Hamster]

Biggest Salami, on 26 August 2014 - 05:20 PM, said:

I didn't actually realize that til I accidentally mouse-scrolled. Then I was much more impressed; that was actually quite neat. I wish there'd been something telling us about that feature or that mouse-zooming does something.

Here's an example of a zoomed in section, for the curious:

Seriously LOLed at your unit name and tag

[Tristan Winter]

KuroNyra, on 27 August 2014 - 07:42 AM, said:

Show me your number, your calculation, etc etc.
I wanted Clan Mech first. Don't speak for myselft thank you.

Mystere, on 26 August 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

But you gave a 1000:1 figure. Or did you just pull that from your behind?

I already responded to this question in the first 2 pages of this thread. But if you want some exact calculations, I guess you should start here.

Sandpit, on 27 August 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

I agree with him, there were more players wanting CW than clans. Although his ratio is off. It's impossible, that would mean there'd only be 2-3 people who wanted clans

My ratio is completely accurate. I did the exact calculations myself after months of research. Imagine my surprise when the ratio was exactly 1000:1. Not even 978:1. Needless to say, I have proved God's existence.

Gallowglas, on 27 August 2014 - 07:46 AM, said:

Please do and share the results. I wish to be entertained.

I don't actually have the time to entertain strangers with MS Paint, unfortunately. But I did draw this in MS Paint. Not quite the same as some stars on a black background, but I do believe I could manage it

[Blakkstar]

PappySmurf, on 27 August 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

After being in Planetary BTU=(BattleTechUnivers)-(MW2-MW3)-(MPBT3025 Planetary)-(MW3-MW4)-NBT(NetBattleTech Planetary)-(MW4)-(MWL MechWarrior League Planetary- Solaris MW4) MWO just seems childish and so simplistic its on the same level as playing pong.

And anyone who never played these complex Solaris and Planetary leagues can not even imagine the fun game play solo or in groups. I could see PGI doing planetary if they had built a complex Multiplayer setup like PC MechWarrior was but MWO is not it is way to shallow of a MM setup and game to do it right.

Plus PGI is not EA or Microsoft Studios with endless resources and talent PGI should let the community help build leagues and help with the burden of maps ETC.I would like to play MechWarrior again in a true league not some shallow attempt to keep a game going that has no future and just is a cash grab for as long as it lasts.

This game should have launched as Solaris. It fits perfectly with the F2P MMO style (weekly sales! tournaments! flashy paint jobs!) and would have instantly built in a Faction and CW framework through Mech Stables and their House (and Clan!) affiliations.

They could have even built the Solaris City into the UI, and let you click around to visit the different sectors. Built chat rooms into "Lounge Areas", have different mech dealer locations spread around, let you spectate at the different arenas. We could have a bunch of game modes that would fit into the Solaris context (deathmatch, team, capture the flag, king of the hill, etc).

It would have been cool, instantly immersive, and best of all...already completely built at the conceptual level for PGI to just code into the game. Including a whole bunch of familiar and popular maps!

That would have made for a much more successful launch and satisfied the player demand for CW from the start. It's like PGI is intent on reinventing the wheel when there's a perfectly good one sitting right over there.

[TLBFestus]

Kilo 40, on 26 August 2014 - 06:48 PM, said:

being cynical is easy. you don't have to actually do anything, just down play everything someones else does.

I believe that what you are saying is "lets give credit where credit is due", correct? I get it, and you are right, so here goes;

"THANK YOU PGI FOR MAKING IT SO EASY TO MOCK YOU, IT MAKES MY JOB THAT MUCH SIMPLER"

How'd I do?

[meteorol]

Just out of curiosity, is it possible to rename the "general of the army" rank?

[Deathlike]

meteorol, on 27 August 2014 - 08:16 AM, said:

Just out of curiosity, is it possible to rename the "general of the army" rank?

Yes. There's a "pencil" icon beside the name. Use it.

[Sadist Cain]

Blakkstar, on 27 August 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

This game should have launched as Solaris. It fits perfectly with the F2P MMO style (weekly sales! tournaments! flashy paint jobs!) and would have instantly built in a Faction and CW framework through Mech Stables and their House (and Clan!) affiliations.

They could have even built the Solaris City into the UI, and let you click around to visit the different sectors. Built chat rooms into "Lounge Areas", have different mech dealer locations spread around, let you spectate at the different arenas. We could have a bunch of game modes that would fit into the Solaris context (deathmatch, team, capture the flag, king of the hill, etc).

It would have been cool, instantly immersive, and best of all...already completely built at the conceptual level for PGI to just code into the game. Including a whole bunch of familiar and popular maps!

That would have made for a much more successful launch and satisfied the player demand for CW from the start. It's like PGI is intent on reinventing the wheel when there's a perfectly good one sitting right over there.

Exactly this.

Seeing them talk about great clan invasions and battles over thousands of planets in a vast star system with community warfare on a grand scale is just pathetic and laughable, humiliating even.
Matches last on average 8~mins EIGHT!!!! that's barely enough time to get positioned for a large scale tactical battle.


My god the potential had they of gone down this route, they might actually be able to achieve something with it.

[Foksuh]

Blakkstar, on 27 August 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

This game should have launched as Solaris. It fits perfectly with the F2P MMO style (weekly sales! tournaments! flashy paint jobs!) and would have instantly built in a Faction and CW framework through Mech Stables and their House (and Clan!) affiliations.

They could have even built the Solaris City into the UI, and let you click around to visit the different sectors. Built chat rooms into "Lounge Areas", have different mech dealer locations spread around, let you spectate at the different arenas. We could have a bunch of game modes that would fit into the Solaris context (deathmatch, team, capture the flag, king of the hill, etc).

It would have been cool, instantly immersive, and best of all...already completely built at the conceptual level for PGI to just code into the game. Including a whole bunch of familiar and popular maps!

That would have made for a much more successful launch and satisfied the player demand for CW from the start. It's like PGI is intent on reinventing the wheel when there's a perfectly good one sitting right over there.

It would have all been part of one big picture that makes sense at least.. the customizations, the flashy paintjobs, the bothersome taunting of the horns.. even your earnings would have had a basis, you're taking part of games after all.
It would have been a better basis to start off from, could have expanded from there to.. well.. to whatever you felt like.

It's so screwed how f2p devs don't understand that the thing that makes these games succeed is that sort of social activity. You meet people, you join groups, you practice and work together and compete against other organized teams.. or just group up and kick pubbies around.

That would have been a better basis to grow from.. That way we would have had something to do, events, tourneys.. while waiting on the invasion of the silly clams and planetary warfare.

[PappySmurf]

Blackstar

([color="#b27204"] [/color]

• Members
  
• 
  
• 33 posts

Posted Today, 09:12 AM

PappySmurf, on 27 August 2014 - 08:28 AM, said:

After being in Planetary BTU=(BattleTechUnivers)-(MW2-MW3)-(MPBT3025 Planetary)-(MW3-MW4)-NBT(NetBattleTech Planetary)-(MW4)-(MWL MechWarrior League Planetary- Solaris MW4) MWO just seems childish and so simplistic its on the same level as playing pong.

And anyone who never played these complex Solaris and Planetary leagues can not even imagine the fun game play solo or in groups. I could see PGI doing planetary if they had built a complex Multiplayer setup like PC MechWarrior was but MWO is not it is way to shallow of a MM setup and game to do it right.

Plus PGI is not EA or Microsoft Studios with endless resources and talent PGI should let the community help build leagues and help with the burden of maps ETC.I would like to play MechWarrior again in a true league not some shallow attempt to keep a game going that has no future and just is a cash grab for as long as it lasts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This game should have launched as Solaris. It fits perfectly with the F2P MMO style (weekly sales! tournaments! flashy paint jobs!) and would have instantly built in a Faction and CW framework through Mech Stables and their House (and Clan!) affiliations.

They could have even built the Solaris City into the UI, and let you click around to visit the different sectors. Built chat rooms into "Lounge Areas", have different mech dealer locations spread around, let you spectate at the different arenas. We could have a bunch of game modes that would fit into the Solaris context (deathmatch, team, capture the flag, king of the hill, etc).

It would have been cool, instantly immersive, and best of all...already completely built at the conceptual level for PGI to just code into the game. Including a whole bunch of familiar and popular maps!

That would have made for a much more successful launch and satisfied the player demand for CW from the start. It's like PGI is intent on reinventing the wheel when there's a perfectly good one sitting right over there. )
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And I totally agree with your post much that once was is lost (leagues-MechWarrior Communities-Website coders)because PGI never understood BattleTech or MechWarrior and they chose not to ask the individuals that had experience with this IP namely the old player base for PC MechWarrior.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cain
(Exactly this.

Seeing them talk about great clan invasions and battles over thousands of planets in a vast star system with community warfare on a grand scale is just pathetic and laughable, humiliating even.
Matches last on average 8~mins EIGHT!!!! that's barely enough time to get positioned for a large scale tactical battle.


My god the potential had they of gone down this route, they might actually be able to achieve something with it. )
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many of us at the beginning of Closed beta tried to help PGI with many Ideas for this game almost all were rejected and thrown into K-Town because they did not fit into PGI'S game plan or game model. One of the ideas was 4-6x the armor amount and up the ammo per ton to compensate . This would have allowed for longer battles because the mechs would have been much harder to kill .Plus the addition of ammo refill stations but no repair stations unless it was for planetary battle maps.

Also a timed re-spawn mode for new players so they could gain valuable skills 3-8 minutes a battle like in MWO is quite harsh on new players trying to learn and stay hooked on the game.

But in conclusion im talking to a forum that no devs read and little of what I say or my understanding of MechWarrior-TT-BattleTech will ever be told or known or acted upon by the devs.

Edited by PappySmurf, 27 August 2014 - 09:10 AM.

[Sarlic]

You can quote PappySmurf, or are you on a mobile phone / tablet?

[Mawai]

geodeath, on 26 August 2014 - 02:37 PM, said:

Well, after two years of developing it, you would think the bells would be more shiny and the whistles would work.

Lol ... where did you get the 2 year figure from?

Significant CW design didn't start until PGI received a license extension for Mechwarrior near the end of 2013. Significant development work on CW elements (other than UI2.0 required precursors and similar) didn't even start until after the clans were introduced. There is a quote from Russ floating around stating that when clans were out the door they would be able to turn their attention fully to CW.

They have been talking about CW since closed beta. They didn't start to actually DO anything about it until the last 3 to 6 months.

[BARBAR0SSA]

I can't believe Blizzard was mentioned in this thread, that's a company I want to see go under Diablo 3 and WoW were both just garbage, WoW was in the trash about a week after playing it, D3 I at least beat the queen ali...errr diablo, in that terrible story line poor gameplay mess. I'm not sure how it took so many years to re release diablo 2 with a slight update.

[Sandpit]

shad0w4life, on 27 August 2014 - 09:44 AM, said:

I can't believe Blizzard was mentioned in this thread, that's a company I want to see go under Diablo 3 and WoW were both just garbage, WoW was in the trash about a week after playing it, D3 I at least beat the queen ali...errr diablo, in that terrible story line poor gameplay mess. I'm not sure how it took so many years to re release diablo 2 with a slight update.

except millions of paying customers would disagree with you

[PappySmurf]

• 
  
• 11536 posts

• [color="#505050"]Location[/color]Arkansas

Posted Today, 10:48 AM

shad0w4life, on 27 August 2014 - 10:44 AM, said:

I can't believe Blizzard was mentioned in this thread, that's a company I want to see go under Diablo 3 and WoW were both just garbage, WoW was in the trash about a week after playing it, D3 I at least beat the queen ali...errr diablo, in that terrible story line poor gameplay mess. I'm not sure how it took so many years to re release diablo 2 with a slight update.

except millions of paying customers would disagree with you
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not to change the subject but the first 3 years of World Of Warcraft were Amazing it was one of the hardest and most complex games on the market and won many awards . It was after the first 3 years until now they Dumbed down the game for the kiddies that cried and complained it was so very hard. The end result is a messed up easy to level game that still retains million of young kids and old pedobears.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can quote PappySmurf, or are you on a mobile phone / tablet?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NO PGI?MWO forum is not compatible with my tablet and win 8.1.

Edited by PappySmurf, 27 August 2014 - 09:58 AM.

[girl on fire]

so conflicted. Should I criticize? Is my criticism even warranted? is it PGI's fault that deadlines have been missed? Features pushed back or summarily cut? Or should we be looking at IGP, cracking the whip over a development team that is not receiving proper funding (possibly)?

At this point, however, I will say its so stunningly disingenuous to say that people who do complain are "entitled". Sometimes it seems to me that most of the people who toss that word around all willy nilly don't actually knows what it means to be entitled... Further entitlement is not a word we should be using as a pejorative, it's not even a bad thing to be UNLESS THAT ENTITLEMENT IS UNWARRANTED.

and who is the arbiter of that judgement? You? I daresay, sir, that your a inability to accept criticism without resorting tot he crutch of mischaracterizing critics as entitled cry babies makes you a DUBIOUS JUDGE AT BEST! Oh ho ho, what now, sir? A ROWDY BOUT OF FISTICUFFS?

Edited by girl on fire, 27 August 2014 - 10:01 AM.

[PappySmurf]

girl on fire said
(so conflicted. Should I criticize? Is my criticism even warranted? is it PGI's fault that deadlines have been missed? Features pushed back or summarily cut? Or should we be looking at IGP, cracking the whip over a development team that is not receiving proper funding (possibly)?)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing many dont understand is PGI and IGP are one LLC.You have to dig to find the information but they are one in the same company IGP owns PGI and the owners of PGI are some of the board memebers of IGP.

[Foksuh]

PappySmurf, on 27 August 2014 - 10:03 AM, said:

girl on fire said
(so conflicted. Should I criticize? Is my criticism even warranted? is it PGI's fault that deadlines have been missed? Features pushed back or summarily cut? Or should we be looking at IGP, cracking the whip over a development team that is not receiving proper funding (possibly)?)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing many dont understand is PGI and IGP are one LLC.You have to dig to find the information but they are one in the same company IGP owns PGI and the owners of PGI are some of the board memebers of IGP.

This really the case? I was always curious if there was a closer connection between the two. The names and all