67 replies to this topic

[Lightfoot]

CW will work when I start up MWO and get some kind of communication connection to most other players in the interface when I want it. At the moment I start up MWO and only my "Friends" are available. I need to be able to see other Units and Clans, what they are looking for, then contact them to join or challenge. Anyway, that link is very important that it be available and straightforward. Then they need to Rank the player Units and Clans to create some competition.

Someday there should be planetary asset control in an interactive boundless (can grow or shrink as needed) universe, based on the Battle Tech maps of course. These Assets do good things such as controlling more planets and mechs in some way.

[CocoaJin]

Ideally, territorial holdings would be faction owned, not so much Squad owned. This way, factions can defend holdings from challenges with any squad available within the faction. Now what defines "available" can be diverse and argued to create a system that maintains immersion and some layer of logistical strategy.

[Kirkland Langue]

Enlil09, on 10 September 2014 - 01:29 AM, said:

1. You must form a pre-made group to participate (no random matchmaking).
2. Results of matches are binding, meaning if you win you get the planet and if you loose you're kicked off of it.
3. You have to defend your planets from challengers. What happens if you don't respond to challenges? I assume you would loose by default. How else could they handle that?
4. Finally, you have to play pure Clan or pure IS teams.

If I were to design CW - all 4 of these items would be accurate descriptions. The devil is in the details (how many times per day can you be challenged and are there windows of time for which a challenge can be made - does the defender get advanced notice of a challenge.. .that kind of thing).

[AztecD]

open a few worlds to challenge, say an active war zone of 5 planets in 1 corridor, once those are done, open the next zone in a different corridor, etc

[VanillaG]

Enlil09, on 10 September 2014 - 01:29 AM, said:

2. Results of matches are binding, meaning if you win you get the planet and if you loose you're kicked off of it.
3. You have to defend your planets from challengers. What happens if you don't respond to challenges? I assume you would loose by default. How else could they handle that?

Any type of "one and done" type of battles for CW would just be bad. I envision something along the line of challenges that we have where 2 factions fight numerous battles over a planet and the faction that hits a point goal first or has the most points after a period of time wins that planet. Based on the results another planet is put up and fight goes on.

Enlil09, on 10 September 2014 - 01:29 AM, said:

4. Finally, you have to play pure Clan or pure IS teams.

It is even more restricted than that initially because you would be limited to faction specific mechs. Russ explained that CW will be the role playing aspect of the game. The matches that we currently enjoy with mixed Clan and IS will still exist but in CW matches the mechs that you can pilot will be faction specific. He left open the possibility that later down the road you might see mixed teams but the initial vision is to have Clan vs IS with faction restrictions.

Edited by VanillaG, 10 September 2014 - 11:08 AM.

[Why Run]

Having thought this through, again, the only way this is really feasible is what Steel Battalion did. Just align to a side and fight. Group folks together and wins and losses are tallied. If one side wins more, it pushes the line. Eventually you win. (It was Steel Battalion right?). If it is limited to groups and factions, I don't know how you set up the fights. Everyone always online just incase you're attacked? One player online vs. 12 man group = 1v12 match for the planet?

The other alternative is you declare intent to attack, and it sets up a date of the attack and you get online and fight at that time. (Navyfield Harbor Assault - it was beyond cumbersome).

This would require a massive player base and only a few factions though. It would also take the personality of smaller groups controlling something out of the question.

Oh dear, I've gone and completely depressed myself.... This is gonna be a problem

Edited by Why Run, 10 September 2014 - 11:17 AM.

[Bhael Fire]

Enlil09, on 10 September 2014 - 01:29 AM, said:

Listened to the town hall on the NGNG podcast and am more than a little disturbed by what I heard about the Community Warfare model everyone thinks will be the holy grail for this game. The key points I heard are:

1. You must form a pre-made group to participate (no random matchmaking).
2. Results of matches are binding, meaning if you win you get the planet and if you loose you're kicked off of it.
3. You have to defend your planets from challengers. What happens if you don't respond to challenges? I assume you would loose by default. How else could they handle that?
4. Finally, you have to play pure Clan or pure IS teams.

I've seen other games try a similar mode - persistent results campaign modes where you have to defend against all comers. NO ONE ever played that mode. The reasons are obvious if you think about it for a few minutes.

Put simply, you have to form a dedicated team of 4, 8 or more players that are consistently available to answer challenges to your ownership of a planet. If you don't answer, you loose your territory. If you can't get your whole team together to answer a challenge, and have to supplement your team with less competent players, then you loose your challenge and loose your territory just the same.

Who will be successful in this game mode? Only the absolute top tier elite players who dedicate a significant portion of their free time to this game every single week. Who will never have a chance and therefore be excluded from this game mode by default? All PUG's. All new players. All casual players.

It looks to me like Community Warfare will be an oddity played by the top 0.05% of the community, while the remaining 99.95% continue to drop in from time to time for a quick match in the PUG queue.

Looks like for all the moaning and groaning about this feature, and all the focus PGI is putting on it, it will be a huge fail.

Thoughts?

1. Incorrect. There will be three modes of play: Public, Faction and Private. In Public, you will be able to drop solo and in a group (just like now). In Faction, you will still be able to drop in solo or a group but there will be restrictions that adhere closer to BT lore.

2. EXACTLY the point of Planetary Conquest.

3. See number 1. CW will be Faction vs Faction, not premade/unit vs premade/unit. There will always be players (both solo and grouped) defending the territories or planets of the faction that you belong to regardless if you're playing or not.

4. Again...EXACTLY the point. In the inital first wave of the Invasion, Clans used Clan mechs and IS used IS mechs.

[terrycloth]

How about, when you attack a planet with your premade, it fills out a PUG defense force of players aligned with that faction + mercs and lone wolves to defend it. (or maybe a collection of small groups)

Then, to keep the planet you have to queue for a 'defend planet' mission once per day against a PUG force from some other faction.

Occasionally, it will be a PUG force made up entirely of clan mechs -- INVASION! Good luck!

[LauLiao]

VanillaG, on 10 September 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

Any type of "one and done" type of battles for CW would just be bad. I envision something along the line of challenges that we have where 2 factions fight numerous battles over a planet and the faction that hits a point goal first or has the most points after a period of time wins that planet. Based on the results another planet is put up and fight goes on.

This is what I envisioned. One battle for a planet? Can you imagine the forum rage? "Totally unrealistc to take a planet in one 15 minute game" etc...

Of course ironically if you look at some of the EARLY Battletech sources, backwater planets (which were most of them) were often defended by as little as a company to a single lance of actual Battlemechs, so a single company on company battle really would be accurate to that. As the lore and cannon developed, that vision of the BT universe evolved and planets all became much better defended.

[VanillaG]

Bhael Fire, on 10 September 2014 - 11:28 AM, said:

1. Incorrect. There will be three modes of play: Public, Faction and Private. In Public, you will be able to drop solo and in a group (just like now). In Faction, you will still be able to drop in solo or a group but there will be restrictions that adhere closer to BT lore.

I wouldn't be surprised if the the Faction matches merged groups and solos into one queue. They are already have mech restrictions so this would not be that far of a stretch.

[Bhael Fire]

VanillaG, on 10 September 2014 - 11:47 AM, said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the the Faction matches merged groups and solos into one queue. They are already have mech restrictions so this would not be that far of a stretch.

Yeah, that wouldn't surprise me either...and to be honest, I don't think it's a bad idea for Faction play as long as Public play keeps solo and groups separate. I have a feeling CW is going to attract the diehards and experienced players anyway....so there should be a smaller sample of inexperienced players in the Faction queues than the Public queues.

[Deathlike]

All I can say is this:

1) If it doesn't come, well, I'm sure the excuse is "it was too difficult for us to accomplish". Just like Clan vs IS balance.

2) If it does come, it will most likely need vast refinement (see UI 2.0 initially) and will disappoint many.

3) Regardless, it will be far lower than the bars previously set for bad patches.

Huge fail? Probably not. Huge disappointment? Most definitely.

[SI The Joker]

In my opinion, anything short of a full economy (in/out cbills per unit per timeframe, mech factories etc), inventory (attacking planet x with y # mechs in Z # jump/dropships or defending with X # mechs), movement (takes X days to get to Y planet) and merc contracts along with lone wolf support will fall short of this community's expectations.

There's always been a core disconnect between what any developer has been willing to provide in a community warfare implementation and what this community expects. The community expects a league. The corporate world is willing to provide a glorified ladder. There's a core difference - and that's what the community is going to seize on.

Just my 2 cents.

[Jhaele]

To early to tell anything. Right now everything is just words. The finished product is the proof.

I am hoping for the best but will in no way be surprised if CW doesn't work out or is implemented poorly.

[Kain]

It will at least be an enrichment to the game, it probably won't fullfill everybody expectations, so for some people it would be a fail and to some people it will be an epic win.

1.
And I never heard Russ say that premades are the only one who can play CW?
If you are on the faction tab, you are in the CW business ,so probably solo players will be able to press play and will be matched in a CW match on a specific planets against the concerning factions. The Amount of Solo / PUG players is the majority of the playerbase.
But those details are not yet clear.

2.
Planets are contested, so one battle won't be enough to conquer them I presume.
But those details are not yet clear.

3.
Defending planets will probably happen automatically during solo CW queue?
But those details are not yet clear.

4.
Pure Clan vs IS, yes that is true and of course the whole point of CW, if you want to mix techs you can just stay away from the CW/Faction tab.

So I think it would be nice to see more details concerning CW and how it is going to play for Groups/Solo etc, because apparently those things are not really clear at the moment, .

[Kyrie]

Although I have not listened to the podcast, judging by what has been posted... I am expecting World of Mechs. Er, I mean, World of Tanks Clan War system.

And I expect it will be quite unappealing.

[ice trey]

Belorion, on 10 September 2014 - 04:05 AM, said:

They have stated several times that a single player mode is not in the cards at the moment.

That's the point
That's the problem.

Neither a company nor band of fan programmers is willing to put a nominal effort into making a single player experience.

Everyone bleats about how difficult programming AI is. The honest truth is that I'm not expecting HAL on the other end of the computer. Often times, difficulty can scale based on how many baddies you face, how good their aim is, and the objectives of the mission.

Hell, Recycled AI from as far back as Mechwarrior 3 would still be adequate enough to tell a story. Just like games like the Mass Effect series, I don't think they'd be getting any awards for amazing AI, but the immersion, gameplay, and storytelling is what makes it memorable. Likewise, it's said that whenever someone brings up "Vampire the masquerade: Bloodlines", someone reinstalls it. That game had some pretty poor AI, but the gameplay itself was what made the game fun, and the story and atmosphere is what made it so memorable.

Battletech has one of the most vast and detailed settings of any science fiction universe, some of the most flavor, and mounds of potential for storytelling. I feel like the opportunity to explore any of that is wasted in a multiplayer game.

Edited by ice trey, 12 September 2014 - 01:35 AM.

[buttmonkey]

Going purely from past events, I would say it will not come at all. I still remember when it was coming before christmas in 2012.

[Bacl]

I only see two ways to do this, yes i m back on the forums, i vented my steam form last couple of days...);

Either they go with a point systems like %, every successful defense would give maybe like 10% loyalty points for that territory but maybe lose 5 or 6% upon defeat. That way even if you miss a match your not hugely penalized and while your online you could still climb hill. Of course tweaking the numbers would be necessary but you get the main idea.

Second option would be by points for the entire faction, all Steiner units on the game would get points in a common pool for a planet or area. That way even if your unit is offline or incomplete at least other units will be backing you up.

Crossing fingers here but yeah i m not expecting something that will ******* away.

[Josef Koba]

I'm excited to see what they can do. Maybe it'll be awesome, maybe it won't. I reserve judgement until I either play it or see firmer details. My only concern is that I drop solo 50% of the time or more, and with one other lance mate the rest of the time. Very rarely do I drop with a full lance (less than 1% of my drops). I'm just looking forward to fighting battles with meaning, whatever that meaning is. At the end of the day, I'm just a lowly mechwarrior and I suspect/hope I'll be sent to fight over random piles of dirt in the middle of nowhere. But, you know, as a part of a larger war effort. I'm looking forward to it. However, based on the history here, everyone is going to have some issue with how it turns out, whether minor or major. Everyone has their perfect vision of how the game should be developed and no two people share that vision across all elements of the game. If the game doesn't meet every point of a person's vision, they view it largely as a failure.