1306 replies to this topic

[Egomane]

Ok... I removed some attempt to sabotage this thing by derailing the thread. The user has now his own thread, where he can try to stop this program.

[Aym]

Koniving
Victor Morson
Roadbeer

[headbasher]

Dont really care one way or the other but what about some form of combination of the two? POLL/COUNCIL

You make a council

The Council polls the community on w/e to discuss / bring to the devs attention.

[Aym]

However I feel it's important to point out, and I know I'm not the first to do so, that balancing ECM in a vacuum may be doomed to failure before it launches. Nothing can be balanced in a vacuum as we've been saying since Closed Beta, ECM is certainly no different. W/out substantive changes to LRMs, UAV's, BAP, and maybe even Command Consoles this may be an exercise in futility, which I suspect is known by any developer suggesting it.

[Kirkland Langue]

Viges, on 14 September 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

Pay to balance? lol That is a horrible idea.

It's not that terrible of an idea. In fact, no matter what method you decide who is on a "balance council" there are going to be problems - at least going the "pay $500, get on the council" method ensures that those who develop the system have some skin in the game.

But given how the perception is already one of PGI trying to squeeze every dollar they can out of the player base without caring to increase the size of the player base - a buy into the balance council might not go over well.

[Abivard]

If I am named as Head of the council I would be for it, otherwise a council is a very bad and destructive thing to inflict upon the MWO community.

Actually, Unless I had what amounted to Tyrannical authority over that said council I would have to stand against the idea of any council what so ever!


Better a single Tyrant then a council of Tyrants, and this council smacks more of a committee then anything else.

[buttmonkey]

OK this thread has gone on for pages now. How about some one write down all the nominees and get a poll together, otherwise we will be discussing this until the rights to the IP expire

[Abivard]

Viges, on 14 September 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

I guess they can include the option against the council so you and others would have the choice?

If there is not a NO to council vote then it would be a sham.

This whole ill conceived idea is being ramrodded by what amounts to a handful of rather like minded forum warriors.

For people to propose having a vote on who should be on this council, without even having a referendum on whether to have a council in the first place has me aghast!

If you want to make lobby groups and lobby PGI go right ahead, just don't try to pretend you are doing anything else or have a mandate from the players to 'guide' the game and 'filter the correct ideas' to PGI.

[Egomane]

buttmonkey, on 14 September 2014 - 11:20 AM, said:

OK this thread has gone on for pages now. How about some one write down all the nominees and get a poll together, otherwise we will be discussing this until the rights to the IP expire

There is... please see the regularly updated opening post. A poll is already planned for the near future.

I'd advise to not rush this thing. It just came up only two days ago. Give it a little bit more time, to gain some more attention.

[DocBach]

Thanks to quick moderation this post is no longer necessary and can be moderated off, too.

Edited by DocBach, 14 September 2014 - 11:32 AM.

[stjobe]

I'll repost this here, since it seems some posters think the "player council" is an idea someone in the community came up with:

Russ Bullock, on 12 September 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:

Okay how about this, this is what many of you have been waiting for:

Well first a question: Do you think you the community can come to an agreed upon consensus? One in which if the changes are implemented everyone says great job PGI on listening to us now we feel great about ECM and your ability to listen to feedback?

If the answer is Yes then I suggest the following:

You the community decide how your going to present a proposal, nominate a peer that you feel has the best handle on this, put together your own player council whatever you like but present a proposal that your peers vote on. The vote would likely need to be far greater than just 51% in favor. Perhaps something more like 80+%

At that point PGI will analyze the proposal, if we see any technical problems or balance problems that we feel perhaps you didnt see, we will point those items out to you. Then if necessary you can adjust your proposal and put it to a vote again, if successful PGI will again analyze and repeat if necessary until we have a final design solution for implementation.

PGI will then communicate how long it will take to implement with full explanation as to why, and we will patch the changes in upon the agreed upon delivery date. Once complete if this whole process has gone smoothly and civily we will proceed with doing things like this far more frequently or at least for other areas of the product that are controversial.

What do you say?

[Egomane]

As I just did! Thanks DocBach.
But instead of responding, please report them, in case I do not notice them myself, or when I'm not here to monitor the thread, so that another mod can take care of it.

I want this thread, and the new conter-thread to be as civilized as possible. Unconstructive and insulting posts are not a part of civilized discussions and shouldn't be made into one.

[Logan Hawke]

I would have to put my vote towards Koniving, Roadbeer, and Iraqiwalker. Koniving especially has good ideas and seems to care about the game and the players.

Also, I'm not sure anyone that's been banned should be accepted :/

Edited by Logan Hawke, 14 September 2014 - 11:41 AM.

[Abivard]

stjobe, on 14 September 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

I'll repost this here, since it seems some posters think the "player council" is an idea someone in the community came up with:

But you seem to be supporting a backwards prop. i.e. Form council, form idea, skip vote, present to Russ.

Where Russ says: Form Ideas in community, have players vote, if player base votes 80% in favor of idea appoint spokesman or delegation/council to present said idea to PGI.

The 'Council supporters' have just hijacked what Russ said and subverted it into something else, something that is going to stifle and alienate the vast majority of player's ideas and concerns about this game.

[Snowseth]

Livewyr (see http://mwomercs.com/forums/topic/170983-ecm-dialogue-part-1-identifyingsolidifying-the-problems/)
Homeless-Bill

[KraftySOT]

Another vote for Homeless Bill here.

Reading through his posts and topics and such, he's definitely the right guy for this. His article on Convergence was great.

[Merit Lef]

Homeless bill has my vote

[IceSerpent]

Abivard, on 14 September 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

But you seem to be supporting a backwards prop. i.e. Form council, form idea, skip vote, present to Russ.

Where Russ says: Form Ideas in community, have players vote, if player base votes 80% in favor of idea appoint spokesman or delegation/council to present said idea to PGI.

The 'Council supporters' have just hijacked what Russ said and subverted it into something else, something that is going to stifle and alienate the vast majority of player's ideas and concerns about this game.

No, Russ basically says: Form a council, have council form a proposal, let the rest of the players vote, if player base votes 80% in favor have council present said idea to PGI. If player base doesn't pass the idea, it goes back to the council for refining/modifications, then goes back to the rest of the players to vote on.

[KraftySOT]

Koniving, on 13 September 2014 - 11:15 AM, said:

Heh.
-----------
It's like I also disagree with about half the things Bishop says, but I still see the value of what he could bring. I have always seen value...and convolusion in Homeless Bill's biggest idea (the most popular one of the targeting overload as an anti-pinpoint) which I could get very similar results (not for the same reasons but nevertheless similar results) with in a far more simplified version by just converting all mechs to a locked 30 threshold for heat. Even so it'd be possible to go out and get a drink together -- though I strongly suspect I'd be buying.

Even Khobai or Ultimatum X [I know I'm probably butchering this name] I can respect, both of whom had opinions with which I have had incredible disputes over to the point where I've rewritten what would have originally come out as almost benignly hostile responses before returning, trying to see it from his or her point of view and trying again -- repeatedly -- to try and find a middle ground. But just because I can be friendly doesn't mean we'd go conspiring to conquer the world. Though we might eventually settle on an agreement.

The point in general is you can disagree and give counter points whether you like the person or not. I mean even Russ has demonstrated this ability in overturning some of Paul's balancing decisions. The old and new results are things I strongly disagree with, but it's a fine demonstration that opinions can vary, compete, etc., without having to "hate" everyone you're with.

On the mention I had before, the US Senate could debate and eventually compromise on something but Congress, the two sides are so at odds that absolutely nothing is getting done. I can see why 'buddies' can be seen as an issue, but so are 'enemies' that despite each other for the sake of doing so.

Me and StJobe aren't really buddies and we've never spoken outside of debates about what functions this or that has versus what it should have and sometimes we agree and sometimes we don't.

That said however, if I were to choose anyone, the last thing I'd want is a "yes man." I've seen that side of game development and the results are so awful that you might find them familiar. It's a thinking person's shooter and it needs thinking people. Homeless Bill, DocBach, Livewyr, Bishop, and some of the others: these are people that I know actually put some thought into things. Some more than others. They were voted on for a reason and it's not because "I like or dislike this." It's because they study issues, look into what things were supposed to be, and even find ways to make things fit in a way that seems fair even if it's not 100% satisfactory to even themselves.

(Also I did wind up finding StJobe did get some votes. Still surprised at how few though; I mean who else has found ways to break conceptions I've had based on what I could read on BT and do on Megamek? So far no one else has ever been able to directly disprove anything I've derived from a combination of the lore/fluff and the game.)

What a great post.

[stjobe]

Abivard, on 14 September 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

But you seem to be supporting a backwards prop. i.e. Form council, form idea, skip vote, present to Russ.

Me? Far from it. I'm on record in this thread and in others as saying the council shouldn't be the ones to either come up with or decide on anything; they're just there to do the legwork of collating ideas and putting them to the vote so we can hopefully agree on one single proposal and present that to Russ.