32 replies to this topic

[Verdic Mckenna]

1.) Community Warfare - This is why I pay PGI money. This is why I bought in and subsequently cancelled. This is why i'm again paying them large sums of cash that honestly shouldn't be paid. I'd rather Russ Bullock be fielding some PR - and then spending the rest of his day helping in whatever way he can getting Community Warfare out the door. This IS the last chance.

2.) NARC Hits- The hit detection is completely broken. Half the time it hits, half the time it doesn't. You really want to balance ECM? Just fix this issue and make NARC a hard counter. Kill the Scouts or get bent. Your choice.

3.) MASC - Even short bursts that turn off automatically to avoid rubber banding kicking in on the server is better than no MASC at all. I'm a SaaS Administrator - i'll apply for work if it means I can see what the heck is going on with the server issues.

4.) XL Engines - Want Clan XL's to not be overpowered? Just replace the current IS XL penalty being DEATH and instead institute a 50% movement debuff. You've automatically made XL's on the IS side more viable by a long shot. Some mechs will still take Standard so they don't risk the movement penalty on an already slow mech. Penalizing both sides would result in XL's being useless. Doing it to a Clan mech that CANT SWAP OUT THE ENGINE would be unbalanced in the other direction.

5.) Modes - Dropship mode was coming. Now it's not. Now it is. I don't even have a bloody clue anymore. I'd love to see this come with a Dropship Asset that we could actually see from first person what a drop looks like instead of that ugly Ready Screen.

* Cyber Warfare Mode - Have a new key and control be implemented. i for Inspection or whatever like in Mechwarrior 2. All the sudden the maps utilize their building assets to create Data Center's or HPG Facilities that require one team to defend these objectives - and another team to get within 100 Meters and inspect and escape to extraction point. Combat parameters would be equal to Skirmish.

6.) UI Immersion - Frankly - if we're going to be immersed i'd volunteer to apply my novice CryEngine skills to submitting a community proposal for an interactive Mechbay mod. Where you create a little pilot and can move around a mech bay with four of your primarly selected Drop Deck Chassis'. Just give me the word.

* Adding some voice acting for Dust-Off and some for Extraction at the beginning and ending of matches as radio chatter would be really cool polish. I volunteer Darren at NGNG for this task.

* UI 2.0 is nice - but i'd prefer a UI 3.0 where everything is in a 3D space and makes me feel like i'm AT my facility (much like Mechwarrior 2) or in modern times (Star Citizen.) CryEngine all around people - CMON.

7.) Community Submitted CryEngine Mods - No time for the work? Crowd source it! Worried about hacks? Visit a Vancouver lawyer and write out a nice and serious EULA. Then only issue assets you're willing to allow modders to play with. Then have a simple submission pipeline where compiled modules can be uploaded to a PGI server facing the external network and allow a submissions handler to make sure they match up with your QA. A simple toolset that only allows use of the Mechbay and basic chassis' models would be a great start.

From a business stand point this creates good will and and crowdsources content PGI does not have the resources to engage in.


Conclusion:

So much community effort could be channeled. I'm not sure if Russ will even view this post - but i'd love to hear from you guys what other balance or even cosmetic issues you'd like to see added to the game that are a constructive step forward. I'm sure i'll come up with more as things filter through my coffee - but thats just off the top.

Edited by Verdic Mckenna, 16 September 2014 - 05:38 AM.

[El Bandito]

Stuff you said above should all be looked at. However, let's keep things focused one at a time, cause the community has its hands full just on ECM issue alone.

[Verdic Mckenna]

http://mwomercs.com/...player-council/

That's in limbo right now. As far as i'm concerned it was a crazy idea to begin with. It will eventually come to fruition - but not with ECM. So now we're moving on.

El Bandito, on 16 September 2014 - 05:46 AM, said:

Stuff you said above should all be looked at. However, let's keep things focused one at a time, cause the community has its hands full just on ECM issue alone.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Verdic Mckenna, on 16 September 2014 - 05:48 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...player-council/

That's in limbo right now. As far as i'm concerned it was a crazy idea to begin with. It will eventually come to fruition - but not with ECM. So now we're moving on.

Incorrect if you read Russ latest announcement we're not moving on ....yet.

[Bigbacon]

but ECM isn't even an issue if they'd fix or make slight changes to counters and/or players prioritize targets better.

[Mechteric]

Your list is missing jump jets and ghost heat.


Anyways, just because ECM balancing isn't important to you doesn't mean its not more important to a large quantity of players.

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 16 September 2014 - 05:52 AM.

[Verdic Mckenna]

No need to be salty. The point is this entire process is/can be in limbo right now while he decides what it is exactly he wants to do.

DV McKenna, on 16 September 2014 - 05:49 AM, said:

Incorrect if you read Russ latest announcement we're not moving on ....yet.

[Joseph Mallan]

Any one of your suggestions could replace ECM. if I read that post correctly.

[Funkadelic Mayhem]

Change ECM and I walk.

[Rebas Kradd]

Larger maps.

That needs to be here. It would completely change information warfare, role warfare, and ECM. With twelve players no longer huddled in a ball of death, is ECM so OP anymore since it only shelters four?

[Hoax415]

Please remove IS XL from that list. That's a truly terrible idea. You would just create another layer of build min/max'ing that eliminates more and more chassis/variants from top level viability.

They need to do that to clan XL although we're going to regret that they didn't a long time ago before all the other nerfs to clan tech.

[Joseph Mallan]

Funkadelic Mayhem, on 16 September 2014 - 05:53 AM, said:

Change ECM and I walk.

We'll be sorry to see you go.

Seriously Funk.

BUT ultimatums like that just don't work on a parent, so if you gonna walk then be sure to walk when/if it happens.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 16 September 2014 - 05:58 AM.

[Verdic Mckenna]

Which is why Cyber Warfare to me would be interesting. The question is - do you assign an objective to the defending side so that they don't huddle around the objective? Or do you just make it so that the other side doesn't know where it is they are to be defending? ?'s ?'s.

Rebas Kradd, on 16 September 2014 - 05:54 AM, said:

Larger maps.

That needs to be here. It would completely change information warfare, role warfare, and ECM. With twelve players no longer huddled in a ball of death, is ECM so OP anymore since it only shelters four?

[Bigbacon]

CapperDeluxe, on 16 September 2014 - 05:52 AM, said:

Your list is missing jump jets and ghost heat.


Anyways, just because ECM balancing isn't important to you doesn't mean its not more important to a large quantity of players.

but is it large quantity of players or a large quantity of some small subset of players?

[Verdic Mckenna]

Until the implement a polling ability within UI 2.0 we'll never really know that answer. Its like that old thread we had up here some time back about how many players we THOUGHT we had. Whats the registration at now? 597,000? Who actually comes here? Its like - 1400 people online at most given times? Please tell me 0.2% of the player population isn't forming a Player Council or proposing changes to mechanics. I'd rather have my thoughts put up on a poll the WHOLE player base sees. Anything else feels wrong.

Bigbacon, on 16 September 2014 - 05:56 AM, said:

but is it large quantity of players or a large quantity of some small subset of players?

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Verdic Mckenna, on 16 September 2014 - 05:59 AM, said:

Until the implement a polling ability within UI 2.0 we'll never really know that answer. Its like that old thread we had up here some time back about how many players we THOUGHT we had. Whats the registration at now? 597,000? Who actually comes here? Its like - 1400 people online at most given times? Please tell me 0.2% of the player population isn't forming a Player Council or proposing changes to mechanics. I'd rather have my thoughts put up on a poll the WHOLE player base sees. Anything else feels wrong.

Problem is, the population has to come here to take part, if they don't you can't force them.

As long as at the end conclusion the poll is placed inside the client, with a forwarding link to the forum topic for details that's all you can really do.

You can't make people visit here, you can't make them read the ideas, you can't make them vote.

[Verdic Mckenna]

Correction - I can if the UI Design dictates I can. And if you want the largest subset of players - that is what you do. Being a Forum Warrior shouldn't instill ANYBODY with a sense of entitlement.

DV McKenna, on 16 September 2014 - 06:02 AM, said:

Problem is, the population has to come here to take part, if they don't you can't force them.

As long as at the end conclusion the poll is placed inside the client, with a forwarding link to the forum topic for details that's all you can really do.

You can't make people visit here, you can't make them read the ideas, you can't make them vote.

[Livewyr]

Funkadelic Mayhem, on 16 September 2014 - 05:53 AM, said:

Change ECM and I walk.

Interesting def...comm...err statement?

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Verdic Mckenna, on 16 September 2014 - 06:04 AM, said:

Correction - I can if the UI Design dictates I can. And if you want the largest subset of players - that is what you do. Being a Forum Warrior shouldn't instill ANYBODY with a sense of entitlement.

Perhaps we differ in what we consider force.

If you make the UI force people to come here to the forums to view the topics at vote and won't let them do anything else, they will hate it and complain, some will take part.

There is however no reason the poll can't be added to the mechbay.

[Fut]

Hoax415, on 16 September 2014 - 05:55 AM, said:

Please remove IS XL from that list. That's a truly terrible idea. You would just create another layer of build min/max'ing that eliminates more and more chassis/variants from top level viability.

They need to do that to clan XL although we're going to regret that they didn't a long time ago before all the other nerfs to clan tech.

XL Engines are pretty much where they should be. 3 Engine Crits destroys a Mech, IS XLs have 3 slots in the side torsos, so when an ST goes it's 3 crits to the engine. Clan XLs only have 2 engine slots in the ST, so they keep on trucking when they lose an ST.
The only thing that should be added, would be increased heat or something when a Clan Mech loses a ST.