41 replies to this topic

[Diablobo]

The poll by the devs about voting for modes has been closed this afternoon. While there were quite a lot of votes on the matter, I find it hard to believe that only 1547 votes represents the majority of our player base. Is the active player base that small that there are so few people needed to decide an issue?

Also, even though the poll has been open for several days, I only just found out about it today when it was shared on the MWO Facebook page just 8 hours ago. The thread was then shut down a couple hours later. Why wasn't the poll thread shared on the FB page earlier?

As for the issue itself, how about making it so we don't play the same map over and over again instead of all this voting nonsense? How many of us have had sessions where the matchmaker kept giving us the same map over and over in the space of just a few hours, many times getting the same map over 7 out of 10 drops. Do you really think we want to have the same map over and over while some maps are rarely seen? That's a way bigger problem than getting to choose modes and maps. Make it so the same map can't be played more than 3 times out of 10 with fairly flexible release valves. It doesn't have to be a set in stone hard and fast rule, but the so called random map selection is anything but random. For some reason the MM wants to give us the same map over and over again while leaving out the other maps. Fix this before you make the MM even MORE complicated and buggy with voting and other variables. Fix what we have before changing and adding more things.

Edited by Diablobo, 24 September 2014 - 10:55 PM.

[FupDup]

EDIT: I misinterpreted the thread. I thought this was about the assault mech poll, not the map/mode poll!

The Zeus' late comeback surprised me.

I hope that if we do get it (Russ said it would be either the Zeus or Clops, depending on certain game factors) we get the ZEU-6Y variant. It's the best excuse we've got to get the Binary Laser Cannon in-game. IS customization is fairly stale right now.

Edited by FupDup, 24 September 2014 - 07:40 PM.

[Eddrick]

FupDup, on 24 September 2014 - 06:36 PM, said:

The Zeus' late comeback surprised me.

I hope that if we do get it (Russ said it would be either the Zeus or Clops, depending on certain game factors) we get the ZEU-6Y variant. It's the best excuse we've got to get the Binary Laser Cannon in-game. IS customization is fairly stale right now.

I was thrilled to see the Zeus make a comeback. I'm hopeing for the ZEU-6Y, too. The Binary Laser Cannon is literaly two Large Lasers put together into one weapon. It would be great for variants that are short on Energy Hardpoints.

[FupDup]

EDIT: I misinterpreted the thread. I thought this was about the assault mech poll, not the map/mode poll!

Heck, I even have a homemade version of the Blazer's entry in Weapons.XML written up:

<Weapon id="1015" name="BinaryLaser" HardpointAliases="Energy,Laser" faction="InnerSphere">
	<Loc nameTag="@BL" descTag="@BL_desc" iconTag="StoreIcons\BinaryLaser.dds" />
	<WeaponStats Health="10" slots="4" type="Energy" projectileclass="" numFiring="1" damage="16.0" heatdamage="0" heatpenalty="3.4" minheatpenaltylevel="3" impulse="0.0" heatPenaltyID="3" heat="14.0" cooldown="3.55" ammoType="" ammoPerShot="0" minRange="0" longRange="450" maxRange="900" visRange="1500" tons="9" duration="1.2" lifetime="0" speed="0" volleydelay="0.0" maxDepth="10.0" />
	<EffectList>
	  <Effect name="Beam" asset="Objects/weapons/laser_beam_binary.cgf" />
	  <Effect name="BeamCap" asset="Objects/weapons/laser_impact_binary.cgf" />
	  <!--time : time it takes for the beam to scale to 100% for x,z scale	 distance :  how much the beam grows in one sec-->
	  <Effect name="ParticleBeam" asset="" />
	  <Effect name="TraceEffects" asset="laser_binary" />
	  <Effect name="Sound:Fire" asset="sounds/weapons:lasers:laser_binary_fire" float="0.0" />
	  <Effect name="Sound:PostFire" asset="sounds/weapons:lasers:laser_binary_power" float="0.0" />
	  <Effect name="DamageBrush" asset="Textures\\decals\\damage_brushes\\laser_binary.tif" />
	  <Effect name="DamageBrushType" asset="laser" float="32" float2="32" />
	  <Effect name="Projector:icecave" asset="textures/defaults/sparks_test.dds" vector="0.243,0.411,1.0" float="0.5" float2="1.5" float3="12" float4="160" float5="80" float6="6.5" num="9" />
	</EffectList>
	<Audio OnDestroyedDialogue="BB_BinaryLaser_Destroyed" />
  </Weapon>

Just need to adjust the values for balance, and add in the visual FX files/store descriptions being referenced. The float values on the Projector:icecave line probably need to get modified as well (currently using the regular LL values).

Edited by FupDup, 24 September 2014 - 07:38 PM.

[Quxudica]

Diablobo, on 24 September 2014 - 06:25 PM, said:

The poll by the devs about voting for modes has been closed this afternoon. While there was quite a lot of votes on the matter, I find it hard to believe that only 1547 votes represents the majority of our player base. Is the active player base that small that there are so few people needed to decide an issue?

Also, even though the poll has been open for several days, I only just found out about it today when it was shared on the MWO Facebook page just 8 hours ago. The thread was then shut down a couple hours later. Why wasn't the poll thread shared on the FB page earlier?

As for the issue itself, how about making it so we don't play the same map over and over again instead of all this voting nonsense? How many of us have had sessions where the matchmaker kept giving us the same map over and over in the space of just a few hours, many times getting the same map over 7 out of 10 drops. Do you really think we want to have the same map over and over while some maps are rarely seen? That's a way bigger problem than getting to choose modes and maps. Make it so the same map can't be played more than 3 times out of 10 with fairly flexible release valves. It doesn't have to be a set in stone hard and fast rule, but the so called random map selection is anything but random. For some reason the MM wants to give us the same map over and over again while leaving out the other maps. Fix this before you make the MM even MORE complicated and buggy with voting and other variables. Fix what we have before changing and adding more things.

Wha? there was a poll of some kind? First I've heard of it and I've been on this website for the last week.

[FupDup]

Quxudica, on 24 September 2014 - 07:29 PM, said:

Wha? there was a poll of some kind? First I've heard of it and I've been on this website for the last week.

EDIT: I misinterpreted the thread. I thought this was about the assault mech poll, not the map/mode poll!


There was a poll for IS assault mechs. The choices were Charger, Zeus, and Cyclops.

http://mwomercs.com/...ault-mech-poll/

Edited by FupDup, 24 September 2014 - 07:40 PM.

[El Bandito]

Ah Steiners. They are numerous, but not good for much--except in this case.

Anyway, Russ' last comment stated that either one can be made first due to neck to neck poll. Personally I prefer a second 90 tonner with a big engine (360 of Cyclops vs Highlander's 325), than an 80 tonner that offers nothing new.

Edited by El Bandito, 24 September 2014 - 07:39 PM.

[Quxudica]

FupDup, on 24 September 2014 - 07:30 PM, said:

There was a poll for IS assault mechs. The choices were Charger, Zeus, and Cyclops.

http://mwomercs.com/...ault-mech-poll/

I'm confused, if the poll was about what assault mech the community wants why is the OP talking about map selection and changing the MM?

Maybe I just need more sleep.

[FupDup]

Quxudica, on 24 September 2014 - 07:37 PM, said:

I'm confused, if the poll was about what assault mech the community wants why is the OP talking about map selection and changing the MM?

Maybe I just need more sleep.

Oh, it appears that I'm the one didn't get enough sleep. I mistakenly thought this thread was about the assault mech poll (there were two different polls). Lol.

Edited by FupDup, 24 September 2014 - 07:39 PM.

[Diablobo]

That just goes to prove my point. Not only was the poll closed too early, hardly anyone even knew of its existence. If there are many forum regulars who didn't know, there is no way the poll can be considered inclusive of everyone's opinion. There shouldn't even be a choice to begin with, but the poll itself is fatally flawed.

[Bhael Fire]

Wait...WHAT poll is the OP talking about if it's not the assault mech poll?

[FupDup]

Bhael Fire, on 24 September 2014 - 07:57 PM, said:

Wait...WHAT poll is the OP talking about if it's not the assault mech poll?

The poll about whether we'd prefer closer Elo matches or the ability to choose game modes.

[Bhael Fire]

FupDup, on 24 September 2014 - 07:58 PM, said:

The poll about whether we'd prefer closer Elo matches or the ability to choose game modes.

WTF...WHERE was that?

[FupDup]

Bhael Fire, on 24 September 2014 - 07:59 PM, said:

WTF...WHERE was that?

http://mwomercs.com/...-match-quality/

[Nathan Foxbane]

Bhael Fire, on 24 September 2014 - 07:59 PM, said:

WTF...WHERE was that?

It was right next to the Assault 'Mech poll. It has since been locked and unpinned.

[Bhael Fire]

FupDup, on 24 September 2014 - 07:59 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...-match-quality/

Ah yeah... that one's kinda old.

Sorry OP. I thought there was an even newer poll.

[Nathan Foxbane]

I think Russ had a little too much faith in how many people actually looked at the pinned section of GD. It would not have hurt to put it in the announcements section or better yet, have a dedicated poll section in the Developers' Corner.

[Johnny Reb]

So the Z won? Ok i'm fine with either just prefer a 90 ton w/possible ecm.

edit; just want my Urbie! Also since its a close vote now does it apply to the Cyclops for both?

Edited by Johnny Reb, 24 September 2014 - 08:12 PM.

[Quxudica]

FupDup, on 24 September 2014 - 07:58 PM, said:

The poll about whether we'd prefer closer Elo matches or the ability to choose game modes.

Damn, got my hopes up they were talking about giving us map selection.

[FupDup]

Quxudica, on 24 September 2014 - 08:10 PM, said:

Damn, got my hopes up they were talking about giving us map selection.

That was actually mentioned by Russ in the post.

Russ Bullock said:

Also if the player base accepts this change and it works out well, we would consider putting this voting system in place for map selection. Players will have the ability in the front end UI to select the maps that they vote for, similar to game modes. The code will then tally votes to select the map the game will take place on.

The timing of the game mode selector change would be for the Oct 7th patch. The timing of the map vote selector is unknown as it would take additional UI work but we would push to deliver it inside of 2014.

Please let us know with your vote if you would give up the ability to guarantee your game mode for having a higher chance of getting in a competitive match.

UPDATE: See my next post below for a better explanation of the voting process for maps.