353 replies to this topic

[Almond Brown]

VanillaG, on 24 September 2014 - 08:16 PM, said:

In regards to the benefits of owning planets, my recommendation is that players be given c-bill bonuses for dropping in faction correct mechs and equipment. If your faction owns the planet that makes a specific mech you get a c-bill bonus and if it is equipped with equipment from faction controlled planets you get additional c-bill bonus. The bonus would represent lowered repair cost which are passed on to the mech owner.

For example, a Kurita pilot would get a [3%] bonus when piloting a Dragon. Kurita also own planets that make gauss rifles so any mechs that have a gauss rifle get a [0.5%] bonus. So the Kurita Dragon pilot that has a gauss rifle would get a [3.5%] bonus for every CW match that they drop in. The Davion's attack and take the last gauss rifle planet in Kurita space so the Kurita Dragon pilot would would only get a [3%] bonus until Kurita take back the planet.

As an added twist you could have multiple planets make the same items so the bonus fluctuates with number of planets owned. The higher the number the greater the bonus and vice versa.

A solid idea BUT what about the Clanners. They would/will take Planets (lots) with Factories but would never get those Bonuses as they are not allowed to use either IS Mechs or Gear?

A possibility would be a Factory/Gear conversion system based on ownership. Clan takes IS owned planet with Factory, now those Mechs and gear simply switch. A Gauss factory becomes a Clan Gauss factory and a Dragon(Heavy) Factory becomes a Clan Heavy Mech factory for bonus point additions?

[Juvat]

Forcing a Merc Corps to align with a Faction in order to participate in CW TOTALLY goes against what a Merc Corps is... shame on you guys for forcing that. A better idea would have been to allow them to be what they are... guns for hire to the Faction(s) they want to work for. If I wanted to join a House unit I would have long before now. You are going to fragment a lot of units by forcing them to play for a Faction they don't want to (provided this concern overrides their unit loyalty). Another example of why you guys have strayed away from this being a MechWarrior game. Allowing ANY IS Faction to defend (based on your example Davion attacks Kurita world Liao, Marik, Steiner, and FRR units can help defend?!?!) is the second example. You could have used the Merc Corps in this capacity (helping with defenses as they were used for in the franchise) very easily without affecting the dynamic of how CW is. I will not be spending one more dime on this game and to be honest I am questioning why your permission to continue with using the MechWarrior franchise license was renewed. I have been patient and supportive of your efforts and critical of them when necessary since closed Beta. I am not sure whose ideas these were but they need to be given a timeout to go and read through all of the BT material and really see what the essence of this franchise is about before you implement this.

[Almond Brown]

Cmdr Rad, on 24 September 2014 - 09:02 PM, said:

As was mentioned earlier... single players queuing up for a drop don't have any logistics placeholder costs that units seem to have, so aren't you essentially taxing the ability to drop with your fellow unit members?

The understanding is that the Single player can never initiate an Attack, only a Group. Seems fair enough.

My question would be: Assuming that only the Attackers pay a toll...

Does the Attacking Group pick up the (per player) cost for any/all Solo (non-member) players, or 3-mans, who get attached to their < 12 man Attack group?

Edited by Almond Brown, 25 September 2014 - 09:32 AM.

[MightyMeatShield]

Question about the following:

Quote

How it plays out for the attacking Force players (Clan players):
* Clan players (either solo or in Unit groups) click Balsta and see a planetary information screen appear.
* On this screen, players can see the contract issued by Clan Jade Falcon (as an example).
* Clan Jade Falcon says the reward of winning your attack match is an extra 5,000,000 CB divided amongst your team.
* An 8-man group clicks Accept Contract.
* The 8-man group is put into the Attacker's queue for planet Balsta.
* A 2-man group clicks Accept Contract.
* The 2-man group is put into the Attacker's queue for planet Balsta.
* The team builder for match making adds the 2-man group to the 8-man group for a team of 10.
* A 4-man group clicks Accept Contract
* The 4-man group is put into the Attacker's queue for planet Balsta.
* The 4-man group does not fit into the current 10-man group in the queue so they are placed on hold.
* A 2-man group clicks Accept Contract
* The 2-man group is put into the Attacker's queue for planet Balsta.
* The team builder for match making adds the 2-man group to the 10-man team for a team of 12.
* A successful 12-player attacking team has been built.
* A call to arms message to all players aligned to FRR is sent system wide. ("A unit group is attacking Balsta! Click the Faction tab to defend!")
* A 3-man group clicks Accept Contract.
* The 3-man group is put into the Attacker's queue for planet Balsta.
* The team builder for match making adds the 3-man group to the 4-man group that was on hold for a team of 7.
This cycle of creating teams and triggering attacks/calls to arms continues for 2hrs.

Are the last 4 bullet points from the call to arms message to the FRR through the team of 7 included in error?

[Almond Brown]

Kilo 40, on 24 September 2014 - 09:55 PM, said:

Honestly, I'm feeling left behind here.

I rarely get to play with a unit, and since I'm a night worker I don't get to play during these so called "peak times".

I mean, I like what I'm reading for the most part. It's just that it seems to be catering to these large "competitive" units rather than the average player.

Not sure what you mean. Whenever you play, it will be some regions "Prime time". Prepare to Defend your chosen Houses turf then...

It would be pretty hard for PGI to make a Prime time based on ones work schedule...

[Bront]

A comment on Solo players and CW.

You mentioned that at this time there was not a plan to allow solo players participate directly. Why not allow solo players to choose CW, and use them for filler when needed in drops? So they don't aim for a planet as much as fill in their faction's holes if you can't otherwise make a 12 man. Obviously it's not an idea solution, but it lets solo players contribute to CW without forcing them to find groups first, at the cost of restricting their choice in where they drop (It would simply look for drops that need a single player for that faction, or in the case of a lone wolf or general clan supporter, they would fill in anywhere that is appropriate.

[Jman5]

How is Elo going to fit into Community Warfare?

[Lord Jay]

It seems like the drop ship mechanic can be abused. "Everyone in a light or medium suicide and drop in your Timber Wolf. Ok now push!" Any thought to somehow maintaining 3/3/3/3?

I'd like to suggest some bonus either LP or cbills if your team wins and you do not use all of your dropship mechs. The fewer resources you spend in achieving the goal the higher your rewards should be.

There needs to be some incentive to controlling more planets. How about some faction wide bonus? For example: If your faction owns one planet each pilot should get +2% XP, cbills and LP. 3.8% for two planets, 5.4% for three... etc. This should not be linear and have some kind of diminishing returns mechanic.

Edited by Lord Jay, 25 September 2014 - 09:41 AM.

[smokefield]

I have read the posts about cw.ph2, a couple of times, i know how things are supposed to work and the mechanics behind, there are a lot of explanations of how groups will be made, how defend and conquer phase will go and so on, but i have one big question, which practically questions what CW actually is :

- it is a more "advanced" conquest type of the game ? from all these posts this is the image i got, please correct me if I am wrong. planets will be "reset" every 24h. points/tokes will be won/lost, you need to "hold" a number of them to conquer a territory and so on...

On the other side - what I was expecting from CW, and what my (wildest) dreams related to CW are, is an entirely different thing. I want us to participate in an advanced invasion and warfare conflicts, where you fight for a planet/territory for months, where you slowly advance, where you need to scout ahead enemy lines and then plan an offensive, where you can sabotage their resources, factories, power generators in order to weaken them, where you run out of ammo/spare parts while in a prolongued offence and you need to hold the lines until reinforcements arrive. I want a CW that means more than a conquest game expanded to a planet instead of 5 points of a map. I want a mmorpg combined with a tactical fps combined with a mech sim and a mmorts that follows the BT universe. and we dont need to have hundreds of planets for it. we just need a couple of them...

[Bront]

Juvat, on 25 September 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

Forcing a Merc Corps to align with a Faction in order to participate in CW TOTALLY goes against what a Merc Corps is... shame on you guys for forcing that. A better idea would have been to allow them to be what they are... guns for hire to the Faction(s) they want to work for. If I wanted to join a House unit I would have long before now. You are going to fragment a lot of units by forcing them to play for a Faction they don't want to (provided this concern overrides their unit loyalty). Another example of why you guys have strayed away from this being a MechWarrior game. Allowing ANY IS Faction to defend (based on your example Davion attacks Kurita world Liao, Marik, Steiner, and FRR units can help defend?!?!) is the second example. You could have used the Merc Corps in this capacity (helping with defenses as they were used for in the franchise) very easily without affecting the dynamic of how CW is. I will not be spending one more dime on this game and to be honest I am questioning why your permission to continue with using the MechWarrior franchise license was renewed. I have been patient and supportive of your efforts and critical of them when necessary since closed Beta. I am not sure whose ideas these were but they need to be given a timeout to go and read through all of the BT material and really see what the essence of this franchise is about before you implement this.

2 comments on this.

1) It was stated that at the moment they were working with Faction clans to get the system up and running to start with. This is all still design phase stuff, so that could change, and they want to allow for merc units, but they need the faction infrastructure in place first. This doesn't mean your merc unit will never be able to be mercs, just that they'll have to allign at the moment.

2) Because of where the Clans are coming in, not every faction can defend against the clans normally. So some factions may miss out on the ability to defend the IS from the Clan invasioin. Since that's part of the fun, the idea is to let anyone help. This has the strange side effect of allowing house units pick and choose which areas they defend, so Steiner may not help Kurita defend and vice versa. I find that adds more depth. Liao may decide to simply take over the IS and ignore the clans till their boarders touch for example.

It's a work in progress. I'd avoid being outraged on anything till we get something working, and then give them time to spruce it up.

[Almond Brown]

Wintersdark, on 24 September 2014 - 11:01 PM, said:

This is a really good point. You absolutely do not want to penalize a unit for having inactive members. That just makes it harder to return to the game after some time away.

Then it would seem reasonable to have the Groups police their own ranks in regard to activity. No one can actually expect PGI to track player activity on a "group by group" basis right? Sounds like an internal Team management issue.

[Bilbo]

Almond Brown, on 25 September 2014 - 09:58 AM, said:

Then it would seem reasonable to have the Groups police their own ranks in regard to activity. No one can actually expect PGI to track player activity on a &quot;group by group&quot; basis right? Sounds like an internal Team management issue.

Especially considering there is not a buy-in requirement. It wouldn't be hard to purge when required and re-invite later.

[Almond Brown]

Savage Wolf, on 25 September 2014 - 12:10 AM, said:

The question that I want answered the most is this:

Is the design goal of planetary conquest to give a match based more on objectives than taking out the enemy forces? To give an exampe, Conquest mode as it exists currently is still primarily focused on taking out the entire enemy team as opposed to winning on capping. Capping is the secondary objective and is the least likely victory condition.

So are the design goals for planetary conquest that destroying the generators are the expected victory condition as opposed to wiping out the enemy team. Or is just a secondary objective one must simply make sure is not achieved while destroying enemy mechs?

Also, will the defending players have a similar objective that will grant them victory by destroying? Attacking players must destroy the power generator, what must the defending players destroy?

I think the "generators" are destroyed to "open the gates" to the compound, within which lies the actual "win objectives". So you can destroy the Mechs, defending the fortified compound, 4 waves, or drop the Gennies, gain the compound, destroy all forces or designated victory targets.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Lord Jay, on 25 September 2014 - 09:40 AM, said:

It seems like the drop ship mechanic can be abused. "Everyone in a light or medium suicide and drop in your Timber Wolf. Ok now push!" Any thought to somehow maintaining 3/3/3/3?

Paul said you can choose which Mech you drop in out of your 4. This means that there will not be a 3/3/3/3 system deployed on the field at any particular instance in time... rather a 12/12/12/12 total number of Mechs fielded over the course of entire battle.

Quote

Is there any team limit on what you take in the first spawn/wave?

Right now we're not planning on having a limit on which 'Mechs are taken in the first drop. If a team wishes to take all Assaults at the start of a match, they're going to regret it as the fight continues and they start losing their assaults and are left with lights at the end of the match.

This means you CAN drop in all TWolves for the first wave, assuming you're willing to fight the rest of the match with no more Timberwolves after that.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 25 September 2014 - 10:08 AM.

[Almond Brown]

Jacob Side, on 25 September 2014 - 04:25 AM, said:

stuff

Edit: Saw some of Russ's replies.

You are correct Sir, Mercs do "align" themselves with Houses by that "aligning" is really only for the duration of whatever contract they've taken on. After that contract is up they could turn around and be attacking the House they just worked for.

Mercs need a contract system where they "align" themselves with a House for a given time. 2 week to a month contract period then they look for a new contract.

That will depend on the actual benefit gain from LP's. Better things for tighter (one or two factions) association/loyalty versus lesser for a more broad association/loyalty (3-4/All faction split)

[Zyllos]

Jman5, on 25 September 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

How is Elo going to fit into Community Warfare?

It doesn't.

All drops are on a FIFO basis.

[Xanquil]

I chose to be a lone wolf because I didn't want to have to choose a house/clan. (lore reasons) As it stands (from what I have been reading) that will make it impossible for me to be part of CW, which is sad. I was looking forward to it too.

Hopefully there will be something for Lone wolfs like me to do to help out (either / both sides) in CW.

[BigZach]

Oops, missed the link to this and sent a PM instead. But here's my question (haven't looked through previous 8 pages to see if it's been asked, but didn't see it in FAQ update):

Can you make the new invasion map(s) available in the testing grounds and private lobbies so both solo players and units that want to play Community Warfare can try them out and practice on them?

[Almond Brown]

Livewyr, on 25 September 2014 - 04:57 AM, said:

Legitimate question:

If community Warfare attack and defense is handled by everyone of the faction, on every world in the faction...

What purpose are the Units going to serve? Is that something in Phase 3?

Garrisons? The planet flies the owners Faction Flag with the Unit Garrisons Banner below it on the Flag Pole.

Edited by Almond Brown, 25 September 2014 - 10:15 AM.

[Wieland]

Quote

What are the peak player count times that you described?
We have been watching peak player times constantly since going live with the game. We are currently looking at 6-8PM PDT for West Coast, 3-5PM PDT for East Coast (6-8PM EDT), and 11AM-1PM PDT for UTC (6-8pm UTC). We may also include prime times for AU and Asian times as well. These numbers are all still to be determined but I just want to let you know that we're not just focusing on North American play times.

Lets take these numbers and look at it from different timezones.(there might be light discrepancys due to summertime or not), i also changed the order of the combat phases for better viewing
Central Europe
8PM-10PM, Midnight-2AM, 3AM-5AM

British Isles and Portugal
7PM-9PM, 23PM-1AM, 2AM-4AM

Eastern Europe
9PM-11PM, 1AM-3AM, 4AM-6AM

European part of Russia
10PM-12PM, 2AM-4AM, 5AM-7AM

Eastern Australia
5AM-7AM, 9AM-11AM, 12PM-2PM

US East
2PM-4PM, 6PM-8PM, 9PM-11PM

US West
11AM-1PM, 3PM-5PM, 6-8PM

For me personally it would be Central Europe.
I know the numbers are not final, but
Only 2 hours of CW? Something i have waited so long for? Heavily disapointing.
You will not keep players with those numbers.