972 replies to this topic

[JT Black]

Greetings.

Russ, nice to know you ask for our opinion and even tell us your preferences as a player.

I see you still love your Dragon and i remember your love for the Cicada years ago.

Now can i ask you a favor? Will you please remove the bit of code from public matches mode that rushes matches into 12-1 results? That would be appreciated greatly.



Please dont follow the usual bigger mmo's mistakes.
I have noticed the changes since closed beta.

Kind regards and Russ, we believe in your work but please dont make the public match system like world of tanks. Give us the option to decide the outcome.

[wicm]

Wait..so if I chose CrapQuest ill get skirmish?????

[A sebaceous cyst]

I'm likely in the minority here, but I actually like all 3 game modes currently in MWO (and would like to see more modes and more maps introduced by PGI) but the resource gathering one is by far my least favourite. That being said, if I don't feel like playing a particular game mode for whatever reason, I have really appreciated having the choice to deslect that mode and know I will not have to play that mode. On the other side of things the old system's ability to match make evenly was a joke (over the weekend my SH was in a lance with 3 DW more times than I could keep track of). I think your poll is too limited for you to get the kind of feedback the community is trying to express. Most everyone wants a better matchmaking system with more ballanced teams (either 3/3/3/3 or for the sake of que times maybe just ballanced tonnage) but not everyone wants random game modes. So why not give people the choice to select from 4 game modes...the 3 existing (where you can select/un select what you want) and a 4th random selection, so if you only want skirmish then you unselect the other 3 (yeah I guess random is pointless if you choose all 3 but random is essentially what you have made the selection into with this patch because it doesnt matter what I select now I get what I get and I'm stuck with it)

Edited by A sebaceous cyst, 08 October 2014 - 12:17 AM.

[Morang]

ThomasMarik, on 07 October 2014 - 10:52 PM, said:

World of Tanks last time I played did not allow you to choose the map or mode.

They allow you to choose modes, though not 100% strictly. They have one mode, basically our "Assault", than can't be excluded and that is the only available mode for tiers below 4th. Other two modes, "King of hill" (single base cappable by both teams) and "Attack/Defend" (asymmetrical mode, single base, one team can cap, other must prevent capping) can be included or excluded by checkboxes in the options. So "Assault" is always here to stay, and you can't play other two modes w/o "assault", but other two modes you can strictly exclude at will (any particular of two if you want, not just both at once).

Edited by Morang, 08 October 2014 - 12:19 AM.

[Savage Wolf]

Levon K, on 08 October 2014 - 12:11 AM, said:

Didn't realize so many people hated conquest mode. It's the superior mode (Skirmish + Objectives) and has more varied engagements (not always deathball).

I run conquest mode exclusively, and I actually agree with the voting system. How is it those who run other modes exclusively have a problem with it? You basically approach each match *the exact same way*. You're supposed to play conquest mode as a Skirmish anyways. Capping is just another variable that allows some alternatives to deathballing.

It appears that some players have an issue with the possibility of being able to win in other ways that simply eradicating the enemy. This is probably also why Conquest is still played much like Skirmish because people would QQ otherwise. And yet people opt out of Conquest.
I would much prefer that we kept our choice of what not to play and made Conquest less Skirmish and more it's own game mode.

[QuantumButler]

This change has been by far the worst change since Ghost Heat.

[Morang]

Savage Wolf, on 08 October 2014 - 12:17 AM, said:

This is probably also why Conquest is still played much like Skirmish because people would QQ otherwise.

Maybe because it's more effective? Because stretching thin and trying to cap many points still doesn't allow you to win by cap against a steamrolling blob that both eradicates scattered forces and quickly reclaims cap points on its way?

[NeonKnight]

Do you Like Long Walks on the Beach?

Yes - Coffee is an excellent Morning Beverage.
No - Wool sweaters are too itchy.





Makes about as much sense as the Thread's Poll Question.....

Edited by NeonKnight, 08 October 2014 - 12:25 AM.

[Stonefalcon]

NeonKnight, on 08 October 2014 - 12:23 AM, said:

Do you Like Long Walks on the Beach?

Yes - Coffee is an excellent Morning Beverage.
No - Wool sweaters are too itchy.

Niko, unfortunately Neon's post makes more sense than your poll.

Edited by Stonefalcon, 08 October 2014 - 12:26 AM.

[wicm]

3 out of 16... still not seeing the one I "perfer" What a cockup PGI should read the comments, more people speak there mind there , then here.

[Savage Wolf]

Morang, on 08 October 2014 - 12:21 AM, said:

Maybe because it's more effective? Because stretching thin and trying to cap many points still doesn't allow you to win by cap against a steamrolling blob that both eradicates scattered forces and quickly reclaims cap points on its way?

Of course people do this because it's most effective, but that's what I hope will change at some point. That Conquest is balanced differently and will try to appeal more to players wanting something else than deathmatch. And since people prefering deathmatch still opt out of it, there seems to be little reason to still appeal to them in that gamemode.

[Asmosis]

I'd prefer a different weighting system. give me 10 points to distribute between the 3 game modes. If I put zero points into a mode, I don't get added to a game with that type.

For the game itself, set the game type before adding the first player. that way using the above suggestion you don't end up with 3 different players who have zero points in each category collectively.

e.g. given 10 points I would put 7 points in conquest, 2 points in assault and 1 point in skirmish. When I click on play, it checks for pending games waiting for players in that order.

Perhaps it waits X x10 seconds where X is the amount of points I put into a game mode before it checks for my 2nd option e.g. in the above scenario it would scan for conquest games for 70 seconds, then assault for 20 seconds then skirmish for 10 seconds, then back to conquest for 70 etc. All things being equal I would default to conquest unless there were no eligible games. I could still put 10 points in one mode to play that exclusively.

You could even make it a neat little 3 bar slider thing so its intuitive. move one bar up, the other two drop down.

*edit*

I voted no because I just don't think ELO has that much of an impact on match outcomes. Matches are normally decided when one team makes the wrong decision, out of two or so choices that (without knowing where the enemy is going initially) are both equally viable.

Edited by Asmosis, 08 October 2014 - 12:34 AM.

[Zainadin]

MischiefSC, on 08 October 2014 - 12:04 AM, said:

It's amazing anyone played the game before you could select game mode.

Clearly UI 2.0 was the BEST THING EVER DONE FOR MW:O.

At this point anyone who says 'the game was better in closed beta' needs to be voting for no gamemode selection - since that was all the same thing back then.

The idea that game mode selection negatively impacts matchmaking is so obvious it shouldn't need me to math it up.

500 or 600 people even is more than enough; it's well under a 5% margin of error for a binary topic (two options). The real issue is that the sample is purely self-selected. The again that means it's more likely, not less, to get people who actually care about the answer.

CW will have a variety of winning approaches and situations that you don't get to select - especially if defending.

If you absolutely can't handle not having total control of your game mode, please for the love of god never play in CW. You're going to be dead weight in an environment where winning counts.

I remember the when, but don't know about you. I like to be prepared and design a Mech for a role/game mode/match as much as possible. Some game modes a 25 ton mech can't always afford a TAG/NARC if it isn't going to see the front line and is a capwarrior.

If you like tweaking the mechs for a specific role, then the more control the player has with the game mode/map, the better the mech can be designed.

Maybe based on conquest and being a light I didn't have to worry too much about heat because I won't be up front fighting a lot but capping.

Or you want to be an LRM Boat but instead of staying in one general place and lob salvos, you're running with the group from cap to cap not using the LRMs because targets get too close.

And what is the point of having a capture module in any mode but conquest?

[ExoForce]

Lindonius, on 07 October 2014 - 08:58 PM, said:

Does it really matter? All the game modes are deathmatch with anywhere from 0 - 5 cap points. I'd rather have closer ELO.

Voted NO, remove this abomination. I dont want to be forced to play gamemodes that I am not interested in.
Only group leaders should pick modes.

With current forced modes new players will be be frustrated and company income WILL drop.

Never seen multimode game where are You forced to play random mode.

[wickedlegendz]

I woul have to say I would "prefer" a better system for the drops but, until there is a better drop system I think we should revert to the old drop system, while as a community coming up with a different system.
WickedLegendz

[Morang]

Zainadin, on 08 October 2014 - 12:28 AM, said:

And what is the point of having a capture module in any mode but conquest?

In Assault mode group queue coordinated base rushes still exist. Cap module can decide the outcome in these cases.

[Kerrisis]

I'm in the No camp myself. I have zero interest in playing Conquest or Assault and quite frankly don't appreciate having those game types forced on me. I quit out of several matches as they started last night due to this change. What else can I do other than stop playing?

[Shivaxi]

I would vote no and also say that the ELO needs to be fixed regardless. ELO is currently based on wins and losses only right? Which in short, doesn't mean anything since this is a team based game, and your team can lose the game for you no matter how good you are. So the current ELO is seriously flawed in this regard. Matches were more balanced back in the day when it was purely based on tonnage and matched each teams overall tonnage. Mind you it wasn't perfect of course, but it was something. If PGI insists on sticking with ELO, then perhaps your ELO should be based on average match score? your damage, assists, all that stuff that counts to match score (which is currently broken in the new patch) which I think would better balance people's ELO properly. Just throwing some ideas out there.

Edited by Shivaxi, 08 October 2014 - 12:34 AM.

[wicm]

just selected all ....then finaly got what I wanted!!!!

[AeusDeif]

MischiefSC, on 08 October 2014 - 12:04 AM, said:

It's amazing anyone played the game before you could select game mode.

Clearly UI 2.0 was the BEST THING EVER DONE FOR MW:O.

At this point anyone who says 'the game was better in closed beta' needs to be voting for no gamemode selection - since that was all the same thing back then.

The idea that game mode selection negatively impacts matchmaking is so obvious it shouldn't need me to math it up.

500 or 600 people even is more than enough; it's well under a 5% margin of error for a binary topic (two options). The real issue is that the sample is purely self-selected. The again that means it's more likely, not less, to get people who actually care about the answer.

CW will have a variety of winning approaches and situations that you don't get to select - especially if defending.

If you absolutely can't handle not having total control of your game mode, please for the love of god never play in CW. You're going to be dead weight in an environment where winning counts.

the problem isn't that you're dropped into x game mode, it's that you're dropped into one that may be the worst suited for your mech, thus stacking the odds against you.

is that really going to happen in CW? I was under the impression that in CW you would know ahead of time what the map/mode was so you could select your build for it and thus avoid having the worst possible mech for a match