972 replies to this topic

[MercilessTRADER]

I play the game regularly and had no idea about this.. I guess PGI assumes everyone who plays goes to the website regularly and reads everything, like they don't have a wife, kids and a job to worry about.. Wasting time on making and coding the game to make it more obstructive for players(less options) GREAT..

Edited by MercilessTRADER, 08 October 2014 - 03:09 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

OK the poll is indeed biased.

Do i want a good ELO - yes of course - Do i like the Voting system - hm depends.

First - I like the idea not to choose the Game Mode - i play for fun - nothing else matters - and not to choose the game mode is challenging.
If you think its challenging to do every day the same, with the same buddys and the same mechs, the same game modes and if possible the same maps - congrats you are a Top Tier Elite player

Do i dislike it to start on Terra Therma with primary LRM weapons - of course - do i think its a problem? Nope

If there is a thing that i dislike - its the income on Conquest.

So if you ask me - don't allow any player to have any influence on the game mode or map.

Oh of course - you should give player groups different weights.
If a 12men team get 12 votes - they have to much power
reduce the weight of a group with each member

(for example
voting weight = 0.6*numbers of player +0.8)

---

another idea - make the 3 game modes a single one
all game modes are skirmish
so all game modes need cap points and turrets

so conquest with turrets

Edited by Karl Streiger, 08 October 2014 - 03:13 AM.

[Kotev]

I have voted yes, becouse i want faster queue and team strenght balance. For me it isn`t big deal what game mode i`m playing but i see for some people is very important so i think these people have to have freedom of choice.

[Livewyr]

I am voting to keep the change regardless. (Alpine conquest in a Dire Wolf be damned!)

But I think the Conquest game mode should change. It seems like a skirmish mode with a time limit.
We need more tangible incentives and reasons to take *AND HOLD* a base in the match. (Maybe an AMS screen, a UAV effect.. something.)

Right now it just seems like a Skirmish mode where you send off the lights to grab some bases while you march to the base between you and the enemy and duke it out. (All for less credits/XP)

[Kilo 40]

Zainadin, on 08 October 2014 - 02:55 AM, said:

I agree, this 52.5% isn't a fair judgement for the people who don't want it.

but it's a fair judgement for the people who do want it?

ok then...

Quote

I actually spend money on the game so should my concerns be weighed the same as someone who doesn't?

yup.

Quote

AND because I pay cash for the game I think I have the right to an opinion over a Free-player who is trolls the forums. So any argument saying I need to look for a poll is outmoded.

since I pay money too, your privilege has just been checked.

Karl Streiger, on 08 October 2014 - 03:09 AM, said:

OK the poll is indeed biased.

it is a yes or a no question, "do you want to keep it as is?". there is no bias.

[Carthoo]

Livewyr, on 08 October 2014 - 03:16 AM, said:

I am voting to keep the change regardless. (Alpine conquest in a Dire Wolf be damned!)

But I think the Conquest game mode should change. It seems like a skirmish mode with a time limit.
We need more tangible incentives and reasons to take *AND HOLD* a base in the match. (Maybe an AMS screen, a UAV effect.. something.)

Terrible vote, but its yours. For me - CHANGE CQ FIRST, then make MM biased towards it...perhaps Ill even like it. I refuse to play something I do not want to play in hope that "in the nearest future of few years the cq will be modified..."

Kilo 40, on 08 October 2014 - 03:20 AM, said:

since I pay money too, your privilege has just been checked.

Since Im paying founder on prem acc, yours is deleted - if we want to sound childish.

Edited by Carthoo, 08 October 2014 - 03:24 AM.

[Alex Novian]

War is Hell, you don't get to chose the time and place you get to fight for your life.

That being said, This is a direct result of Customizing mech load-outs. Most battle mechs had a weapons load-out set to deal with a wide range of environmental possibilities and situations.

YOU min-max QQ fest whiners that specialize for 1 mode really take away from the universe.

Only way I'd vote to go back to the old way would be if attached to it was a STOCK ONLY mode.

Adapt or DIE

[Thanatos31]

Yes to better match making, BUT also YES to have a look at conquest and make the rewards different (more points or cbills or xp for hold/ capture)

It is part of the appeal to not only make one specialized mech load out or just play one version of a game, but having to be challenged and having to adapt; at least it is for me.

Edited by Phil Ambush, 08 October 2014 - 03:25 AM.

[Hallbor]

I voted to keep the new system as well.
I usually only drop assault and skirmish like most players probably do (almost always in a group), but i don't mind a round conquest here and there.
Like mentioned already, usually conquest is played almost exactly like skirmis. I would guess maybe 1 or 2 matches out of 10 end with 750 points, the rest with the death of all enemies. So you won't need any different Mechs or differen't modules usually.
If the game modes where more different the new system might cause problems, but the way it is now it might not be bad.
At the very least we need it for group matches. More even maches will do more for our fun than the game mode (at least for me).

besides, it can be a refreshing change. If no other reason than because on conquest the big fights are often at different positions compared to skirmish/assault.
A match that isn't decided on alpine by who gets to H9 first is a nice change

[XtremWarrior]

Wintersdark, on 08 October 2014 - 03:00 AM, said:

"I play slow Heavy and Assault mechs, and they suck in Conquest, so I shouldn't have to rarely play Conquest."

"The queues are full of Heavy and Assault mechs; I want role warfare!"

For the same reason I've been against being able to never play on specific maps,I think the game is much improved by players having to account for these factors when choosing a mech. I do think that adding this voting system would be good for maps, though, so you can at least weight the scales and get less desirable maps less often.

I also never use the game mode selection because i like the challenge of not knowing what you're gonna end up with, so your loadout have to be made up to face any situations.
But i wouldn't force everyone to not being able to choose.

Some people find it fun to use the very biggest mech with all the weapons they can put in it (at the cost of having a 40Kph top speed) and they don't know how to play an other way. Those guys are screwed when Conquest comes up.
Even if such a behavior is something i would discourage, you can't blame them for not wanting to be overall good players.

Forcing them into an unapropriate game mode kind of nullify the purchase they made in game before that patch. That's not cool.

[N0MAD]

Levon K, on 08 October 2014 - 02:59 AM, said:

Strange, there's an alarmingly high percentage of hate posts in this thread, all screaming "PGI you suck, revert change, and by the way you suck".

However, the Poll is actually slightly in favour of keeping the new system. Go figure.

Lets look at it this way, we know at least 1k people are going to vote for it, i mean thats how many voted in favor of it in the first place, whereas there were only about 300 people voted against it then, there are already twice that number voting against it now people have actually been informed about it....go figure.

Edited by N0MAD, 08 October 2014 - 03:31 AM.

[Spurowny]

Personally, I don't like the changes to the match maker.

I voted against it's implementation in the original poll and I'm voting against it now, but raging is pointless.

A loud minority is still a minority. If the "no" side is still a minority at the end that is ok.

PGI left this one for us to decide and thats pretty cool, win or lose.

Edited by Spurowny, 08 October 2014 - 03:35 AM.

[Hallbor]

N0MAD, on 08 October 2014 - 03:29 AM, said:

Lets look at it this way, we know at least 1k people are going to vote for it, i mean thats how many voted in favor of it in the first place, whereas there were only about 300 people voted against it then there are already twice that number voting against it now people have actually been informed about it....go figure.

Those votes are from all those people who don't pay very close attention to the forum and where somehow surpriesed by the changes and are now all fired up and all.
Many will probably calm down in a few days once they either have gotten used to it or read enough to understand what exactly was changed and what the point is.

Not to say i can't understand those who have an honest and different opinion, i mean the ragers that only come out of the woods now

[TK TikTok]

PUT THE GAME MODE BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS BEFORE THE PATCH YOU IDIOTS!

[Darwins Dog]

I have always leave every option selected specifically because I am hoping for shorter wait times and closer matches.

I have a question (and no time to search for a possible answer before work). How often have people been getting modes that they don't like? Actually two questions. If no one selects conquest (for instance) is there still a chance that it can come up?

One last thing. I was told that every game mode is the same. Is that not true?

[Thanatos31]

XtremWarrior, on 08 October 2014 - 03:27 AM, said:

Some people find it fun to use the very biggest mech with all the weapons they can put in it (at the cost of having a 40Kph top speed) and they don't know how to play an other way. Those guys are screwed when Conquest comes up.
Even if such a behavior is something i would discourage, you can't blame them for not wanting to be overall good players.

Forcing them into an unapropriate game mode kind of nullify the purchase they made in game before that patch. That's not cool.

Just means they have to find a better load out that works better for a multitude of situations, or just suck it up buttercup, and crawl at 40kph.

[Wolf486]

I want the game modes I selected!

[Chrithu]

Darwins Dog, on 08 October 2014 - 03:34 AM, said:

I have a question (and no time to search for a possible answer before work). How often have people been getting modes that they don't like?

Depends on the people and whether they drop in the 12 man queue or the solo/small group queue. Reports range from only conquest when selecting assault or skirmish to only the selected mode.

Darwins Dog, on 08 October 2014 - 03:34 AM, said:

Actually two questions. If no one selects conquest (for instance) is there still a chance that it can come up?

Yes. A VERY small one but still a mini chance.

Darwins Dog, on 08 October 2014 - 03:34 AM, said:

One last thing. I was told that every game mode is the same. Is that not true?

This also depends on the queue you drop in. In the solo queue (or in PUG land as some call it) regardless of gamemode the best way to handle things is to stay as a group and try to kill all enemy mechs.

In the group queue though with voicecomms at hand and groups outfitted specifically for the mode conquest can actually be quite different to skirmish and assault. But Skirmish and Assault remain basically the same in the group queue as well.

[PRIME MOVER]

You give the option of "improved ELO", and you are still basically at a 50/50 split. Only the makers of this game would consider implementing a change that would greatly alter the game and anger nearly have of its consumers.

I got an idea:
How about you have someone teach you how to improve ELO without screwing up the game.

P.S. The matches will improve once people feel more engaged and have something to play for... Make CW!!!!!!!!!!!

[Livewyr]

Darwins Dog, on 08 October 2014 - 03:34 AM, said:

I have always leave every option selected specifically because I am hoping for shorter wait times and closer matches.

I have a question (and no time to search for a possible answer before work). How often have people been getting modes that they don't like? Actually two questions. If no one selects conquest (for instance) is there still a chance that it can come up?

One last thing. I was told that every game mode is the same. Is that not true?

1: I drop with a bias towards skirmish/conquest..last night out of about 6 games I played (mostly in group, some in solo) I dropped on a conquest.. zero times.
2: Technically: No.
Skirmish- fight to the death. Team with most points in the end wins if timer runs out.
Assault- Attack/defend bases.
Conquest- Gather and hold bases to accrue points. (750 points needed first)
2a: In Practice: Yes.
Skirmish- Fight to the death.
Assault- Fight to the death avoiding bases. (Or on occasion, base rush them and win or lose among insults.)
Conquest- Fight to the death, but first, send lights to cap fringe bases.