972 replies to this topic

[Impyrium]

jozkhan, on 08 October 2014 - 01:25 AM, said:

Once again this is a deviously worded Poll that this time suggests we cant have ELO improvements without the loss of player choice which is absurd.

Why are these polls always stacked like this in their wording?

No, it is worded as to show the strongest reasoning for both choices, that being either a better ELO or proper mode selection. It is not stacked at all. Stop trying to pick apart the poll.

[Amary]

Savage Wolf, on 08 October 2014 - 02:20 AM, said:

But isn't that a problem to be fixed?

Yes and that's why I wanted to give my opinion on this as a game mode should require different tactics.

[N0MAD]

Old system..
People who like to play all modes, check all...happy people..
People who dont like a game mode, check wanted modes.......happy people..

New System...
People have no choice... 50% unhappy people...

I say the new system has something going for it right? right?

[NuKulaR]

Whats the point in selecting sth. if it doesnt have any effect?

[N0MAD]

Tsuki Ookami vas Mugunghwa, on 08 October 2014 - 02:32 AM, said:

yes it is.

they also made a news article for the patchnotes. the first time i have ever seen that. big props for that PGI. maybe people finally stop asking what was in the patch mid-match and just read it up.

Only reason its in the news section of the main page is cause some of us have been hounding them over this for months if not years, and still not till this poopfight they hadnt thought it important enough to do it for the original poll.

[1e0n]

my 5c...

My group hates assault so we drop on skirmish and conquest.
Yesterday out of 10 matches with unchecked assault we got 8 assault matches...out of frustration ppl stooped playing.

[Kilo 40]

Tsuki Ookami vas Mugunghwa, on 08 October 2014 - 02:32 AM, said:

yes it is.

they also made a news article for the patchnotes. the first time i have ever seen that. big props for that PGI. maybe people finally stop asking what was in the patch mid-match and just read it up.

ah. I thought he said it would be up tomorrow. Guess it wasn't as involved of a process as I thought.

[Ren Kurogane]

abstain...

1. i don't have problem from being forced playing game modes i dislike. Or more like, i hated assault and conquest before, now i'm fine (yep, -fine-, not -like-) with both even when i use my less-than-60-kph assault mechs.

2. i never liked suicide-runners, which increased more due to the voting system. Can't blame them anymore, they still do something wrong, but now they do have solid reason for that.

3. i'm torn between tighter ELO and game mode preference

[Naginata]

You implement the option to choose what to play and now I am forced to play Conquest even I deselected it?

Not happy.

[N0MAD]

AUSwarrior24, on 08 October 2014 - 02:33 AM, said:

No, it is worded as to show the strongest reasoning for both choices, that being either a better ELO or proper mode selection. It is not stacked at all. Stop trying to pick apart the poll.

So they got all the accurate info on ELO matching within a few hours of half the population trying this? i mean neither the Asia or Euro pops had even played before it was anounced that the ELO matching was way beter... wait but not in the solo Q there was not real difference there and as we know and been told the Solo Q is by far the largest pool (80%?).
Gathering so much good accurate info was very quick this time or was it convenient?

[Barfing Gopher]

I voted "No." There are already too many things that have made me not want to play as much as I used to.

1. I can't see what map I'm dropping on before choosing my mech. Would I choose my slowest assault short range brawler for Alpine Peaks or my hottest build for Terra Therma? Of course not.

2. Ghost Heat. This is just a way to force players to only build what PGI allows them to or else suffer a severe penalty.

3. 3x3x3x3. While I see the reasoning behind it, it also causes another problem, when I get a new mech I want to grind it to get all the skills unlocked. I have to do this 3x because I can't unlock elite tier skills if I don't. But I can't do that quickly because everyone who also got that mech is trying to do the same thing. So now it takes forever to get into a match with it because there are too many of that weight class in the game.

4. No mode selection. This is just icing on the cake really. Now I'm forced to play modes I don't enjoy playing with builds that aren't good for that particular mode.

Basically, you want to control what I build, what weight class I play, where I play, and now what mode I play. With all that weighing down my "experience" is it any wonder that I might finally say "Why don't you just play it for me too?"

All of these things take away from my enjoyment in order to appease some other group that are complaining because they aren't winning. I don't play this game to be an NPC for PGI, I play it because I like the game.

[That Dawg]

I voted twice, just like I do for presidents.

[Zainadin]

Kilo 40, on 08 October 2014 - 02:27 AM, said:

One guy said earlier he'll only agree to leave it as is, if that option wins in a land slide.

I agree, this 52.5% isn't a fair judgement for the people who don't want it. I actually spend money on the game so should my concerns be weighed the same as someone who doesn't?

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.

[That Dawg]

Make conquest about getting "paid" for capping, and taking risks of capping instead of damage, and I'll play all three again

[RustyBolts]

I voted yes but with a note. The reason I dont like conquest is that it pays less. If it paid the same as the other two game modes I would not have a problem playing it.

[Levon K]

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.

[Wintersdark]

"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.

[Carthoo]

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.

I figured.

First - poll questions were modified in the process.

Second - questions are very hard to understand, if you're not so good in english. And I say its on purpose. Every school boy is capable of making a simple poll:

Do you like the new MM system? A) Yes. No.

[That Dawg]

make conquest pay for capping, and I'd play more of it. Banshee will just learn to adapt
now, its a waste, me and one other guy run from cap to cap and run back to recap to recap and wind up with less than 200 damage and a crap paycheck for a win-
conquest turns into deathmatch EXCEPT for the one or two capping and they can win an 11 to 4 game and get paid like they were AFK with a win? Nonsense

[Knight_Invictus]

I play solo queue almost exclusively. I would prefer the old way assuring game mode.

The new preferance way is ok though.

Thanks,

Knight4Him