83 replies to this topic

[CaptnBlam]

who really thinks forcing people into playing game modes they dont like is a smart decision......i mean seriously.

to be honest...... i dint read all and every post and thread regarding this topic nor do i rage behind my pc.

but now i don't just have to play some maps i really hate the poorly designed --terra therma-- but on top i have to deal with "capture the spots with meaningless names" game mode which i personally just don't enjoy.

i really! hope there is enough voice in the community that it will be changed back no matter what the good intention behind this bad decision was.

[Soul Tribunal]

I think the only change to conquest is our earnings. Make it mean something more to cap those points and it will fundamentally shift things a big.

Plus, they should give us destructables as well to take out like objectives, that, would make it much more fun.

As it stands, I play them all and I am just thankful there is a MechWarrior Game that exists to I can do that.

My thoughts, at least.

-ST

[Russ Bullock]

Thanks for taking the time to make a positive post - as humans we rarely speak up when were happy only when were unhappy.

I don't know if the mode voting will be able to stay in or not, isn't looking good but either way I appreciate it.

[Mawai]

There are a lot of complaints ... it is to be expected.

If you look at the original poll numbers ... despite the fact that it may not have been up that long ... there were about 1500 answers. 20% of these folks ... about 300 players said no. The folks who said no may have had a number of reasons but primarily for one reason or another ... they hate a particular game mode and don't want to be forced to play it. Personally, I hate conquest since the objective is supposed to be capping but the folks who sacrifice their time to cap receive nothing for their efforts ... no cbills, no xp ... so they are left with trying to cap to help ensure a win or running off and playing skirmish looking for the other team and hoping that someone else keeps the team in the capping game.

Anyway, with at least 300 people unhappy with the decision and who knows how many who never even saw the poll ... it is not in the least surprising that there are negative posts on the forums.

Personally, I would like to see cumulative actual mode selection proportions for the player base for the month preceding the new scheme.

What fraction of the players choose:
Any
Conquest+Assault
Assault+Skirmish
Skirmish+Conquest
Conquest only
Assault only
Skirmish only

This data would be inclusive of all players ... it would reflect the actual current choices of the player base ... and would give some useful hard data to base a decision on. Everyone who launches a match without all modes selected has a REASON for leaving out the undesirable modes ... EVERY one of these players is impacted by this change. So ... what fraction of the players does this represent? It is way more informative than a poll which is also worded in a biased fashion "Yes - I want a smaller Elo difference" ... when they have stated that the change has not significantly affected the Elo difference in the solo queue.

[Blakkstar]

Big +1 to this thread. I'm in the same boat. I was quite unimpressed when this game launched, and took about an 18 month break, coming back a few months ago. As a long-time Battletech player and MWO skeptic, I'm ready to get behind this game and root for it to succeed.

The improvements and dev response over the last few weeks has sealed the deal. The game is improving, the UI updates in the latest patch were extremely helpful, and Russ and the dev team are showing signs of "getting it". It's not perfect, but nothing about Battletech ever has been.

My wallet will be open as soon as we get the next decent sale (hint hint).

[BlackIronTarkus]

Well, this make me want to come back.

[Soul Tribunal]

If they cannot remove it from the rotation, make it worth something.
Increase our earnings and speed up the cap time a little.

Do what they do in WG WoWP.
Have some destructibles in there that remove resources from the enemy team.
That will make the mode FAR better and probably remove a lot of anguish.

-ST

[Rambow]

to OP and PGI :


o7

[Jolly Llama]

I guess you all missed the new poll threadnaught. Looks like this stupid "fix" is on the way out. Hopefully it will take 3/3/3/3 with it. Then maybe I will start spending money again...maybe.

Edited by geodeath, 08 October 2014 - 10:05 AM.

[orcrist86]

3/3/3/3 isn't going anywhere

[Jolly Llama]

orcrist86, on 08 October 2014 - 10:13 AM, said:

3/3/3/3 isn't going anywhere

Well, when the server population drops below it being able to find a match, we will see. I foresee that happening in the near future.

[Sadist Cain]

Russ Bullock, on 08 October 2014 - 08:05 AM, said:

Thanks for taking the time to make a positive post - as humans we rarely speak up when were happy only when were unhappy.

I don't know if the mode voting will be able to stay in or not, isn't looking good but either way I appreciate it.

Personally I think that if anything the poll is showing that a new solution be found as right now it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. I think the solution lies in the reasons why people get so polarized over certain game modes.
most of it seems directed at other players.
I've made another thread for the topic (my sig) but i think the solution lies in command wheel and reinforcing teamwork in game to improve quality of matches overall. this would tackle a lot of matchmaker fluctuations too but raising the barr on quality of play and the new player experience.
Sincerly hope you get a chance to read it at some point as it's a very unrealized feature in a lot of games.

And to echo Auswarrior's message, it's good having you down here in the trenches. 07

[Killstorm999999]

Xelah, on 08 October 2014 - 12:39 AM, said:

You should warn people before you get to the blatant lies section of your post. The rest of them were just hazy lie-like constructs, but this is patently false.

Yes, I understand it made no difference for PUGS, but improved the group queue? But its irrelevant because elo doesn't take into consideration the loadout, so its pointless to try to make more perfect elo matches.

[Almond Brown]

Always had ALL selected. Just seemed to add some more "flavor". Now Map selection... RCN could use a check box that never gets filled. LOL!

[Soul Tribunal]

I think the improvement to the matches (and I've felt this directly with ELO) is well worth it at the end of the day.
It hopefully will help us keep the new players too.
No matter what happens people resist change even change they asked for but didn't understand entirely.
What I care about most is the new player experience. And if better ELO rankings and easier games for the newbies is what we get from this(and so far it seems good that way) then that is what we need here.
People will stomp and complain because they didn't get there way. But if their way means the end of the game because it drives the new blood away, that is not something I am willing to accept.

-ST

[LordKnightFandragon]

Where did IGP go anyway? They get fired from MWO?

Now fire HG from the Mechwarrior or robotech or w/e franchise and let MWO have their mechs.

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 08 October 2014 - 11:07 AM.

[0rionsbane]

While i agree that PGI is following community input in this case, it begins to question the direction this game will take when decisions like this are made. Half of the community dose not like this change, and a vocal minority hate it. So if this change goes through you can expect players to leave, that will reduce the benefit of putting us all in one queue. There are better ways to make a single queue, several already suggested ones are c-bill bonus for all modes, match by elo in the game mode selection, fix conquest by a. making its c-bill reward the same, and b reducing cap times, or add more rewards for capping, attract more players with reduced prices/grind, balance pinpoint damage with something less gimmicky than ghost heat (ex. 30 heat cap, scaling dmg reduction for dmg dealt to a component within .5 sec, no weapon convergence, increase weapon base heat, increase engine heat to reduce boaters mobility, make is acs operate like clan acs by spreading damage, or the dreaded cone of fire.).
So while I wont be leaving the game over this move, some people will and it leads this game toward a unsustainable business model. Which will when the player base declines as it has on past divisive decisions lower the games profitability and end up killing it. The FTP model requires a large player base that buys into the game, with out a large player base the FTP model will not be profitable, and it will die. Its a vicious cycle I have seen it many times and though I think this game will last for several years it will need to find ways to attract people not divide them if it intends to be successful. I think if the game continues on this trend it will have to become subscription based to be succesfull.

Edited by 0rionsbane, 08 October 2014 - 11:48 AM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

0rionsbane, on 08 October 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

While i agree that PGI is following community input in this case, it begins to question the direction this game will take when decisions like this are made. Half of the community dose not like this change, and a vocal minority hate it.

Well given the first poll was an even smaller more vocal minority...

[Bishop Steiner]

Rebas Kradd, on 08 October 2014 - 06:15 AM, said:

PGI has always been willing to listen to the community. If I made a list of examples in which PGI has followed community feedback, you'd be surprised.

I don't agree with this decision, but I'll follow it if the community wants it.

half the bad decisions made by PGI were by community demand, lol. And pretty much EVERY bad balancing decision lay in Community QQ.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 08 October 2014 - 01:24 PM.

[The Dreaded Baron B Killer]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 October 2014 - 01:23 PM, said:

half the bad decisions made by PGI were by community demand, lol. And pretty much EVERY bad balancing decision lay in Community QQ.

exactly. most people make those demands because they want their superiority unhindered. whenever anyone mentions LRM boating issues in matches the responses are hilarious "get ams!" "learn to use cover" etc etc... and just goes to show how childish and spoiled the community is.

When the AC20 range was nerfed, yeah it sucked, but ok, playstyle change.. god forbid you play the game the same way over and over.. funny.. people were complaining the game was too repetitive and had no depth... is that the games fault or the players fault I wonder...