419 replies to this topic

[Mercules]

Hardin4188, on 08 October 2014 - 11:35 AM, said:

A lot of us didn't know about it. Where do we go to find these polls? Does it show up on the main page? Do we have to read their tweets? There is only so much you can do in a day.

Forum post. During the poll it was even stickied up at the top...

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Destructicus, on 08 October 2014 - 11:41 AM, said:

Well didn't they just tell the people who said yes to piss up a rope?

No; they said they wanted a clear winner. There wasnt one.

[Hardin4188]

TygerLily, on 08 October 2014 - 11:39 AM, said:

The original poll had 1,546 participants. That's an adequate sample size for 99% confidence for a population of 300,000,000 with a +- 3.5% variation...

What do your fancy statistics say about the second poll then? The second poll had 2801 participants and 1356 of them voted no. That's almost as much as the total voters in the original poll. I'm certain if the poll was still open it would have even more people voting in it now.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Willard Phule, on 08 October 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

....if only there were a Test Server where this kind of stuff could be tried out, to get the community's opinion.......

But alas, this is still beta and we cant expect anything like that, wait till launch

[Bilbo]

jackal40, on 08 October 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

Wow, you don't get it. The yes vote was by people who don't care what game mode they play in. The no vote was by people who do care what game mode they play. Then add in those who were heavy financial supporters (Founders, Phoenix, Clan I and Clan II) who stated they would leave the game if this stayed.

You know this how? I voted yes and I haven't played assault since turrets were introduced.

[jackal404]

kamiko kross, on 08 October 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:

Except those same people will be raging and crying about getting stomped.......today probably.
What's next on the rage-o-matic I want my way list I wonder?

So the people who said they got stomped AFTER this change was implemented were whining? Somehow they don't deserve to play a game mode they prefer AND to get a decent match?

I don't enjoyed getting stomped repeatedly, but if you do - hey more power to you. I don't believe that this change to the game mode selection would have done much of anything to reduce the number of stomps. Maybe PGI will look into other methods after CW comes out and the competitive teams move to it.

[Felio]

Destructicus, on 08 October 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

I just feel it's disgusting that the people who didn't like the way the vote turned out are able to reverse the decision just because they cried loudest.

Totally defeats the purpose of a voting system.

Are people not allowed to change their minds after trying something? And didn't the first poll take place before the feature was fully explained?

It has nothing to do with the number or tone of posts opposing it. A supermajority was always going to be required to keep the feature. Think of it like an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That's a really big deal that affects everyone, so two-thirds of the U.S. House and Senate have to agree, then two-thirds of the state legislatures have to agree.

[Destructicus]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 October 2014 - 11:43 AM, said:

No; they said they wanted a clear winner. There wasnt one.

If it takes 50% to stop progress but it takes 70% to make it happen then nothing is ever going to change.

[wicm]

THere I just purchased MC as a thank you to PGI for being Responcive. These Guys have familys too, If you like what there doing Buy somthing as a thank you.

[Mercules]

jackal40, on 08 October 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

Wow, you don't get it. The yes vote was by people who don't care what game mode they play in. The no vote was by people who do care what game mode they play. Then add in those who were heavy financial supporters (Founders, Phoenix, Clan I and Clan II) who stated they would leave the game if this stayed.

So what you are saying is that if the 52% who were voting for the change now threaten to leave the game because of the change PGI should change it back?

[Hardin4188]

Mercules, on 08 October 2014 - 11:43 AM, said:

Forum post. During the poll it was even stickied up at the top...

The top of what? General discussion? I'm going to do my best to actively seek out polls from now on, but before I had no idea something so important was going to be determined by a forum poll.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

wicm, on 08 October 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

THere I just purchased MC as a thank you to PGI for being Responcive. These Guys have familys too, If you like what there doing Buy somthing as a thank you.

How much MC you need to get a month of premium time again?

Mercules, on 08 October 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

So what you are saying is that if the 52% who were voting for the change now threaten to leave the game because of the change PGI should change it back?

No, but it they DC and alt f4 that should work

[Rizzelbizzeg]

Weird they stuck to the 70% threshold from the other poll but didn't stick to the "up for at least a week" part of the actual current poll. I didn't even get to play with the change before it's gone.

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

[vortmax]

Just tossing this out: Here's how I would suggest implementing the system (if it's possible):

1) Player (or group) selects Assault & Skirmish game modes.
2) Player (or group) launches.
3) After a short search MM finds a slot in a Conquest game.
4) Game pops up a dialog to the Player (or Group Leader) saying "Would you like to launch in Conquest with more evenly matched teams?" with "Yes" and "No" buttons, "No" being default.
- NOTE:) MM continues searching for Assault & Skirmish matches for Player (or Group) as a fallback for either "Yes" or "No" selection.
5) If Player clicks "yes", team is dropped into the Conquest game.
6) If Player does nothing or clicks "No." the Player (or group) is launched into the first available Assault or Skirmish game found.

I can see how that can be very problematic on the MM programming side, as one game could be held up by inaction on the player dialog.

[spectralthundr]

Destructicus, on 08 October 2014 - 11:30 AM, said:

I was hoping the community was better than this.

This sets a bad precedent, shows that if people ***** hard enough they can get their way.
People only want a voting system if it comes out in their favor, when it doesn't work the way they want it to they do this.

I'd rather they do it in a way that people aren't stuck playing modes they hate, *cough* Conquest *cough* As someone who's put plenty of money into the pot to keep this game going, I for one shouldn't be forced to play a mode where half the players wouldn't know how to cap an objective it it hit them upside the head with a Gauss slug.

[Darth Futuza]

Fut, on 08 October 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:

Don't really understand what's going on.
Wasn't there a poll with 50%+ in favor of the new voting system? Why would they change it?

51% is not a significant majority. As you can see the repoll they did was very evenly split almost nearly 50/50. It wouldn't be fair for them to continue pushing a change that obviously so many disagree with. I wanted the voting system, but I'm happier that they are actually listening to our feedback. Though I'm a little surprised they made the decision so quickly, if it were me I would have given it at least 4 days...this was a very quick decision, that's about the only thing I'm iffy about.

Edited by Darth Futuza, 08 October 2014 - 11:50 AM.

[Jabilo]

Not sure how I feel about this.

As a Pugger I guess I do not care too much one way or another.

My sneaking suspicion is that large Try Hard groups get an advantage over small casual groups by min maxing to a chosen game mode (skirmish), and do not want to give up that advantage.

I am sure that is not the case for everyone but it will be the motivation for some.

It is a shame that dev hours have been wasted that could have been spent elsewhere.

[Tristan Winter]

Shredhead, on 08 October 2014 - 11:15 AM, said:

Bullied into submission. Disgusting display of how reactionary this community can be.

Uh... you do realize he wants to please the players, right? It's not like he's a starving artist and we're crushing his artistic freedom and ability to express himself the way he wants. He's trying to find a way to make matchmaker work in order to please the maximum number of players. People said they found the latest attempt boring and it took away from their enjoyment.

In the end, a lot of people would rather see frequent one-sided matches rather than being forced to play a game mode they don't enjoy. And they informed Russ of that.

If you call that digusting, we have very different opinions of the producer - consumer relationship.

[Destructicus]

spectralthundr, on 08 October 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

I'd rather they do it in a way that people aren't stuck playing modes they hate, *cough* Conquest *cough* As someone who's put plenty of money into the pot to keep this game going, I for one shouldn't be forced to play a mode where half the players wouldn't know how to cap an objective it it hit them upside the head with a Gauss slug.

That's awfully egocentric of you

Some people like conquest, some people like assault.

You don't speak for everyone.

[Mercules]

Hardin4188, on 08 October 2014 - 11:46 AM, said:

The top of what? General discussion? I'm going to do my best to actively seek out polls from now on, but before I had no idea something so important was going to be determined by a forum poll.

Yep... General Discussion. To be fair we chided PGI for not giving us a voice and not putting up something like a poll before making a major change. They listened to us and once again got blasted by us for doing what we told them to do. It's a real "Damned if you do - Damned if you don't" thing we the community have going on with PGI.