419 replies to this topic

[jackal404]

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.

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?

I don't believe that would happen, and no I wouldn't expect PGI to change back to a failed solution. I think what helped PGI see this as a mistake was the number of financial supporters who said they would stop paying, or to use Russ' own words "Vote with your wallet."

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Hardin4188, on 08 October 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

Something like this should have been voted on and then play tested for a few weeks first. At least a few days. But this came as a surprise to a lot of people, not just me.

Yes, TESTED not shoehorned into the live server FOR a test

[WarHippy]

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?

I saw plenty of people in the short time this system was in place that voted yes and complained they were still getting stomped. Perhaps get a grasp on what the problem is before voting away your choice? I for one never complained about the stomps and actually enjoyed playing against better players as that is the best way to improve. This new system got a massive NO from me and I am happy that Russ is reverting something that was a cancerous growth on this game community.

[Mercules]

Hardin4188, on 08 October 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

Something like this should have been voted on and then play tested for a few weeks first. At least a few days. But this came as a surprise to a lot of people, not just me.

It was voted on and then I believe it was up on the playtest server no one ever logs into.

[Sorbic]

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

I thought it would teach them to listen to the majority not the minority

You may need to look up the definition of "majority".

[Big Tin Man]

Well, the question was 'Matchmaker as currently implemented.' As such I would vote no.

I would NEVER EVER run conquest in my DWF. I wouldn't even risk it. If it had an option of allowing me to pick which mech I wanted within that class from mechbay, or even provide a slot for a 'backup' mech (similar to the dropship, but a backup mech in that class) to use once the game and map were selected, I would be all for the voting system.

Maybe it could be coded to give you the option to switch mech if your game mode is not selected (a sour grapes option).

Yes, this would potentially create tonnage issues.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Sorbic, on 08 October 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

They said the vote was going to be up for a week so you can't say "looking for a certain % and didn't get it". I leaned yes but hadn't yet voted in the hopes that Russ might release some more stats after the system had ran for a little while. See if the MM for solo Q narrowed some after a decent sample size.

Odd, Russ said himself they were looking for 70% yes

Where are you getting that he said something else?

[Moonlander]

cSand, on 08 October 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

Well, when people are purposely suiciding, disconnecting, and TKing on match types they don't want, the alternative was to ban ALL of those people... or change it back.

I hate the fact that to those people, those tactics are now validated as they got what they wanted.

The decision makes no difference to me (mostly a pugger )... but still. I can't help but think, you know, PGI has been making a pretty big effort recently to communicate and ask for input, and then they do that, the playerbase responds, changes are carried through, and the players turn on them. They can't win, it must be frustrating.

Well, they tried. It's really sad how vile some people can be towards game devs when they don't get what they want. The sad part is, these people pride themselves on tactics such as these and get zero reprimand. It may or may not have been a good change, I can't say I noticed. I play this game to have fun and I also don't feel I need to belittle anyone at PGI when something doesn't go my way. I would really like to know what makes people feel they're so much better than others.

I honestly don't know what to say... it's just sad that people do stuff like this... I can't imagine how they react to thing in their everyday life. People don't tend to act much different in their everyday offline lives, as much as they like to think they do. I would rather lose their business than to deal with their constant bullying.

[Alienized]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 October 2014 - 11:57 AM, said:

They already did that for the last two years. You think that was better?

and now its going to split the community even more. you think that people that are now upset because that new system gets removed again will pay anything to PGI for listenign to whiney babies?
i for my part am considering to not invest in such things.
there are now people never going to play again because, as someone said, he had fun again as a 2-man-group. and now he hasnt anymore. i guess that counts for many people as well.

[EvilCow]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 October 2014 - 11:59 AM, said:

Yes, TESTED not shoehorned into the live server FOR a test

It must be said that it is not something you can test on a test server because lack of numbers. The change was valid only in a statistic way and that requires numbers.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Destructicus, on 08 October 2014 - 11:57 AM, said:

Now when the next dividing issue comes around the people who didn't like it are going to scream until it's changed.

What you call "screaming" or "whining" etc I call "voicing opinion" and PGI reacting to that I see as "listening"

[LiGhtningFF13]

Hotfix?! Nothing new here guys.

[wicm]

If it was just once in a while I got put in a less desirable match ..that would be nothing. the contrary was true out of 21 dropps i only got my perferd choice 4 times. too mutch

[Roland]

It was a poorly conceived idea to begin with.

If your playerbase is too small to support multiple game modes, the answer isn't to force people to play game modes they don't want to play, because you're just gonna drive away what few players you have.

[Sorbic]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 October 2014 - 12:00 PM, said:

Odd, Russ said himself they were looking for 70% yes

Where are you getting that he said something else?

http://mwomercs.com/...oting-poll-v20/

"So please vote again and I will leave the poll open for at least a week. "

Edited by Sorbic, 08 October 2014 - 12:02 PM.

[Egomane]

I'd like everyone to tone down on the hostility towards players with a different opinion.

We are all here to play the game and all opinions are valid. There is no need to get aggressive over it, just because someone doesn't share the same point of view on this, or any other, topic.

[Shredhead]

Jabilo, on 08 October 2014 - 11:50 AM, said:

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.

No. Real competitive ("tryhard") teams select all game modes, because they have to be firm with all of them. The leagues and tournaments out there use all those modes. I guess many of those who said "No" are terribads that can't adapt to different spawn points and tactics.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Mercules, on 08 October 2014 - 11:59 AM, said:

It was voted on and then I believe it was up on the playtest server no one ever logs into.

link?

Proof?

[Mercules]

jackal404, on 08 October 2014 - 11:58 AM, said:

I don't believe that would happen, and no I wouldn't expect PGI to change back to a failed solution. I think what helped PGI see this as a mistake was the number of financial supporters who said they would stop paying, or to use Russ' own words "Vote with your wallet."

Because none of those who have dropped hundreds of dollars are in the 52% voting yes on it? What I am basically saying is that if now the other side said, "That is it we are going to stop playing and spending money." PGI recourse, having given in once to the threat is to what? Give in again?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Sorbic, on 08 October 2014 - 12:00 PM, said:

You may need to look up the definition of "majority".

I think you may if you think the forums are that