67 replies to this topic

[Toothless]

Skirmish is the only thing that makes it even try to feel like a MW sim. Standing a mech in a laser tag ring to 'capture' a box doesnt make any sense or appeal to me in a Mechwarrior game.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

yay troll thread XD

[Belkor]

Lefty Lucy, on 08 October 2014 - 02:43 PM, said:

Improved match making is important to maintaining a player base. A large portion of the playerbase will be upset with *any* change to the game. Over half of us liked the change, and the other half might have learned to play something other than death match if you'd actually stuck with your guns for two weeks.

What a fascist. So people not enjoying the ring around the rosie cap in conquest is forced to play it? Sorry but I don't play the game to run around capping. I play the game to blow up mechs. Also if you think the minor improvement in elo will make a noticeable different, you're due for a reality check.

[VanillaG]

Intelekt, on 08 October 2014 - 03:26 PM, said:

No offense but I play with a group of 10-12 at all times, with close to 60 members we always have large groups, and there are ZERO players who thought this change was a positive thing, so I am struggling to find out where all these nonsensical statistics are coming from...

Lances and groups are formed with a specific game type in mind, and planned as such. To everyone saying "just suck it up and play", you clearly miss the nuance of the game, and that efficient tonnage for once game type is CERTAINLY not the same for another.

This is why you have imbalances in the group queue. You have a large team min/maxed for a specific game mode. You have forced the game mode and loaded your large team with optimized and complimentary mechs while the match maker is forced to pull together other teams to force them into a fight that they most likely are not optimized for.

This type of game play is actually less nuanced because you control most of the variables. The only thing that you don't control is the map and if you had a chance at that your team build would be even more skewed. Your team composition would change if you had to account for multiple game types which would lead to more diversity and nuance as each team has to tackle a harder problem with a larger range of solutions. It would most likely lead to multiple meta based on team composition instead of a static meta for each game mode.

[KraftySOT]

I love that some of these replies boil down to: "I BLOW UP MECH...NO CHASE OBJECTIVE...MORE SPLOSIONS"

The only reason not hamfisting these people into matches they dont want to play, is because theyre immature ******. Which...you cant do anything about. So instead of them polluting up matches they dont like, trolling and QQing, its better it just goes back to the way it was before.

Theres a reason they dont dump the deathmatch CoD kids in with the Conquest CoD kids...they dont play nice together.

It was a nice experiment, and honestly screw the people who are so singular minded that they cant enjoy something to change up the grind, but seriously its better to just wait the extra time to get into the match you want.

I feel the opposite about PGI tho. They listened. Twice. They made a change we wanted, they tried it, there was outrage, they fixed it.

Thats rad.

[Penance]

Possibly slightly off topic....what do you guys think about how games are prepared overall. I mean do you like the total randomness of not knowing the map you'll be on? Would you also like a preference of maps?

How many times have you picked a mech, let's say one with 6 SRMS's, only to be put on the "open mountainous you need LRMS to really be useful here maps"...yes, this just happened, call me a little bitter.

[Squally160]

101011, on 08 October 2014 - 03:09 PM, said:

Yeah...option A, while valid, will pretty much never actually happen. Seriously. Drop conquest 25 times (without having the overwhelming majority of players on comms) and tell me exactly how many times your entire team avoids combat. Option B is just stupid. Any team trying to do that would get rolled, for the exact same reasons that a team splitting up in five directions in skirmish would get rolled. Perhaps you do not like conquest, that is fine. Using piss poor strategies and claiming that they are the norm is ignorant, however, just as ignorant as me saying that all Assault rewards is people sitting on their base the whole match and waiting for the other guys to make a move.

Why would I play solo when I have buddies on comms to play with?

Teamwork OP.

[Johnny Z]

Penance, on 08 October 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

Possibly slightly off topic....what do you guys think about how games are prepared overall. I mean do you like the total randomness of not knowing the map you'll be on? Would you also like a preference of maps?

How many times have you picked a mech, let's say one with 6 SRMS's, only to be put on the "open mountainous you need LRMS to really be useful here maps"...yes, this just happened, call me a little bitter.

If they added map selection on top of mode selection there wouldnt be a decent solo queue left. It would be a synch drop nightmare.

My experience lately as a rule the group queue has closer matches than the solo queue. They have both been fairly decent but the solo has some bad synch drop matches.

What ever way they come up with instead of this mode vote that is being taken out, maybe players who are mad they cant effectively synch drop anymore will be wishing they had went with mode votes instead.

Dont let anyone saying synch dropping is ok. It isnt its groups on ts dropping onto both teams to create stomps.

I honestly have no idea how often this is done, but if anyone doesnt like it, make those stomps last as long as possible so they dont troll any other matches.

This is one of the reasons some players dont like conquest as well. Their fat stomp ball of assault mechs cant react to the other team trying for caps as easily. Their second least favourite is base defense because again the would be stompies have some fire power in the base to help slow down a roll.

Edited by Johnny Z, 08 October 2014 - 04:04 PM.

[Pjwned]

It lasted slightly over a day.

I know people were getting upset about it but that's ridiculous, not to mention the people that were fine with the mode voting are now disappointed because it's back to worse matchmaking again.

Sigh.

[Squally160]

Johnny Z, on 08 October 2014 - 04:00 PM, said:

If they added map selection on top of mode selection there wouldnt be a decent solo queue left. It would be a synch drop nightmare.

My experience lately as a rule the group queue has closer matches than the solo queue. They have both been fairly decent but the solo has some bad synch drop matches.

What ever way they come up with instead of this mode vote that is being taken out, maybe players who are mad they cant effectively synch drop anymore will be wishing they had went with mode votes instead.

Dont let anyone saying synch dropping is ok. It isnt its groups on ts dropping onto both teams to create stomps.

I honestly have no idea how often this is done, but if anyone doesnt like it, make those stomps last as long as possible so they dont troll any other matches.

This is one of the reasons some players dont like conquest as well. Their fat stomp ball of assault mechs cant react to the other team trying for caps as easily. Their second least favourite is base defense because again the would be stompies have some fire power in the base to help slow down a roll.

Sync dropping... really?

Who does that crap. Nobody worth even worrying about honestly, because if they can carry a game, they are off playing group q together on purpose.

[101011]

Squally160, on 08 October 2014 - 03:55 PM, said:

Why would I play solo when I have buddies on comms to play with?

Teamwork OP.

Please show me where I said you had to play solo? Nice to see that you chose to ignore my entire paragraph to respond to a comment I did not even make.

[Penance]

Johnny Z, on 08 October 2014 - 04:00 PM, said:

If they added map selection on top of mode selection there wouldnt be a decent solo queue left. It would be a synch drop nightmare.

My experience lately as a rule the group queue has closer matches than the solo queue. They have both been fairly decent but the solo has some bad synch drop matches.

What ever way they come up with instead of this mode vote that is being taken out, maybe players who are mad they cant effectively synch drop anymore will be wishing they had went with mode votes instead.

Dont let anyone saying synch dropping is ok. It isnt its groups on ts dropping onto both teams to create stomps.

I honestly have no idea how often this is done, but if anyone doesnt like it, make those stomps last as long as possible so they dont troll any other matches.

This is one of the reasons some players dont like conquest as well. Their fat stomp ball of assault mechs cant react to the other team trying for caps as easily. Their second least favourite is base defense because again the would be stompies have some fire power in the base to help slow down a roll.

i was annoyed when posting.


PSA: DON'T POST WHEN ANGRY AFTER PLAYING

[Bhael Fire]

Squally160, on 08 October 2014 - 02:49 PM, said:

I play skirmish. Out of all the game modes, its the only complete one.

Conquest: Merry -go-round with no reason to go around.
Assualt: Both teams are defenders, there is no assaulting side.
Skirmish: TDM, as advertised.

Squally160, on 08 October 2014 - 03:01 PM, said:

Conquest is the mode that rewards NOT fighting.

I find this absurd. All three modes are essentially Team Death Match and can be played that way regardless of how the other team plays.

Actually all three modes can be described by the level of mobility they require to play effectively.

Skirmish requires the least mobility and has very static "camp mentality" gameplay.

Assault tries to shake things up a bit by adding a small amount of threat to get you to move your ass out of your comfy camping position if the other team manages to damage your base significantly (but most of the time you can completely ignore your base).

Conquest requires the most mobility and situational awareness of the three...but you can still play Conquest like Team Death Match. You just have to make sure you keep up on points while engaging the enemy at the same time or utterly obliterate them as fast as possible. Of the three, it requires the most tactical skill....but it's still basically Team Death Match.

[Mechteric]

It is a shame, but it is understandable why they chose to repeal the change only so far as because that's what so many were used to (people tend to dislike change). Obviously the story would be completely different if this were to have happened at open beta instead of now, but that's just how things roll.

Clearly the way forward is to improve game modes to make sure more people want to play all game modes, and if they're really clever have an active voting procedure instead of a passive one.


By "active" I mean when 24 people are matched together by Elo, show a UI which gives each player an active vote of say 5 mixed maps with modes indicated, and ~30 seconds later will be dropped into. Whichever passes the active vote is played. To further improve the experience, after the match is over allow anyone who wants to continue playing with their matched friends/enemies the chance to do so. (similar to a public "lobby" kinda like what you see in other games). Just some ideas.

[keith]

the change was good. what happens in the future when PGI gives us say 2-3 more game modes? going to assume CW gives us that many. no way we can chose our own game mode it always going to be on random

[GentlemanBryan]

The Clan ERLL has changed PGI/Russ.......the range went from 810m to 740m...this is not right, correct??

[Mechteric]

MAVRICK64, on 08 October 2014 - 04:30 PM, said:

The Clan ERLL has changed PGI/Russ.......the range went from 810m to 740m...this is not right, correct??

Not important nor relevant to the topic.

[Mcgral18]

MAVRICK64, on 08 October 2014 - 04:30 PM, said:

The Clan ERLL has changed PGI/Russ.......the range went from 810m to 740m...this is not right, correct??

750M is the TT range, so yep, pretty close.

[RazorbeastFXK3]

I honestly haven't paid much attention. I just join and adapt.

Penance, on 08 October 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

Possibly slightly off topic....what do you guys think about how games are prepared overall. I mean do you like the total randomness of not knowing the map you'll be on? Would you also like a preference of maps?

Plenty of times, but you know what? EVERY map has a spot where having a strong short range punch is better than having a strong long range reach.

Countless times I'll run up to an opponent's 'mech designed to keep their competitors at range and tear them apart 'cause they're too busy hitting their coolshots or waiting for their heat gauge to fall low enough for them to strike again.

Penance, on 08 October 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

How many times have you picked a mech, let's say one with 6 SRMS's, only to be put on the "open mountainous you need LRMS to really be useful here maps"...yes, this just happened, call me a little bitter.

[EDIT]Lefty Lucy.. They listened. It was in the forums about what was planned.. they even had an online meeting/gathering where everyone was allowed to attend and add their two cents to everything to be taken into serious consideration but the population wasn't 100% (as I wasn't there to partake).

Conquest is there to add something more to the game instead of "Join.. locate opponent.. kill.. end battle.. join.. locate opponent.. die.. end battle.. repeat.." As well as Assault where instead of taking on the opponent, you sneak around them and "assault" their base along with the turrets (which were a nice added bonus to help make it a bit more difficult for the enemy team to just slide right in with no resistance). The option to "Skirmish" is in all three game modes which means you don't HAVE to run to the points or to their base to win the battle.. you CAN seek and destroy the opposition by ripping all their 'mechs apart.. so I don't really see the grounds from which you have to stand on and complain about anything.[/edit]

[EDIT2]Match-making seems a bit better now than it was last week to me. I'm not finding myself in losing battles as often where my team gets completely annihilated. It seems a bit slower but I'm guessing it's just working that much harder to find a team that closely matches my poor battle history.[/edit2]

Edited by RazorbeastFXK3, 08 October 2014 - 04:46 PM.

[Squally160]

101011, on 08 October 2014 - 03:09 PM, said:

Yeah...option A, while valid, will pretty much never actually happen. Seriously. Drop conquest 25 times (without having the overwhelming majority of players on comms)

Sounds like "drop solo" to me.

also, solo q, since, even if I am not on comms w/ 10 of the other people, they might be on comms together.