208 replies to this topic

[aniviron]

Thanks for the info. Pretty excited about most of this, it sounds like the things that have been "Maybe someday" goals for MWO for a long time are actually getting ironed out into workable systems now. They're not quite what anyone imagined back then, but they're something, and they actually sound workable.

Plus, that screenshot is the first time we've actually seen proof that CW is being worked on.

I don't know how this is going to turn out, but I haven't been this excited for MWO in almost two years.

[Impyrium]

Ejecting



Wanted this for a long time. Though, realistically, considering the way you put it... Paul, am I right in thinking there isn't going to be an animation?

Is there possibly any way a first person animation, or at the very least a pod flying up from the destroyed 'mech, could be implemented?

Drop Deck Change

Also 100% happy with this. IMO it's a fantastic middle point between those that wanted the four 'Mech restriction, like me, and those that wanted tonnage limits. This way we're not going to see decks of just Timber Wolves running about.

Dat Pic

Looks awesome... but I worry... it looks like the entire map is going to focus on that one point. That's a pretty restricted, tiny point, and there's only a single location JJ-less 'Mechs will be able to fire from. Isn't that going to severely restrict gameplay on a map like that?

[Destructicus]

This eject news gave me an ejection.




Also super hyped to finally tonnage restriction in the game in some capacity.

Also
Will we see the cbill rewards be adjusted since it's going to cost us money to actually participate in cw?

Edited by Destructicus, 08 October 2014 - 07:18 PM.

[Cimarb]

AUSwarrior24, on 08 October 2014 - 06:39 PM, said:

Wanted this for a long time. Though, realistically, considering the way you put it... Paul, am I right in thinking there isn't going to be an animation?

Is there possibly any way a first person animation, or at the very least a pod flying up from the destroyed 'mech, could be implemented?

They could use the UAV animation as a base for external viewers, since it looks kind of like that, and just add an explosion with it. Our animation from the inside could just be shooting up out of cockpit - do not really need to have a pilot figure necessarily, but just like startup sequence (legs/arms only)

[Hannibal Chow]

Russ, start upping Pauls caffeine intake?

Can't wait to see this, it all looks awesome.

[Rufus Ingram]

On 4 mechs in dropship:

Really glad we get flexiblity as to weight class of mechs in our dropships. That's great news. Thanks.

[Paul Inouye]

Questions have now been colored this lovely color. Taking suggestions for better colors next time. I need the colors in HEX RGB.

And NO.. I will not use pink!

[Lukoi Banacek]

Paul,

Do Clan Loyalists count as a faction or do we have to fall under an one of the "first-four" for CW?

Secondly, when will my unit be tagged Clan Loyalist ingame? Tag works here on forums, still not showing us as such ingame. Any help coming on that (admittedly minor) item?

[Jman5]

Quote

Drop Ship Mode
Drop Ship mode is being changed to a minimum and maximum tonnage limit rather than a strict 1 Light/1 Medium/1 Heavy/1 Assault limit. For example, we might set the Drop Ship limitation to [140] tons minimum and [240] tons maximum. You MUST take 4 'Mechs meaning you cannot take 2 100 ton 'Mechs and leave the other two slots empty. The available tonnage is restricted to your personal Drop Ship. This means if you take under [240] tons, the remaining unused tonnage is NOT shared with the rest of your team.

Yay!

Oh with regards to ejections, you really need to allow players to shoot up out of the cockpit into the air when they eject. Don't just take them to death/respawn screen. Yes I know it probably wont look that pretty with terrain glitches, but trust me. If I know anything about gamers its that they nit pick this kind of inconsequential crap. You need to have them actually eject. If you don't do this, people will be disappointed. If you do it, people will be happy.

Edited by Jman5, 08 October 2014 - 07:08 PM.

[Rebas Kradd]

Jman5, on 08 October 2014 - 07:02 PM, said:

If you do it, people will be happy.

Not really. It'll push back CW by another 30 days at least.

Eventually they'll get it in.

[ExAstris]

Glad to get confirmation that solo players can still participate in faction warfare.

I don't understand the answer to the final question.

The incentive to defend is to prevent them from getting stuff? That's a terrible incentive. It encourages everyone to 'trade' attacks repeatedly for maximum tokens. SWTOR had this problem in their open battlegrounds at launch. You only got rewards for "flipping" the objective, and so people from both factions would literally stand around next to each other flipping the objective back and forth, then waive and run off.

There needs to be a real incentive for both attacking and defending.

[Sereglach]

This update looks absolutely amazing. I really look forward to even just the first release for Phase 2, let alone the stuff you're already hinting at for the year beyond.

Quote

Q: Is the design goal of planetary conquest to give a match based more on objectives than taking out the enemy forces? To give an exampe, Conquest mode as it exists currently is still primarily focused on taking out the entire enemy team as opposed to winning on capping. Capping is the secondary objective and is the least likely victory condition.

A: MWO is an online multiplayer game that is always going to be focussed on the PVP aspect of a battle. PVE campaigns have been talked about and will be investigated in the new year.

Although I didn't ask this question, I think I can clarify what they were looking for in an answer. I believe they're asking whether future game modes and current game modes will be readjusted/modified to make them more objective oriented than the current modes that we currently have tend to go (which most often end up as team wipeouts rather than objective wins)?

A few examples for this (just throwing out ideas):
-Give assault a major incentive (1K exp and 75k c-bill bonuses as just examples) for winning via base capture, to encourage tactical maneuvering to get into the enemy base and capture it, rather than just wiping everyone out.

-Apply larger rewards for destroying base defenses (as well as assists . . . as it currently stands it is just a fight to get the killing blow), as well as giving winning teams rewards for the amount of base defenses they still have alive in the end. That objective oriented combat prevents undefended cap-races.

-Lessen capture time on Conquest modestly (maybe halfway between what it is now and what it was back in the day . . . as currently it tends to become a race to kill the final targets because you CANNOT flip points in time to force a switch) because as it stands only on the farthest away points on the biggest maps can an assault not respond to a light capping a point from across the map. Create greater rewards for the resources gathered, as well as significantly higher bonuses for assisting in capturing/holding/defending points, to again encourage people to focus on the objectives more than just killing everything in sight.

-Make the capture areas for conquest points mildly larger (maybe significantly larger on bigger maps) and have points NOT give resources if they're being contested. Treat it the same way as Assault, where bases do not go down if they're being contested . . . only don't give anyone points until the skirmish is resolved and someone has definitive control . . . it will encourage people to run away and fight another day at different points. This encourages taking and defending points rather than allowing games to devolve into "ring around the rosie".

Are any of these things possible, either for CW or for even just regular play? It would help game balance, immersion, and game-mode playability immensely. I believe that is the kind of stuff the original question asker was aiming for.

EDIT: After rereading my post, I altered wording slightly in the beginning to sound less course, as that's not what I was aiming for. This is merely to clarify the original question's intent and give potential examples of what the original question is seeking be done.

Edited by Sereglach, 08 October 2014 - 10:50 PM.

[SkyHammyr]

Paul Inouye, on 08 October 2014 - 06:06 PM, said:

Fine.. I'll make it W.

O was used as an example. We'll map it to a non-bound key which players can rebind later.

Wow... You don't even know your own default keybindings?
That makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

[Davers]

While I do see some merits to the Eject function, I don't like it. It devalues mechs that aren't top of their class but are good 'zombie mechs' such as the Atlas D vs the Atlas D-DC. It makes the mechs feel more disposable and makes bringing secondary/back up weapons less desirable. Not to mention how it opens the door for griefing- guess no one is getting a kill on that last light mech ever again.

[Deathshade]

Keep the ball rolling guys and so will the money when you guys get CW popping. I bet you 10 mil cbillz that your player base will double once this kicks in.


It would be nice to get a sneak peak at the UI for it though Can't you just cover up the actionscript vars?

[aniviron]

Davers, on 08 October 2014 - 07:18 PM, said:

While I do see some merits to the Eject function, I don't like it. It devalues mechs that aren't top of their class but are good 'zombie mechs' such as the Atlas D vs the Atlas D-DC. It makes the mechs feel more disposable and makes bringing secondary/back up weapons less desirable. Not to mention how it opens the door for griefing- guess no one is getting a kill on that last light mech ever again.

It needs to be in though, or you open up a significant edge case that I'm sure the devs have discovered- if a mech without any CT weapons is left as a CT with legs, a smart enemy will tell all of their players not to shoot, and the zombie is left with no weapons and no way to influence the battle as well as no way to die. Suddenly the game is 11v12, which sucks.

[White Bear 84]

Paul Inouye, on 08 October 2014 - 06:57 PM, said:

Questions have now been colored [color=#a8e558]this lovely color[/color]. Taking suggestions for better colors next time. I need the colors in HEX RGB.

And YES NO.. I will not use pink!

Awesome, good stuff Paul!

Pink it is!

I think this deserves its own pink poll...

Edited by White Bear 84, 08 October 2014 - 07:28 PM.

[Deathshade]

I wonder what Clanner drop ship they will use and whether I should taunt any clanner that has to drop from an IS ship. rofl

[Roadbeer]

Booooo
Assault Window
Booooo
I really hate to think I waited 3 years to battle Steiner in narrow windows of time.

TL;DR
Lame

Got a little clarification on the subject.

https://twitter.com/...056487624732672

Edited by Roadbeer, 08 October 2014 - 07:50 PM.

[Sereglach]

SkyHammr, on 08 October 2014 - 07:18 PM, said:

Wow... You don't even know your own default keybindings?
That makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

I'm not sure if you're trolling, you're attempting to counter his sarcasm with your sarcasm, or you missed his use of sarcastic humor.

Honestly . . . I thought it was pretty hilarious.