174 replies to this topic

[LordKnightFandragon]

Is CW going to come with a host of new maps? Otherwise we will simply be fighting on the same 11 maps just with a different purpose behind it.....we will be fighting for worlds on 11 maps? lol...

[KraftySOT]

Back in WWIIOL/Battleground Europe, the unit I was with, the 31st Wrecking Crew, almost single handidly won one of the campaigns, (though this was when it was horrible unbalanced for the Allies). We took Paris in 24 hours. It was amazing. It was something the devs didnt even think could be done. They had to change rules about capturing things without valid links via the supply line because of what we did.

We had little campaign ribbons, a special forum tag, an announcement and our names on the front page of the website. It was very very cool.

And of course the French and Brits we beat, were crying, and screaming theyll get us next time (which they did eventually) there was much hooplah in the forums and in game. It was really great. And it all only lasted the weekend until the season was reset...then it was forgotten and its game on.

That kind of thing really only happens with seasons.

LordKnightFandragon, on 09 October 2014 - 09:22 AM, said:

Is CW going to come with a host of new maps? Otherwise we will simply be fighting on the same 11 maps just with a different purpose behind it.....we will be fighting for worlds on 11 maps? lol...

Yeah CW has new maps and a new game mode specifically for it. That will be honestly the best part.

[Russ Bullock]

LordKnightFandragon, on 09 October 2014 - 09:22 AM, said:

Is CW going to come with a host of new maps? Otherwise we will simply be fighting on the same 11 maps just with a different purpose behind it.....we will be fighting for worlds on 11 maps? lol...

Well in fact we are going to have some new maps and a new game mode.

However look at any game including WoT - I mean we will never come remotely close to having maps for all planets ( there are thousands ) - essentially we just keep trying to expand the variety fo maps as much as possible and intermixing them into CW in a way that creates the best sense of immersion possible.

[Dracol]

CyclonerM, on 09 October 2014 - 06:55 AM, said:

I have never liked the idea of seasons. At all.

It really kills immersion and defeats the purpose of having a 1:1 timeline, which was cool.

One issue I always had with the 1:1 timeline was the time spread between battles. With weeks/months of transport time between planets in lore, it was clear that battles would not be going on at a daily rate. At least with seasons, the daily CW can take place and the timeline of the invasion is compacted. Sure, we could fight over a planet for a week, but by lore standards the next attack in that corridor would be days if not weeks later.

Another aspect of CW that almost requires the built in mechanic of seasons is the chance of a house/faction becoming overly dominate. Without any resets, if the Clans completely take over the inner sphere, who would stay with an IS faction? What new player to CW would join with a house that has only its home planet left?

My love of battletech lore is out weighed by my desire to enjoy mech combat on a daily basis. Without seasons, I do not believe CW could happen daily. I also believe without seasons CW could not be viable for the long term.

[KraftySOT]

Also I seriously dont want events in the lore that I want to participate in, happen only once...


Because inevitably ill be out of town for them.

[Sadist Cain]

KraftySOT, on 09 October 2014 - 09:21 AM, said:

We just gotta get there first.

Amen, "It does not matter how slow you go, just as long as you do not stop"

On a side note/dreamland what do you reckon to the idea of PGi manipulating faction relationships? Mayhaps a balancing mechanic that could be explored in the seasons would be one where certain faction ally or become opposed.

Obviously that throws a wrench in the 1:1 timeline works or does it?

Personally in the case of significant events, battles etc showing up in the timeline I wouldn't be against a bit of "Developer Discretion" to snowball in some changes (altering bonuses etc.) if the state of the inner sphere is way out of whack in relation to the timeline.
I also wouldn't be averse to seeing some newer things happen.

I would consider a Persistent CW to require by its nature to follow an altered course of history. Kind of like the new star trek movies but with less lens flare.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Russ Bullock, on 09 October 2014 - 09:27 AM, said:

Well in fact we are going to have some new maps and a new game mode.

However look at any game including WoT - I mean we will never come remotely close to having maps for all planets ( there are thousands ) - essentially we just keep trying to expand the variety fo maps as much as possible and intermixing them into CW in a way that creates the best sense of immersion possible.

Thats understandable that there cant be thousands of maps for each planet.

Lets just hope that if the planet is a frozen wasteland, its maybe 4-5 maps that are largely like Alpine, some like Tourmaline all frozen over and maybe a ice cave map.

[KraftySOT]

Sadist Cain, on 09 October 2014 - 09:31 AM, said:

Amen, "It does not matter how slow you go, just as long as you do not stop"

On a side note/dreamland what do you reckon to the idea of PGi manipulating faction relationships? Mayhaps a balancing mechanic that could be explored in the seasons would be one where certain faction ally or become opposed.

Obviously that throws a wrench in the 1:1 timeline works or does it?

Personally in the case of significant events, battles etc showing up in the timeline I wouldn't be against a bit of "Developer Discretion" to snowball in some changes (altering bonuses etc.) if the state of the inner sphere is way out of whack in relation to the timeline.
I also wouldn't be averse to seeing some newer things happen.

I would consider a Persistent CW to require by its nature to follow an altered course of history. Kind of like the new star trek movies but with less lens flare.

Yeah id love at some point, and most of the games I mentioned that had campaigns did this too, for the strategic side to be handed off piecemeal to players, who can rotate through each seasons command positions. Then they could make dynamic alliances, backstab, etc...that would be very cool.

Clearly at first PGI is going to have to manage that, but once it gets refined, some of the decisions on where to attack, who to ally with, could be in the hands of players.

Also you can have PGI step in and keep things on track...but the less of it that is required is better.

Edited by KraftySOT, 09 October 2014 - 09:35 AM.

[KraftySOT]

I mean if for no other reason that it just takes up bloody time and a butt in a seat to sit around making sure everythings cool with the map flow.

Then you have to figure out how not to piss off the people who are winning when youre snatching victory from their hands at the last moment. No one likes that.

Thats why its better to just have winners and losers. No one likes someone coming in and saving you, or snatching your victory from you.

Edited by KraftySOT, 09 October 2014 - 09:39 AM.

[Livewyr]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 October 2014 - 09:21 AM, said:

Ah, but Author Fiat has a place in The Canon. How many Mechs did Main Characters lose only to have a replacement ready?

how many of them were not "well connected" house members. (Grayson was that author's ***** for the first two books.. lol)

[Bront]

Xarian, on 09 October 2014 - 07:21 AM, said:

See, this is how it works:

• This is a video game
  
• People don't like fundamental changes to their competition rankings while they are in the middle of competing
  
• Video games often change fundamental game mechanics in order to make the game better
  
• To prevent whining and gnashing of teeth, the competition must be reset after changing game mechanics
  
• The easiest and best way to do this is in seasons

The alternatives:

• No game updates at all
  
• Or, change game mechanics in the middle of everyone competing using said game mechanics

I'd rather have seasons.

These are good points, but I'd like to expand on it a bit.

Part of what PGI appears to be trying to do is offer a deep CW experience. However, the initial rollout looks to be fairly basic (Planets can change hands, costs will be fixed in some way, nothing beyond extra CBills and loyalty points of dubious import for winning/losing a planet to start). However, they hope to eventually add things like planet ownership bonuses, fortifications, faction rewards, mech restrictions/bonuses, possibly dynamic mech/part pricing based on owned factories and the faction, and other goodies. And, as noted above, simply changing these on the fly could have a huge impact in the middle of Clan Warfare.

The idea of seasons means that the war continues, uncontrolled by anything other than the players and the rules, till either a particular event happens (A faction owns 80% of the map, clans reach Terra, more than 1 faction is reduced only to it's capital planet, etc) or a particular amount of time elapses (3 months at the moment), and then things are "reset". Durring the Reset, it would give PGI time to deploy changes to how CW works, implement new features, offer some balance changes, and perhaps even advance the timeline a bit (So the Clans may start off with more territory, or perhaps using the history of the previous tourny, the map starts out slightly differently in some other way) and we go to war again.

Other things could be gained from this as well. The winning Clan/Faction(s) would get some bonuses for doing well in the season, and factions that did poorly may recieve some kind of benefit for the next round (maybe an incentive to play under that faction's flag that wasn't there before, so that the same war doesn't keep happening as folks flock to the winning team).

The end result, is every season would be different, and while nothing in the war would ultimately be persistent permanently, it could be used to shape events in future seasons. Perhaps Rassalhauge doesn't die, or Laio takes over the world and thus grows in import for the next season, or the Clans end up coming in from another direction to change things up. The possibilities we could explore are endless, particularly if we ultimately aren't bound by lore for how the matches must end (which is the point, the players decide)

[Joseph Mallan]

Livewyr, on 09 October 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

how many of them were not "well connected" house members. (Grayson was that author's ***** for the first two books.. lol)

Who IIRC Beat a Marauder by running in circles around it in a Stock Shadowhawk? author's ***** my ash! LOL

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 October 2014 - 09:43 AM.

[Livewyr]

I certainly do not mind "Phase 2" being seasons.. or even the intro to Phase 3.. but when it is finally more than "minimum viable product" it should be a persistent universe.

If a group gets thrown off they map, they re-enter. (And it will not be that difficult, because if they are throwing all their armies at 2-3 planets while the big sucker that booted them is fighting everyone else at the same time.. they will win them back by overwhelming force. (Que not filling fast enough for those planets.)

WoT Clan Wars balanced itself fairly well.. you had persistent alliances tha owned vast swaths, but even those came to an end. Just like in Risk, the more territory you take and the more enemies you make the more you have to commit to defending your territory, lest you lose it. This system has all the makings of a very good persistent entropy.

Joseph Mallan, on 09 October 2014 - 09:43 AM, said:

Who IIRC Beat a Marauder by running in circles around it in a Stock Shadowhawk? author's ***** my ash! LOL

That was the return. (The first 2/3rds of that book is like reading Game of Thrones...)


(And then he got **** on again in book 2)
(And then in book three)

Edited by Livewyr, 09 October 2014 - 09:46 AM.

[KraftySOT]

Camo and cockpit items for season winners seems like a totally great thematic reward for winning too. Something you can pass out on a fairly scheduled basis (easy to assign workers too)

And if its camo...everyone can see that you won a season. Which is awesome.

Basically if players feel involved and attached to each season, its just as good as a persistent universe.

Persistence would be cool however.

[Joseph Mallan]

Livewyr, on 09 October 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

I certainly do not mind "Phase 2" being seasons.. or even the intro to Phase 3.. but when it is finally more than "minimum viable product" it should be a persistent universe.

If a group gets thrown off they map, they re-enter. (And it will not be that difficult, because if they are throwing all their armies at 2-3 planets while the big sucker that booted them is fighting everyone else at the same time.. they will win them back by overwhelming force. (Que not filling fast enough for those planets.)

WoT Clan Wars balanced itself fairly well.. you had persistent alliances tha owned vast swaths, but even those came to an end. Just like in Risk, the more territory you take and the more enemies you make the more you have to commit to defending your territory, lest you lose it. This system has all the makings of a very good persistent entropy.



That was the return. (The first 2/3rds of that book is like reading Game of Thrones...)


(And then he got **** on again in book 2)
(And then in book three)

I never read books 2 & 3, Now the last Grey Death book was 100% fiat against the Legion. Every thing that could go wrong did! Observant Non rates, Actually Clearing a stronghold room by room!

[Roadbeer]

In addition to my thought on "Seasons"...

Russ, I know we've discussed "assault windows" on Twitter, but I'd just like to expand my thoughts beyond 140 characters.

I understand your desire for them, but IMO you're doing it a bit backwards.

The narrow window is almost a self-fulfilling prophesy for diminishing returns. "CW isn't that popular because a lot of people aren't playing in it". When you have narrow windows, while during peak time, still assesout a lot of people who don't play during peak times and want to participate in CW. It's kind of like the "84% of 'Launches' are solo" when you don't really have a way to give you metrics of how much of that would have been the other way, given an option"

A good example of this is the low populations on your test server when you do narrow windows rather than that time you opened it up for an extended period.

Start out with very wide "assault windows" or none at all, and tighten as needed.

Edited by Roadbeer, 09 October 2014 - 10:05 AM.

[KraftySOT]

Is starting tight and then going wider that different? I assume we'll hit a beta of it first, maybe on the test server or some other form of test and that the starting participation will be low...cause thar be bugs in them thar hills.

Also theres 3 peak times a day, maybe 3 hours a piece...so...9 hours a day there might be CW going on?

[Joseph Mallan]

KraftySOT, on 09 October 2014 - 10:04 AM, said:

Is starting tight and then going wider that different? I assume we'll hit a beta of it first, maybe on the test server or some other form of test and that the starting participation will be low...cause thar be bugs in them thar hills.

Also theres 3 peak times a day, maybe 3 hours a piece...so...9 hours a day there might be CW going on?

Actually I think it would be. The tighter in the beginning the less likely to get a full picture of participation. Less pressure later than sooner.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 October 2014 - 10:07 AM.

[KraftySOT]

Like US peak time is pretty much from when it hits six oclock in Maine, until the sun has gone down in Orange County. So theres a huuuge window to have CW going on.

Joseph Mallan, on 09 October 2014 - 10:06 AM, said:

Actually I think it would be. The tighter in the beginning the less likely to get a full picture of participation. Less pressure.

Great point

[Logan Hawke]

I think seasons are great because it gives a visible goal, allows people to actually affect the overall campaign to the point of actually being able to declare victory, and lets people fight a campaign the whole way through for their chosen faction.

E.G. I want to fight in the battle of Tukayyid on the side of the clans and the side of the inner sphere. I want to be able to drive the freebirths all the way to terra and declare victory, and I also want to send the clanner scum back to where they came from. I want to crush house kurita and champion house kurita, and each time I want there to be a goal that I'm working towards.

In other words, seasons give closure and variety.