83 replies to this topic

[Mr Beefy]

Deathlike, on 19 October 2014 - 09:25 AM, said:

Um... PGI's current design of the objections are faulty, and are played in the manner that reflects winning. The players are not at fault for doing what they think is best for winning. So, the reality is that the fault actually solely on PGI.

I know the players have wanted "the other objectives" being primary, but the matches IN GENERAL are played 90% like Skirmish. This is not somethings that I'd like to exaggerate. Again, the sole responsibility of this behavior is PGI's.

Note: There have been threads discussing how PGI could improve Conquest and Assault... and AFAIK PGI has not put enough effort into it previously, and what we get is exactly the result of not doing much for the modes.

I agree with you that in game rewards and the objectives completed to get them need a serious look at and over hauled by PGI. What I can not agree with you on is a blanket statement saying, "The lack of the players not following primary objects in a event is PGI's fault" We are in fact talking about two very different things here.

1. The have put the objectives forth in the event challenge for us as a player base to choose to try to get the most points each game played in. They have made it more rewarding to take the base in assault mode, and in getting the most cap points in conquest mode. These are listed as primary objectives in these two modes and give 50% more points for the event each game played that these very simply objects are met by the team playing.

2. If any of the player base doesn't like the game mode, and simply want a death match, click off the damn check marks in your match mode box and have fun doing what you love to do the best! Its that simple, unless you are a complete tool and like not trying your best to contribute to your team and the player base as a whole. If players that don't do this, how can PGI be at fault because of faulty rewards on a game mode. It is kinda funny, they did update and increase the conquest rewards for capping if I am not mistaken, right?

I am not trying to be a$$ about this, but why do the players that are playing this way still in the modes they don't like? They got their choice back, and you would think if they are gonna log in they would play the mode they like, and wait, if they did that and followed the objectives in there choice of game mode, OMG..... it would be greater rewards to the whole player base. If PGI is really trying to turn a new leaf and change things we think need to be improved....shouldn't we all be trying to make this a better player base too by dropping all the toxic and immature BS that some pull in what, protest, just to be a a$$?

This is really simple, if you will not try to follow the match mode you picked and its Primary objectives every game you drop, please only check the modes that suits the objectives you will follow. Thank you and good luck

Edited by Mr Beefy, 19 October 2014 - 10:00 AM.

[Psydotek]

*ahem*

It's TEAM deathmatch.

[Deathlike]

Mr Beefy, on 19 October 2014 - 09:37 AM, said:

I agree with you that in game rewards and the objectives completed to get them need a serious look at and over hauled by PGI. What I can not agree with you on is a blanket statement saying, "The lack of the players not following primary objects in a event is PGI's fault" We are in fact talking about two very different things here.

1. The have put the objectives forth in the event challenge for us as a player base to choose to try to get the most points each game played in. They have made it more rewarding to take the base in assault mode, and in getting the most cap points in conquest mode. These are listed as primary objectives in these two modes and give 50% more points for the event each game played that these very simply objects are met by the team playing.

2. If any of the player base doesn't like the game mode, and simply want a death match, click off the damn check marks in your match mode box and have fun doing what you love to do the best! Its that simple, unless you are a complete tool and like not trying your best to contribute to your team and the player base as a whole. If players that don't do this, how can PGI be at fault because of faulty rewards on a game mode. It is kinda funny, they did update and increase the conquest rewards for capping if I am not mistaken, right?

I play all modes (especially since Conquest is rewarded better at the moment... for C-bills).

I had a match where everyone on our winning team decided to listen AND not kill the capping Kitfox that had zero weapons (it was stripped) Crimson Strait. Everyone collected, and went home happy, because the cap win happened.

In a different match on the same map, the match was a lot more hectic. I was trying to survive an onslaught of mechs.. only to find out the last mech standing was a D-DC that had its weapons stripped (found out too late really)... and I still had some "bloodlust" left. I wished we could have gotten a cap win on that, but at that point, it "felt right" due to the circumstances.

When you have a pack of (twelve/a dozen) wolves, and then you try to tell them "STOP HUNTING", the likelihood of getting them to "stand down" is just hard to do. This is human nature we're talking about... and not "logic". When you are under duress, logic is thrown out the window, and "natural instincts" happen.

Just because "capping" a base nets you 20 pts, it doesn't actually mean it's a good idea when the opfor is looking for you trying to cap, and take advantage of this behavior. In fact, I played against the same 12-man twice trying to cap us, and saw them failed because we caught them in advance. It SIMPLY isn't going to work, based on the CURRENT CONDITIONS of the match types.

Quote

I am not trying to be a$$ about this, but why do the players that are playing this way still in the modes they don't like? They got their choice back, and you would think if they are gonna log in they would play the mode they like, and wait, if they did that and followed the objectives in there choice of game mode, OMG..... it would be greater rewards to the whole player base. If PGI is really trying to turn a new leaf and change things we think need to be improved....shouldn't we all be trying to make this a better player base too by dropping all the toxic and immature BS that some pull in what, protest, just to be a a$$?

This is really simple, if you will not try to follow the match mode objectives every game you drop, please only check the modes that suits the objectives you will follow. Thank you and good luck

It's not about choice... it's about human nature and reality. Since it is possible to play EVERY match type in the same manner 90% of the time, it should not surprise anyone that it is the most LIKELY result because of it. I don't mind playing the objective, but doing that as currently constituted is exploitable by the opposing team, and trying to get a cap win on Assault... let alone Conquest becomes infinitely harder to accomplish.

Edited by Deathlike, 19 October 2014 - 10:11 AM.

[Mr Beefy]

I have also have a few matches that our teammates was more than happy to stop the "hunt/killing" for the better reward on both fronts. If a match is 9-9 or 10-10 and its to close to stop the killing, those are not the matches I am talking about. In those cases, I agree with you, its hard to stop the blood lust.

In any other set of circumstances, I am sorry I can not agree with you and IMO, its a BS excuse. I have dropped with some really decent pugs, that have self control and even if they are blood hungry and want to get the kills, have been willing to look at the bigger picture and complete the primary objectives of the given match.

The problem is this, I have seen a greater number of matches go the way the one I explained went. Players that should not have dropped in a Assault or Conquest match because regardless if their team can complete the primary objective, they make sure we don't. That is the difference, and any other reasons given to make excuses are completely BS. This game was founded on the concept of a thinking man's shooter right? Well, making it that way starts with the players, no matter how we the base feels PGI has not delivered on this, we always have a choice. The objectives they put forth in this event seem to be very simple and if we as a base of players won't try to complete them given the mode we are in, its our own damn fault.

If we as a Player base go out of our way to and try not complete them, what a childish thing to do.

[MoonfireSpam]

As far as conquest goes, capping is great if you get a coordinated team that knows when to disengage.

Usually what happens is one side gets outgunned and dies leaving the team at a 2-5 person disadvantage which is just too much.

[Deathlike]

Mr Beefy, on 19 October 2014 - 10:30 AM, said:

In any other set of circumstances, I am sorry I can not agree with you and IMO, its a BS excuse. I have dropped with some really decent pugs, that have self control and even if they are blood hungry and want to get the kills, have been willing to look at the bigger picture and complete the primary objectives of the given match.

It's not a BS excuse. It's a reality.

Let us remove the tourney from the discussion for a moment. Let's just talk about the game modes AS THEY ARE CURRENTLY.

How often is a based capped in Assault (be honest and give a real percentage)? The reality is, it's LESS THAN 20%.

For a game in Conquest, how often is a CAP WIN? Just like the above, it's also LESS THAN 20%.

So, we now "incentivize" those particular two objectives for the tourney or more appropriately... the "event". How often do you think people will complete the primary objective? It's not going to be high.

Quote

The problem is this, I have seen a greater number of matches go the way the one I explained went. Players that should not have dropped in a Assault or Conquest match because regardless if their team can complete the primary objective, they make sure we don't. That is the difference, and any other reasons given to make excuses are completely BS. This game was founded on the concept of a thinking man's shooter right? Well, making it that way starts with the players, no matter how we the base feels PGI has not delivered on this, we always have a choice. The objectives they put forth in this event seem to be very simple and if we as a base of players won't try to complete them given the mode we are in, its our own damn fault.

If we as a Player base go out of our way to and try not complete them, what a childish thing to do.

Dude, the thinking man's shooter "title" was removed long ago, especially with the introduction of 12v12 into the game. In Assault, worrying about being capped was an actual issue, but yet capping a base succeeded less than 20% of the time (IIRC, it was a number Russ or someone else provided at the time... before 12v12 AND before turrets).

I'm trying to give you an honest answer about a situation that is NOT the player's fault. The players themselves play a particular way because generally they believe that doing it as such produces a win more often than not. If capping a base lends to winning more often than not, they would do it. It has ZERO to do with being selfish... it has more to do with the underlying logic.

Using Conquest as an example... which do you think is easier to do?

1) Cap all locations as much and as long as possible, to get a cap win.

2) "Cap" all the mechs as many as you can, so that less of them can cap or counter cap you?

In today's MWO, #2 is the preference. #1 is ONLY executed if the team numbers are reduced, or the cap locations are far enough to generate a cap win (something like Tourmaline or Terra Therma exhibit this behavior, due to cap distances).

If cap locations were easier to cap, most of that time would be spend looking for targets to kill. This is seriously what happens and the logic behind it.

It can be argued that is is "selfish" of you to demand people to do a cap win on either Assault/Conquest... while it can be "selfish" to blow up more mechs to feed the k-d ratio. The reality is... people will play what gets them the win above all else.

What's worse is a very set of different behavior occurs in a "true tourney", where selfish kills and a whole host of other non-team friendly stuff is exhibited for all to see, watch, and repeat. There, a "half-arsed effort" of teamwork exists. This is a reality of MWO... deathmatch reincarnate instead of "thinking".

Edited by Deathlike, 19 October 2014 - 10:59 AM.

[Mr Beefy]

Death,

I hear what you are saying. I could be wrong, but I don't think ramming it in as a reason what play style players choose to play in a game mode will fix it any sooner. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't PGI aware many in the player base are not happy about the lack of rewards to make players want to complete real objectives. We all get that there need to be major rework done on match modes, maps, rewards, objectives, etc. etc. but it is almost as you are trying to say, Our computer screens have subliminal messages on them...flashing


Don't think, shoot, kill the all the enemy mechs, its the only rewarding/correct game play choice....and magically our joysticks and mice have to follow the flashing messages and we can't turn auto pilot off.

In the match I was in, Mr. A had a choice, and he ran around for two mins, chasing a light and made it a point to kill that light, the last enemy mech. The rest of his team was on the base, and about 60 seconds from completing the main objective. He then types "LOL" in the chat, I think that pretty much sums it up.

It's kinda funny to me that I remember one of the haters of the new MM and his argument on why he hated it and would drop out of any game mode he didn't want. He said, " how would you guys feel if you was forced to play a game mode you didn't want to play every game?" and "and you are taking away my choice." Well, Mr. A took away 11 of his 12 teammates choice when he didn't click off the two game modes he has no intention of trying to achieve the Primary objectives on. Its just Icing on the cake that he went a step further and killed the last enemy mech to stop his team from capping the base, and getting the better rewards for our team.
Looks like he and any others that drop in game modes they don't like playing are taking away our choice to be able to play them the as the primary objective is the goal. Work together as a team... yeah I know who would of thought that could happen in a pug. So we do work together that game, and one a$$hat that knows better, waste the entire teams effort.

Edited by Mr Beefy, 19 October 2014 - 11:54 AM.

[Scratx]

Chagatay, on 17 October 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

Playing the most effective way to win (killing the other team) is the correct action. While I certainly would like varied play the game mechanics, the small arena deathbowl maps, ever increasing firepower and short ttk, the inability to cap at a reasonable rate, etc etc etc, do not favor the "primary objective".

Tell that to the guys who finished off a lamed Centurion in River City Conquest mode..... when we owned all the bases and were at 743 f'ing points.

Yep. Sure win, and they still flippin' went for the kill.


No wonder matches play like deathmatch. Too many people don't care about the match objective even if a reward is dangled under their nose and the match is all but won already.

[Mr Beefy]

Scratx, on 19 October 2014 - 11:54 AM, said:

Tell that to the guys who finished off a lamed Centurion in River City Conquest mode..... when we owned all the bases and were at 743 f'ing points.

Yep. Sure win, and they still flippin' went for the kill.


No wonder matches play like deathmatch. Too many people don't care about the match objective even if a reward is dangled under their nose and the match is all but won already.

And this is what I am talking about..... BINGO ^^^^^^^^^^^^DING...DING...DING!^^^^^^^

If this is the reasoning behind and excuses for players just doing what gets the wins, what ever it takes instead of trying to follow the very simple, straight on objective, only ONE at that, and many just say F it.... how in the hell is CW going to be any different then what we have now? Regardless if PGI hits it out of the park and does something great with its design, or not, How is our choices, and how we play the game, what mechs we shoot or don't shoot, objectives we choose to complete have to do with PGI's design again?
Lets take the current game mode out of it, and say we was in a AI game, with missions, those missions have objectives in them, and if you don't complete the primary ones, you don't proceed in the game story. You have to do it over again till you do complete them.

What do you do??? You have all these mechs to kill, do you do that at all cost, even though that is not the Primary objective to gain more rewards, move forward in the game? Why since we have the freedom that a FPS grants us, and the lack of a single player do some choose to ignore and go out of their ways to not try to complete the Primary objectives in the game mode given?

These guys are just using what ever BS reason they have to justify why they don't play in the mode that rewards them and the entire player base the best way for this weekend. With the mentality of some of the player base here, Gee I wonder how CW, no matter what they make it be, really good or really bad will play out? Seems like it is pretty clear to me how it will play out given the reasons why for the style of play I have seen and the match scratx was in. Only one's that can change that is the players playing the way they choose to play, not PGI, lol.

Edited by Mr Beefy, 19 October 2014 - 12:25 PM.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

The complaints are legit. Welcome to MWO.

[Rebas Kradd]

Not enough disparity between the "primary objective" goal (20 points) and the "kill them all" goal (10 points). The latter was worth half the former, and since killing the enemy is about twice as easy as the primary objective (and/or twice as fast, thus letting you play more matches), the risk wasn't worth the reward. Might as well just play for kills.

You'd probably have to drop the "kill them all" goal down to about 5 points if you want to get people thinking about the objective.

[Mr Beefy]

Rebas Kradd, on 19 October 2014 - 12:29 PM, said:

Not enough disparity between the "primary objective" goal (20 points) and the "kill them all" goal (10 points). The latter was worth half the former, and since killing the enemy is about twice as easy as the primary objective (and/or twice as fast, thus letting you play more matches), the risk wasn't worth the reward. Might as well just play for kills.

You'd probably have to drop the "kill them all" goal down to about 5 points if you want to get people thinking about the objective.

PGI has already rolled back and fixed this for players who feel this way, giving them their choice and it only requires to uncheck two checks in the match box.

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

The only thing they could do to change this would be to make the primary goal worth more. If a base cap was worth 2,000,000 Cbills and 2,000 GXP (extreme case) Only idiots wanting to pad their KDR's and already have too many Cbills would blow that off.

[Glythe]

The game became a death match only game for the most part when bases became defended by turrets and the cap times became ridiculous. One or the other would have been fine.

There used to be this thing called fast cap and you can blame that meta for the long capture tim

"Conquest gives the most rewards"..... except that it is stupid now because it takes too long to capture the points.


So basically now this game IS a fps shooter with robot skins that has no end game content.


The problem with the challenge is as you said that a lot of people already have that mech. They should have given pilots who already have the mech a direct CB payment equal to the discount to make them participate.

The other problem with this event is that you need 250,000 for 45% and 450,000 for an extra 5% more. Lol what? That should have been something like a 65% discount. The Bar is too high and no one cares.

It will end at 45% and that will be a nice discount. Maybe if they do this for all the clan mechs they will be affordable for free to play folk. That would be a nice move imho.

Edited by Glythe, 19 October 2014 - 12:45 PM.

[Chrithu]

Chagatay, on 17 October 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

Playing the most effective way to win (killing the other team) is the correct action. While I certainly would like varied play the game mechanics, the small arena deathbowl maps, ever increasing firepower and short ttk, the inability to cap at a reasonable rate, etc etc etc, do not favor the "primary objective".

QFT.

You need not need to read further than that. The problem isn't about the rewards, and surely isn't solved through them. As long as the combination of maps, game mode mechanics and balancing make playing death match the most effective and therefore plain out best winning strategy this game will remain a simple arena deathmatch in mechs rather than the strategical mech shooter it could be.

Edit:

In my view though that's not necessarily a bad thing though. Besides the issues in details of balancing (that by the way any MMO has so I usually don't bother about them) and the known shortcomings in matchmaking MWO does a damn good job at being Arena Deatmatch in Mechs.

I for one am currently waiting to see how CW will play out and what CW phase 3 will. Before that is done I think any discussion however constructive about the gamemodes is effort better saved for when the team has time to actively work on modes again.

Edited by Jason Parker, 19 October 2014 - 01:08 PM.

[Deathlike]

Mr Beefy, on 19 October 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

If this is the reasoning behind and excuses for players just doing what gets the wins, what ever it takes instead of trying to follow the very simple, straight on objective, only ONE at that, and many just say F it.... how in the hell is CW going to be any different then what we have now? Regardless if PGI hits it out of the park and does something great with its design, or not, How is our choices, and how we play the game, what mechs we shoot or don't shoot, objectives we choose to complete have to do with PGI's design again?
Lets take the current game mode out of it, and say we was in a AI game, with missions, those missions have objectives in them, and if you don't complete the primary ones, you don't proceed in the game story. You have to do it over again till you do complete them.

What do you do??? You have all these mechs to kill, do you do that at all cost, even though that is not the Primary objective to gain more rewards, move forward in the game? Why since we have the freedom that a FPS grants us, and the lack of a single player do some choose to ignore and go out of their ways to not try to complete the Primary objectives in the game mode given?

These guys are just using what ever BS reason they have to justify why they don't play in the mode that rewards them and the entire player base the best way for this weekend. With the mentality of some of the player base here, Gee I wonder how CW, no matter what they make it be, really good or really bad will play out? Seems like it is pretty clear to me how it will play out given the reasons why for the style of play I have seen and the match scratx was in. Only one's that can change that is the players playing the way they choose to play, not PGI, lol.

It's PGI's fault. You're still not getting it.

In Conquest, you could properly argue people being selfish... trying to pad the k-d ratio instead of waiting for a cap win, when there is one guy left. I get that.

In Assault, the act of capping is worthless when it comes to C-bills. Remember that getting the most points in the entire event will get you the best discount...

The problem however is that capping provides the least rewards under this mode. A straight capping situation provides nothing of C-bill value, thus making it MORE DIFFICULT to buy the mechs that are on sale. This is also known as a conflict of interest.

It is full well possible to gib 11 mechs and then cap the base. The likelihood of this occurring is RARE. That's the other issue.

Also, what would stop the 12th mech that goes to commit suicide (overheating, OOB, fall damage, whatever)? I had explained earlier (I think) that the 12th guy decided to go kill himself on Forest Colony, instead of just hiding and/or letting us cap win. Selfish? Sure. Preventable? Unlikely. (I guess you could leg and strip a mech, and hope he's nowhere close to the boundaries and doesn't attempt to finish off the other leg.)

Anyways, that's what makes the system flawed as intended.

Edited by Deathlike, 19 October 2014 - 12:53 PM.

[Mr Beefy]

Bartholomew bartholomew, on 19 October 2014 - 12:42 PM, said:

The only thing they could do to change this would be to make the primary goal worth more. If a base cap was worth 2,000,000 Cbills and 2,000 GXP (extreme case) Only idiots wanting to pad their KDR's and already have too many Cbills would blow that off.

Glythe, on 19 October 2014 - 12:42 PM, said:

The game became a death match only game for the most part when bases became defended by turrets and the cap times became ridiculous. One or the other would have been fine.

There used to be this thing called fast cap and you can blame that meta for the long capture tim

"Conquest gives the most rewards"..... except that it is stupid now because it takes too long to capture the points.


So basically now this game IS a fps shooter with robot skins that has no end game content.


The problem with the challenge is as you said that a lot of people already have that mech. They should have given pilots who already have the mech a direct CB payment equal to the discount to make them participate.

The other problem with this event is that you need 250,000 for 45% and 450,000 for an extra 5% more. Lol what? That should have been something like a 65% discount. The Bar is too high and no one cares.

It will end at 45% and that will be a nice discount. Maybe if they do this for all the clan mechs they will be affordable for free to play folk. That would be a nice move imho.

Both valid points and interesting rewards..... But IMO, Since PGI rolled back the MM and gave us our choice back, I see it as only Idiots would drop in matches they have no desire or interest in trying to work as a team and complete Primary goal. I am sure that the many matches would play out the same way even if they gave the bonus you mentioned. Tools are the ones that drop and when their team can get the primary goal, do everything they can to stop them from doing it. If some outlooks of players don't change, CW is gonna be really interesting when it comes.

Edited by Mr Beefy, 19 October 2014 - 01:05 PM.

[Mr Beefy]

Deathlike, on 19 October 2014 - 12:52 PM, said:

It's PGI's fault. You're still not getting it.

In Conquest, you could properly argue people being selfish... trying to pad the k-d ratio instead of waiting for a cap win, when there is one guy left. I get that.

In Assault, the act of capping is worthless when it comes to C-bills. Remember that getting the most points in the entire event will get you the best discount...

The problem however is that capping provides the least rewards under this mode. A straight capping situation provides nothing of C-bill value, thus making it MORE DIFFICULT to buy the mechs that are on sale. This is also known as a conflict of interest.

It is full well possible to gib 11 mechs and then cap the base. The likelihood of this occurring is RARE. That's the other issue.

Also, what would stop the 12th mech that goes to commit suicide (overheating, OOB, fall damage, whatever)? I had explained earlier (I think) that the 12th guy decided to go kill himself on Forest Colony, instead of just hiding and/or letting us cap win. Selfish? Sure. Preventable? Unlikely. (I guess you could leg and strip a mech, and hope he's nowhere close to the boundaries and doesn't attempt to finish off the other leg.)

Anyways, that's what makes the system flawed as intended.

I agree with the flaws you listed... and have already said that several times. Yes PGI is in control of that and if it stays as it is, that is a problem and it needs to be fixed. Has Russ said they were not looking into fixing these things??? Did I miss it, because I could swear I heard they are working on reworking it.

Once again, if players are not happy with a certain game mode, they can just click two little check marks off and go to town all day long blowing **** up. Why Piss on their teams choice? This is no reason you can give that is not a tool one to justify doing it.

[Deathlike]

Mr Beefy, on 19 October 2014 - 01:04 PM, said:

Once again, if players are not happy with a certain game mode, they can just click two little check marks off and go to town all day long blowing **** up. Why Piss on their teams choice? This is no reason you can give that is not a tool one to justify doing it.

Under your logic.. if Assault is a player's preferred mode AND capping is the only way to get the most points to get the best discount AND that this player needs a fair amount of C-bills... well, there's no other option than to probably stop playing and ragequit right? It's either that or just spending money for MC for buying C-bills... of which the idea itself is terrible.

[Mr Beefy]

Deathlike, on 19 October 2014 - 01:08 PM, said:

Under your logic.. if Assault is a player's preferred mode AND capping is the only way to get the most points to get the best discount AND that this player needs a fair amount of C-bills... well, there's no other option than to probably stop playing and ragequit right? It's either that or just spending money for MC for buying C-bills... of which the idea itself is terrible.

No, that is not my logic at all. Some how I don't think there will be any shortage of C-bills if a team decides they are at a point they can afford to take the base. Battles in Assault mode many times either, comes to you to protect their base, or has mostly already happened and they can chose to leave one or two mechs on the enemy team as Zombies. Rewards seem good either way on c-bills and xp and I believe its more. It might be worth less if both teams decide to take the base and by off chance one side goes right and one goes completely left. In the games I have played, this doesn't happen as much as the other two.

I could care less about rage quitters, as long as they are not in a drop when they do it, of course unless they are toxic and or a team killer. I think guys that team kill and or leg golden mechs on their own team are really big tools ;-)