39 replies to this topic

[Vajrabhairava]

As far as I understand how PGI approaches CW I am convinced they do themself, the game and their business modell no favour but are straight forward complicating the matter (in respect to additional workload/game structure) and right away allienating the score of single players not members of any group but passionate and dedicated players none the less.

Why is that so you may ask?

With CW depending on different type of maps (invasion maps) the need of extra work, new designs etc. has occured.
With the choice of a new map style approach for CW, PGI in fact seperates CW Game from "ordinary" game so far, and with additional new workload from the very beginning etc. this path lengthens development, complicates the matter and plants disperate development roads into the same game.
Instead they should have, as a first step, have kept to the map style and modes allready introduced and producing more of those (which at the same time would greatly benefit the public match map rotation by more maps variants), combining them in easy to deploy planetary settings and keeping the introduction of more modes and different map styles an exploitable future option but first focus on a working, dynamic and reliable CW backbone mechanism.

This approach also make planetary conquest itself a seperated part of the game. Invasion maps are not to be used in public rotation (!) and "old" maps are not used in CW. Both not really clever choices in my opinion.

The public solo drop matches, which I bet are the vast majority of matches played, have no link to CW (as an option) at all, keeping them meaningless pitch battles only for training skills, fun and leveling of mechs. While I would vote for keeping this type of public matches, there should have been an option to connect public solo matches meaningful to CW.

Right now as planned solo players get assigned to random formed groups where cannonfodder is lacking, forcing PUG to play against organized and presumably "hardcore" groups.
Keeping public solo match players (means the PUG majority) out of CW or place them as cannonfodder in the "new" (groups only) CW feature will allienate many players and drive off new ones.
Beside through this "workaround" PGI damages it´s own rule by whitch there should be no PUG in group matches. This is a rather inconsitent application of rules.

As I proposed in this thread:
http://mwomercs.com/...ugsolo-players/
for an easy inclusion of PUG in CW and a practical and easy to integrate method for CW there are much more efficient, community uniting ways / mechanisms to implement a robust and fun CW into the game.

Thank you for reading/commenting:).

[Lily from animove]

right now they wanna bring the CW first.

they said they will consider making current maps fitting for planetary conquest.
Also they wanna bring in the dropship mode later for the non CW gameplay.

Both will be where the solo's get their chance to train and prepare for CW. They will now just not be able at the beginning because PGI does not add this at the beginning.

[orcrist86]

Nothing wrong with their approach. Instant action is not cw, note should it be. When they get to Solaris, that's not cw or instant action and should be seperate too. I got zero problems with the approach because it will form the basis of a more enduring mwo

[Angel of Annihilation]

Vajrabhairava, on 14 November 2014 - 04:17 AM, said:

The public solo drop matches, which I bet are the vast majority of matches played, have no link to CW (as an option) at all, keeping them meaningless pitch battles only for training skills, fun and leveling of mechs. While I would vote for keeping this type of public matches, there should have been an option to connect public solo matches meaningful to CW.

Right now as planned solo players get assigned to random formed groups where cannonfodder is lacking, forcing PUG to play against organized and presumably "hardcore" groups.
Keeping public solo match players (means the PUG majority) out of CW or place them as cannonfodder in the "new" (groups only) CW feature will allienate many players and drive off new ones.

Beside through this "workaround" PGI damages it´s own rule by whitch there should be no PUG in group matches. This is a rather inconsitent application of rules.

Yeah this is my major problem. We already know without a doubt that combining slapped together PUGs in to a group and dropping them against organized 12 mans doesn't work which is why we have separate ques in the first place. However, now that is how CW is going to run? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense and is going to completely alienate alot of players like me which have been looking forward to CW and spending alot of time and money preparing for it but aren't in a position to join an organized group and meet the commitments required to be part of such an organization.

CW needs to be solo player friendly, simple as that. There is just not enough going on in the current game mode to keep people like me engaged and playing. I mean I doubt I will totally quit without being able to participate fully and competitively in CW but there is no reason to spend additional money on the game if what we currently have is all that I will be able to take part in for at least the next year or longer. Also dropping solo and losing 90% of the time doesn't constitute participation.

[xhrit]

Viktor Drake, on 14 November 2014 - 06:13 AM, said:

CW needs to be solo player friendly

Community warfare need to be friendly to solo players with no community? lol, no.

[Triordinant]

Vajrabhairava, on 14 November 2014 - 04:17 AM, said:

The public solo drop matches, which I bet are the vast majority of matches played, have no link to CW (as an option) at all, keeping them meaningless pitch battles only for training skills, fun and leveling of mechs. While I would vote for keeping this type of public matches, there should have been an option to connect public solo matches meaningful to CW.

Right now as planned solo players get assigned to random formed groups where cannonfodder is lacking, forcing PUG to play against organized and presumably "hardcore" groups.

Keeping public solo match players (means the PUG majority) out of CW or place them as cannonfodder in the "new" (groups only) CW feature will allienate many players and drive off new ones.
Beside through this "workaround" PGI damages it´s own rule by whitch there should be no PUG in group matches. This is a rather inconsitent application of rules.

My suggestion a couple of months ago was for groups to play the Invasion Conflicts while soloists play the Border Conflicts, as defined here by Paul Inouye.

[Remarius]

As horrible as it sounds - Community Warfare is supposed to be the pinnacle of the competitive playing experience. I'm more concerned with having random passionate but inexperienced players not on comms dropping with us and being random suicidal cannon fodder as it doesn't help.

Playing on Comstar NA quite often anyway I'm sure there will be plenty of teams running that people not dropping with their units can join.

[xX PUG Xx]

xhrit, on 14 November 2014 - 06:28 AM, said:

Community warfare need to be friendly to solo players with no community? lol, no.

Aye the "Community" in the Community Warfare kind of relates to being part of a group (Note that I said 'group' and not 'unit')

I agree that they could use the smaller existing maps as smaller scale, skirmishes/scouting missions for 4v4 or 8v8 that could apply a smaller bonus to the overall planetary conquest. These smaller conflicts could be limited to solo/lone wolf players that do not want to enter into the larger Invasion matches.

This way they are able to whet their whistle and try out CW, while still being able to contribute to their Factions attempt at Inner Sphere domination.

[DaZur]

Participating in CW is an elective experience. The terms of that experience is the playing field will be comprised of both organized teams and solo players.

If those terms are not agreeable, a player can continue to play care-free in the non-CW queue... It's that simple.

Is it ideal?... No.

That said, the mixed environment has been on the docket since day one pillar discussion of CW so I'm not entirely sure where the sudden inference of disenfranchising players is being formed from.

[TexAce]

I don't get why current matches (assault, skirmish and conquest) can't be part of a planetary conquest. Some are fighting the prime mission objective (destroy big gauss) while some are fighting on the borders using the normal modes).

For example to get a planet you need to fight 1 CW match, 1 Assault, 1 Skirmish and 1 Conquest match. Or different combinations of those.

Edited by TexAss, 14 November 2014 - 08:04 AM.

[Remarius]

TexAss, on 14 November 2014 - 08:03 AM, said:

I don't get why current matches (assault, skirmish and conquest) can't be part of a planetary conquest. Some are fighting the prime mission objective (destroy big gauss) while some are fighting on the borders using the normal modes).

For example to get a planet you need to fight 1 CW match, 1 Assault, 1 Skirmish and 1 Conquest match. Or different combinations of those.

Because it would then just be the normal grind.....

[Vajrabhairava]

1st of all i want to thank ervery1for sharing their thoughts:)

Next I admit I am a bit late in the year with my comments. But anyway I consider the mentioned stuff worth contemplating still.
As opposed to some I consider PUG part of the overall community of mwo-players. Thus making it worthwhile to try to make 'em stick out of passion for the game;).

The inclusion of PUG in CW in the proposed form means in no way a set back to the community of competitive players and interfere in no way with their specific game experience or gameplay options. Instead they keep random passionate players out of group slot 'cause PUG and groups are really seperated.

Additionaly inclusion would add flavour to group play because the ongoing battles for planets in the PUG sphere would give a constantly shifting background to the strategic efforts and planned campaigns launched by grouped players. Think this would enhance at least cosmetically the impact of grouped actions and keep the battlefronts dynamicaly, shifting and in a way uncertain/random because of the PUGelement.

At last the actual random game and CW are still seperated no change here. Only the PUG get a good option to be included and throw their lot in for their faction participating on PUG level in CW affairs.

Anyway I am positvly curious on the further developments.

"To battle!"
greetings
V.

Edited by Vajrabhairava, 16 November 2014 - 06:48 AM.

[Hoax415]

I hope english is not your first language because I'm really struggling with your posts.

But I sense that this is about solo-only players not enjoying anything that doesn't have a solo only queue.

What I can't decipher from the OP or the follow up is what exactly are you suggesting should be done?

How would you put a solo only queue into CW without cheapening the entire experience?

Someone in thread suggested that backwater worlds could be solo-only. Which I would posit wouldn't exactly make anyone that happy but sure why not include such a planet or five where there is constant low intensity action and you can only drop solo as defender or attacker?

Other players have suggested that its more of a solo players are at too great a disadvantage so cammo rose and in-game VOIP and in-game chat tools are the solution to the "problem". Those all sound like nice things and I think Russ has said they sound nice. There's no opposition to them its just a far cry from priority #1. Why you ask? Because lets be honest. No matter what tools you give people there are two problems:

1) An organized premade 12-man who plays together or even *gasp* practices together regularly is still at a huge advantage with agreed on strategies and plans versus an ad-hoc group even if they have voip or whatever.

2) Militant only solo play ever guys probably aren't about to adopt voip or cammo rose all that readily. Afterall one of the leading reasons given for why grouping is "too much to ask" or "not fun" is because they hate the faux military bullshit and being ordered around by 12 year olds (paraphrasing). That doesn't sound like the attitude of someone who wants to have randomly assigned teammates giving them orders and yelling over voice comms.

I think someone in a thread once suggested that a CW-solo queue could be used as a precursor to the actual "proper" invasion team-based CW actions on a given planet in some format. I'd have to see a more solid suggestion but I can see how that could have some legs maybe...

Anyways, I'd like to see actual concrete suggestions.

We can all realize that the SOLO-ONLY player is going to feel alienated (to steal a word from yet another thread on this subject) because there is currently no solo queue in CW. But what do you think should be done about it?

Its pretty useless to say "make them feel more included" what does that mean? They have staked out a position that they refuse to do anything but drop solo and be assigned random teammates. How do you cater to that in CW?

Edited by Hoax415, 16 November 2014 - 02:00 PM.

[Impyrium]

Here's the thing, though; CW isn't necessarily meant to welcome PUGs. Indeed, earlier I thought that it was exclusive to group play, which would have made more sense. Now it's great that they've decided to allow solo players into the mode, but people seem to be forgetting something here:

It's not supposed to be public/solo/PUG friendly.

PGI have said it's supposed to be hardcore- I'm aware people scoff at the term but they have a point. Solos and casuals are supposed to stick with the normal queues. Now I'm not saying it couldn't be worked on in the future to gradually include better support for the non-unit players, but to want to drag it down so early on to what is more or less just the normal queue with a world map.

My biggest fear for CW isn't that PGI won't get it right, it's that too many casual players will want to drag it down to something that really doesn't differ from what we already have. The point is the provide a competitive environment where 'fairness' in MM doesn't mean a thing. I for one will relish such a challenge. This all sort of reminds me of how a lot of the WT community is hell bent on decaying the sim/realistic modes down to anything but sim/realistic.

[Vezm]

I'm not sure I'd be happy if CW was just the current solo queue with all the same game modes but with the addition of a map and pretty colours that move around a little. The new game mode gives CW new gameplay rather than just adding meta gameplay.

[Zyllos]

There is one thing confusing me about CW matches:

Do you ONLY play the Invasion Mode or do you play a mix of Invasion Mode + Conquest/Assault/Skirmish for CW matches?

[Hoax415]

At launch it will only be Invasion mode on 2-3 maps. At least that is the position at this time.

Personally there are only two recent decisions that I think I for sure incorrect in terms of CW.

#1 that any premade group must be only from one player unit. That seems like a silly restriction and I really hope they remove it.

and

#2 that they are doing 100% Invasion mode/maps and that means 100% 48v48 longer matches.

Obviously more variety is better and I hope that they rethink that and include 12v12 and our normal modes/maps in some capacity in CW. Hell I think some worlds should be 8v8 and some 4v4 for that matter using only smaller maps at some point.

But either way I'm more excited than I ever thought I would be about CW actually happening. Crazy times.

[Sandpit]

Once again

CW is the "hardcore" mode. Those that want an "easier" game experience and just mindless deathmatches have that. They've had that for 2 years. Those of us that want a harder and more challenging game are waiting for CW.

This will sound harsh:

Stop trying to make the entire game cater to the "i just wanna shoot stompy robots" crowd. If you want the "easier" mode, stick to the pub matches. CW is not required to advance in any portion of the game. It's not required to earn any mech or equipment in the game. You can't include everyone in everything. Those of us that have grown tired o teh mindless deathmatches WANT a harder mode. If that's not your cup of tea that's fine. Keep playing just as you ahve been but please STOP trying to make every facet of this game cater to that style. Not all of us enjoy that.

[Cirran]

I am curious, will MWO CW become like CW in WoT? The filthy masses of solo players told to ********** because the are not part of large group, exclusive mech chassis only available in CW, MC paid out in CW, exclusive equipment and MC shop items given out in CW, alliances between large units leading to a stagnant map where little to nothing changes and MC being paid to the same units over and over, ect ect ect....

Cirra

[Impyrium]

Zyllos, on 16 November 2014 - 02:47 PM, said:

There is one thing confusing me about CW matches:

Do you ONLY play the Invasion Mode or do you play a mix of Invasion Mode + Conquest/Assault/Skirmish for CW matches?

Phase II will focus primarily on the invasion game type, and I imagine PGI will focus on fleshing and expanding that out afterwards too. Who knows for the future though.