224 replies to this topic

[Jman5]

Karpundir, on 05 December 2014 - 10:06 AM, said:

At this time, there are no restrictions on chassis choices per player, nor was there any mention of it being limited across a team (correct me if I am wrong). So yes, in theory you could have a team that brings light mechs all the time.

I wouldn't recommend it in most cases, unless your entire 12 man is skilled at light meching by knowing how to engage/disengage, zig-zag to avoid sniper fire and mix long and short range to deal with turrets (when attacking).

It would be interesting to use this loadout to try ambushes and hit and runs as a group, but chances are good that you will be whittled down bit by bit.

If they spread the spawn locations like they do on certain maps in Skirmish it could be a viable tactic. Have 12 lights swarm Alpha lance spawn, then beeline the other two with an 4 mech advantage.

[Kill Dozer]

CyclonerM, on 05 December 2014 - 05:07 AM, said:

This guy has the courage to say it. +1



Neg. Aside from special cases like the private war between the Dragoons and House Kurita or the Dragoons seeking vengeance on Anton Marik, a merc unit does not fight for itself, but is always hired by a noble, a society, a House.. So they are always fighting for a faction, basically.

And any half-reputable merc unit would not fight for 3 different houses in 3 different battles. Even the Dragoons honored their contracts mostly, and have been in service of each House for years.

I'm talking about a video game, not role play. It worked in MW4VL as a means for people to round out teams, btdt.

[Thanatos31]

would be great to create a map generator that can customise maps a bit...so the CW matches aren't the same over and over again. But that's probably just wishfull thinking.

[bar10jim]

Harrison Kelly, on 04 December 2014 - 08:33 AM, said:

I'm of the opinion that 240 is too low. Either 240 is too low, or the 4 'Mech restriction needs to go away. As it stands, I'm incredibly underwhelmed with community warfare, because it's going to require that I play chassis or classes that I dislike, or else not play chassis that I do like.

Let's say I wanted to bring my 3 favorite IS chassis: a Highlander, a Catapult, and a Shadow Hawk. This isn't a Steiner scout lance, it's fairly well-balanced. Great, now I have just 30 tons left, and that basically forces me to play a light. Specifically, a Spider which I don't own. I hate playing lights. I never play lights. What this proposal is saying is that community warfare isn't for me.

I've seen proposals that would up the tonnage to the 250-265 range, and feel that would be overall better. Alternately, distribute the tonnage across the group rather than per player so dedicated light players aren't "handicapping" the team. As it stands, 240 tons is simply too low for me to ever play community warfare. The tonnage restricts player choice too much and doesn't suit my preferred roles. It's more important to me that I be able to play roles and chassis that I want (within reason) than to be forced into something I don't enjoy.

I don't have fun playing lights, therefore I will not opt into a mode that forces me to play them.

The reason you will not see a higher total is very simple. As soon as you allow for 250 tons, every Clanner dropping will bring 3 Timberwolves and Myst Lynx (75 + 75 + 75 +25 = 250). With the Timberwolf being arguably the best mech in the game, that's just too overpowered.

[bar10jim]

Hammer Hand, on 04 December 2014 - 07:03 AM, said:

I believe you, but that stinks. Will you share what thread that is in so I can red what else I might have missed?

Actually this was addressed in the town hall that featured CW. It should be in http://www.nogutsnog...hp?topic=2525.0

[Rebas Kradd]

Harrison Kelly, on 04 December 2014 - 08:33 AM, said:

I'm of the opinion that 240 is too low. Either 240 is too low, or the 4 'Mech restriction needs to go away. As it stands, I'm incredibly underwhelmed with community warfare, because it's going to require that I play chassis or classes that I dislike, or else not play chassis that I do like.

Think of it this way: CW puts you into a simulated real-time war, one where resources are not infinite and Houses would not necessarily be deploying assault mechs to just any backwater rock with no strategic value. Highlanders are expensive pieces of machinery. There should be a cost to using them. And since CW as it's deploying this month has no dynamic economy, a tonnage limit is the best way to require calculated decisions of players.

Fortunately, nobody begrudges you the right to play in a Highlander, a Catapult, and a Shadowhawk. It's just that you can't bring them all in the same match, because such a tonnage limit also permits ridiculous combinations that would tear yours to shreds.

The 240 limit still lets you bring two of those mechs and bring low mediums in the other two drop slots. If you're insisting on all three...well, I get that player preference is a valid part of game design, but it's got to play nice with strategy at some point.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 05 December 2014 - 03:13 PM.

[AnimeFreak40K]

I think the only question I have is regarding the Loyalty Points, and it may not be so much of a question and more along the lines of confirmation of an assumption:
Phoenix Mechs will receive a Loyalty Point bonus of some sort (I think 10%?) which, it seems like the other bonuses, such as contract lenght, will be applied to its own line and then totaled.
Bronze Medallions (from the Phoenix Pack) also provide a Loyalty Point bonus (2.5%? I don't remember) to the mech that it's hanging in and given the information given already seems would also get it's own line and total as well.

Assuming this is the case, using the Case Study Examples, rewards would be outlined like this:
Case Study 1:
Contract Match: 50 Loyalty Points
Davion 28-day contract: +30%
Piloting a BLR-1G(P): +10%
Bronze Davion Medallion present in that mech: +2.5%

Match victory: 50 LP
Contract bonus: +15 LP
Phoenix mech: +5 LP
Medallion: +1 LP (well, 1.25, but I'm rounding down)
Total: 71 LP

Case Study 2:
Match victory (consists of all of the bennies from the example): 118 LP
Contract bonus: +35.4 LP
Phoenix mech: +11.8 LP
Medallion: +2.95 LP
Total: 168 LP (rounded down from 168.15)

Is this assumption correct?

The main reason why I am asking is because I have seen very little on how the Phoenix Mechs and the Bronze Medallions are going to pan out and have seen no examples that I have not calculated and presented myself and I have not seen any confirmation that I indeed have it right.

...granted, there may be actual examples, and/or I may have received some confirmation via the forums but could easily have missed it...

[Tim East]

Bigbacon, on 05 December 2014 - 05:45 AM, said:

what immersion do you really expect?

1 of 2 things will happen

You'll all be stomping the massive amount of PUGs and grinning ear to ear because of your awesome skills or you'll all be back on here bitching and moaning it is no fun because the PUGs are ruining your fun because you all refuse to accept them as real players. You ***** because your 4 man got put with 8 PUGs and they "Lost" the match for you.

You all talk like 1%'er and the pugs are dirt although we greatly out number you. This is one of the greatest problems with this game community is the attitude towards though who don't want to align themselves with a group or don't have the time to deal with grouping up.

They are going to need to change it early on because there won't be enough people to make it fun because the PUG folks will just not play because it will be absolutely no fun for them. Can't keep a F2P going when you split you community and waste so much time on CW for such a small subset of players.

Just wait...

Can't +1 enough.

Magnakanus, on 05 December 2014 - 06:02 AM, said:

LOL. I wondered when the loud cry of the self justified would creep its way in. "So unfair, solo PUG for life!".
I did not post here to discuss with you how much solo players are needed or not. I did not post here for you to jump on the opportunity to start some silly flame war. Grow up.

IMMERSION. Read a few rule books and some Battletech novels then come back and tell me how many solo Mechwarriors appeared. Again, IMMERSION into the BT universe. I am talking about a certain feel of "authenticity" to the experience.

Read the novels and tell me how many people in units with other people didn't even get names, let alone descriptions. The pilots that get dropped in next to a proper unit could very easily be extras from an RP perspective, people who are nameless, faceless, descriptionless beyond something simple like "that freeborn in the Stormcrow in bravo star." In the clans, much like real life, people get moved from unit to unit all the time, and once CW kicks off in earnest and units RP die, unit reconstitution and aggregation should be a thing if you want to obsess about "immersion." Are you planning to RP character death after so many ejections? Or a chance of character death each time your mech is downed? If not, I don't really see how you can complain about immersion, since a guy that always successfully ejects is rare beyond belief if you play by the rules in the Battletech books you so fervently mentioned a bit ago.

N0MAD, on 05 December 2014 - 01:57 AM, said:

Not happy about the 140 min weight required its very unfair to heavy/assault pilots.
While all heavy/assault pilots are forced into playing chassis they dont want to because of the 240 restriction, Light pilots already driving the most bugged mechs in the game are free to drive the mech of their choice every drop.
Seems the light pilots are favoured again.. seems legit.
If some of us are forced to play mediums/lights that we dont like to keep within the tonnage required why shouldnt Everyone have to apply to that.
Besides if this happens the games are going to be very Light dominated, just do the math..youre going to get the situation and i think quite often of seeing 8+ lights in a drop,, great fun playing lagmech warrior..
Get rid of the minimum tonage and dont be biased towards Lights again.

I'm not sure you understand what you are saying there. A minimum limit that prevents light pilots from only playing lights (unless you exclusively play 35 tonners) is biased in favor of light pilots? What?

Furry Murray, on 04 December 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

And I found out I can take 2 KC's and 2 Locusts, so looks like I'm going to have fun learning how to play the (arguably) worst mech in the game.

King Crab is the worst mech in the game? Bummer.

[Ian Drsaurri]

You said you'd let some media slip today why you lie

Edited by Ian Drsaurri, 05 December 2014 - 04:27 PM.

[Escobar]

ok, ive been searching for this, not finding anything.

game mode for CW includes

-- a larger map - check
-- 4 mech deck - check
-- defenses and such - check

but nothing seen/found on game match times. if we are looking at longer matches, and that you have 4 mechs to drive makes me expect that the matches will be longer, then what happens to the ammo-bound builds? 25% thru a mission and you are out of ammo but still alive. can you eject? can you leave the field? can you re-arm? If this leads to better more all-around builds with both ammo and energy components then this seems almost as awesome as CW in general.

anyone know whats going on with this?

[Groutknoll]

So with CW beta almost here I've been trying to find out how many bronze medallions phoenix/saber were suppose to get ... the project phoenix page is dead https://mwomercs.com/phoenix ...

was it 6? so that you could get 1 for each IS faction?

[Leigus]

Could we get some clarification on the intention behind restricting Community Warfare groups to Unit Members only?

I can imagine the design stems from wanting to prevent "Power Players" of a faction from flip-flopping and supporting multiple different units in CW (though technically speaking, couldn't that still be accomplished by adding then removing players like that from the desired unit? I'd assume that'd be added as a violation to ToS but it's a workaround still the same).

I just want to build on what I've seen other saying in that this system punishes smaller units as well as multi-unit gaming communities (such as the Free Worlds League Military TS Server). Collaboration of associated units is very much in line with the RP theme of CW, and it'd be really restrictive of unit autonomy if communities like ours had to merge into a single in-game unit just to guarantee we drop into the same battle as our comrades.

[lashropa]

Can't wait guys, Have a good holiday and keep up the good work!

[LordLosh]

Pretty curious like everyone else on the Phoenix mechs and medallions. Why do I feel like PGI forgot about it and just a select few of us remember this being a decent sell point for the program?????????????????????????????

[Johnny Z]

Kill Dozer, on 04 December 2014 - 09:53 AM, said:

Good points.

Pretty much the same concerns I have and I *am* saying it should be changed. We often make teams in the group queue that will have players from 2-4 different units.

Three lances of guys on the same voice comms server is typically going to perform better (all other things being about the same) than three lances of people on three separate voice servers (and thus can't communicate between lances rapidly).

On top of that, there are lance leaders and the group lead to consider, these command elements go out the window if they cant communicate with each other.

They are making it groups composed of same unit players only for a reason as I understand it.

The merc corps have the ability at some time to capture planets for their unit. They have to have a way to have that unit represented. Its fairly straight forward to work out from there.

This could be totally wrong but this is how it looks like it will be and it makes sense.

[Peter2k]

Johnny Z, on 05 December 2014 - 09:37 PM, said:

They are making it groups composed of same unit players only for a reason as I understand it.

The merc corps have the ability at some time to capture planets for their unit. They have to have a way to have that unit represented. Its fairly straight forward to work out from there.

This could be totally wrong but this is how it looks like it will be and it makes sense.

This could be easily determined from which unit the group leader is
Getting an invite and accepting would also mean accepting that the contested planet would fall under the group leaders unit/merc corp

Also for me as a FRR loyalist, I'd rather have a planet that belongs to a FRR unit than a claner one

Though I guess I could understand it that 12 mans could have too much power if they're on one side and not the other
Still this could be gamed a little
You could just quit or abondon the unit if it's too small and form a bigger one
Though that would also include jumping over ones own shadow

But still
As a balancing factor, it could be circumvented easily enough

[Magna Canus]

Tim East, on 05 December 2014 - 03:47 PM, said:

Read the novels and tell me how many people in units with other people didn't even get names, let alone descriptions. The pilots that get dropped in next to a proper unit could very easily be extras from an RP perspective, people who are nameless, faceless, descriptionless beyond something simple like "that freeborn in the Stormcrow in bravo star." In the clans, much like real life, people get moved from unit to unit all the time, and once CW kicks off in earnest and units RP die, unit reconstitution and aggregation should be a thing if you want to obsess about "immersion." Are you planning to RP character death after so many ejections? Or a chance of character death each time your mech is downed? If not, I don't really see how you can complain about immersion, since a guy that always successfully ejects is rare beyond belief if you play by the rules in the Battletech books you so fervently mentioned a bit ago.

Nice of you to come to your buddies rescue, but I will tell you the same thing. Not interested. Go flame somebody else.

[Rinkata Prime]

Check out hit boxes on ADDER and ICE FERRET, all damage goes to CT, no mutter how hard player is trying to save this location!

Edited by Rinkata Kimiku, 06 December 2014 - 10:48 AM.

[Johnny Z]

Peter2k, on 06 December 2014 - 08:03 AM, said:

This could be easily determined from which unit the group leader is
Getting an invite and accepting would also mean accepting that the contested planet would fall under the group leaders unit/merc corp

Also for me as a FRR loyalist, I'd rather have a planet that belongs to a FRR unit than a claner one

Though I guess I could understand it that 12 mans could have too much power if they're on one side and not the other
Still this could be gamed a little
You could just quit or abondon the unit if it's too small and form a bigger one
Though that would also include jumping over ones own shadow

But still
As a balancing factor, it could be circumvented easily enough

It could be determined by the color of the mech at the top of the roster also, it just doesnt make any sense. A premade group representing a unit for the potential capture of a planet should be composed of that units players, makes total sense. They already backed down from requiring a full 12 man premade to capture a planet.

I will go further and say that at some point they will require rank for some actions on the Star Map also only because its obviously and works well and makes sense. They already said they would require creds from unit coffers when they add logistics for some actions on the star map.

Who knows maybe they will do it by adding the total defense points or what ever of the players that did the most defense and which units they are in? But for now they are requiring same unit for premades and that makes sense also.

Edited by Johnny Z, 06 December 2014 - 12:01 PM.

[Sandtiger]

bar10jim, on 05 December 2014 - 02:53 PM, said:

The reason you will not see a higher total is very simple. As soon as you allow for 250 tons, every Clanner dropping will bring 3 Timberwolves and Myst Lynx (75 + 75 + 75 +25 = 250). With the Timberwolf being arguably the best mech in the game, that's just too overpowered.

Not so much. I can't get a TW to do anything for me other than become smoking salvage. I don't think tonnage limits will help balance players skill.

Kill Dozer, on 05 December 2014 - 11:06 AM, said:

I'm talking about a video game, not role play. It worked in MW4VL as a means for people to round out teams, btdt.

I hear you, I guess opinions vary... I for one will not sully a merc unit for exercising their freedom of choice. I admit however, that the LP awards would reflect the con of doing "all around" business. But hey, thats the fun of being a merc unit. The rewards go to the highest bidder. =]

Edited by Sandtiger, 06 December 2014 - 02:28 PM.