17 replies to this topic

[Livewyr]

The good:
Much more immersive and epic feeling experience, dropping in, seeing the massive batteries we're defending or attacking. I love seeing the dropships come in and actually being weary of them as would be the case in BT. Glitches and graphics issues aside- very well done.

The bad:
Why?
Why am I participating in community warfare? The individual battles are nice and immersive, and the rewards can be hansom. (between 500k and 1m per battle) but how does this contribute to the overall experience?
It is great on a tactical level. My unit was very effective in battles and had a 100% success rate on the first night.
But where is the strategy and diplomacy that is involved in a community warfare? Why are all the units directly underneath a massive faction that anyone can join, that dictates where they can go and what they can do?

Problem number 1: Futility.
Entirely possible example: My unit goes after a planet doggedly and with a 100% success rate in our battles.. and two other units (or groups of players) come into the same planetary fight and have a 100% failure rate. For every success we have, they fail twice.
What does my unit have to show for its outstanding success? Nothing.

Problem number 2: Strategy.
Ok, so my unit wants to make a B line for Terra or for Liao space from Ghost Bear. (Because we hate Romano or some Liao unit...for example.) We would like to take planets that go in that direction, but then we run into (1) futility, and (2)the umbrella faction deciding where we can and cannot go, or whether we have a prayer of making it happen at all.

Problem number 3: Diplomacy.
I see on the map the border between CGB and CSJ changed last night (though I am not sure in which direction)
I don't think my unit has any issues with CSJ, and I have no current desires to skirmish with them...yet my unit is attached a faction that is fighting them and changing borders.
There is no method of diplomacy in this game. No way to do a NAP, or an alliance, or set a common goal. It seems to be a free-for-all where any little set of cubs or kittens can go attack anything they want and we are all attached to it. Even if we wanted to in the current system, and we talked between every single CGB and CSJ unit (hahaha, no) and by some miracle got all of them to agree to focus our efforts towards the IS or even CW.. there is no way we could.. because we're attached at the hip to players who have no idea what is going on and just clicking "drop."

Rewards are nice, I'm sure LP is nice, but...

Why should I participate? Is there going to be some massive change in CWarfare Phase3 where it becomes something other than a nifty game mode and separate rewards?

Edited by Livewyr, 12 December 2014 - 11:40 AM.

[Lily from animove]

problem 1: you are not the only unit fighting, so thts how it goes until your unit can not bring serveral groups.

problem 2: thats how it is, wlcome to warfare troubles

Problem 3: you are a unit, not a whole faction, just because you have no issues with a specifc faction, doesn't means they wanna crush you.

[Brody319]

This is just the Beta of CW. They are going to be implementing systems to make it more interesting later.

[Bracchus]

PGI is a small company, what you describe have been tried before and didn't reach store shelves. I hope we get there, but I don't think we will. MW/BT is to much a niche franchise to get enough players that it would be doable. But if you really want to help make it happen, buy more MC and packs. Money is the issue and they have to little of it to make our dream come true fast.

[Joanna Conners]

A lot of your arguments go against faction warfare in quite a few games. I simply don't understand them. This is nothing new or abnormal. This type of warfare has existed for over ten years in PC and console gaming.

[Heisenbug]

Brody319, on 12 December 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

This is just the Beta of CW.

I think we should just marvel in awe of the fact that they got this out before year end at all.

As for futility, how is this less futile than the other modes of the game? And diplomacy? There's a million feature requests out there (so, maybe, slow your roll...).

[Livewyr]

Lily from animove, on 12 December 2014 - 11:48 AM, said:

problem 1: you are not the only unit fighting, so thts how it goes until your unit can not bring serveral groups.

problem 2: thats how it is, wlcome to warfare troubles

Problem 3: you are a unit, not a whole faction, just because you have no issues with a specifc faction, doesn't means they wanna crush you.

1: That's a problem... it isn't a good feeling to put a lot of effort into maximizing your effectiveness and being wildly successful, only to find out bum****-***hat merc unit went full ***** and undid everything you just did.
2: That is how it is... here. (World of Tanks did it quite differently.. starting years ago.)
3: And that, along with computer telling me where I can and cannot go, is the antithesis of "carving out your destiny."

Brody319, on 12 December 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

This is just the Beta of CW. They are going to be implementing systems to make it more interesting later.

Any idea as to what? The only thing I've heard them mention was unit dropships.. and nothing beyond that.

Bracchus, on 12 December 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

PGI is a small company, what you describe have been tried before and didn't reach store shelves. I hope we get there, but I don't think we will. MW/BT is to much a niche franchise to get enough players that it would be doable. But if you really want to help make it happen, buy more MC and packs. Money is the issue and they have to little of it to make our dream come true fast.

When WoT released Clan Wars (and it was Europe only at the time) there were not that many units either.. yet the map was still dynamic, strategic, and diplomatic.

Now WoT is huge.

[Mechteric]

This isn't really CW. Its just a testbed for their new game mode and backend that will eventually be CW.

[Livewyr]

Joanna Conners, on 12 December 2014 - 11:51 AM, said:

A lot of your arguments go against faction warfare in quite a few games. I simply don't understand them. This is nothing new or abnormal. This type of warfare has existed for over ten years in PC and console gaming.

So World of Tanks making a player driven Risk board was somehow revolutionary?

CapperDeluxe, on 12 December 2014 - 11:58 AM, said:

This isn't really CW. Its just a testbed for their new game mode and backend that will eventually be CW.

I really hope you are right. (I just have heard nothing in regards to Phase 3, other than that dropships will be involved and improved based defenses.)

[IIIuminaughty]

I skimmed through this...

[Noth]

Livewyr, on 12 December 2014 - 12:00 PM, said:

So World of Tanks making a player driven Risk board was somehow revolutionary?



I really hope you are right. (I just have heard nothing in regards to Phase 3, other than that dropships will be involved and improved based defenses.)

World of tanks doesn't do faction warfare. Community Warfare is not Clan Wars. They are designed to do different things.. Community Warfare is designed to simulate the entire factions fighting that went on in this time period of Battletech. Clan Wars of WoT is designed with no goal of simulating what went on in the maps but to simply let Clans fight each other for gold. Two very different design goals there.

[Revis Volek]

Because its a BETA, no one said you HAD to participate. You can still do normal 12v12 deathmatches as well...

[Livewyr]

Noth, on 12 December 2014 - 12:32 PM, said:

World of tanks doesn't do faction warfare. Community Warfare is not Clan Wars. They are designed to do different things.. Community Warfare is designed to simulate the entire factions fighting that went on in this time period of Battletech. Clan Wars of WoT is designed with no goal of simulating what went on in the maps but to simply let Clans fight each other for gold. Two very different design goals there.

I would think you can scratch both itches though. (Having individual unit territory, within the overarching faction territory.) Sort of like having a District according to your unit. (You can struggle within your faction for more territory, or you can expand the overall territory and take over the whole map for your faction.) Player Choice.

DarthRevis, on 12 December 2014 - 12:34 PM, said:

Because its a BETA, no one said you HAD to participate. You can still do normal 12v12 deathmatches as well...

I didn't ask "Why do I have to?" I asked "Why should I?" (I.E: there is no strategic or diplomatic element at all.)

[verybad]

Livewyr, on 12 December 2014 - 11:57 AM, said:

1: That's a problem... it isn't a good feeling to put a lot of effort into maximizing your effectiveness and being wildly successful, only to find out bum****-***hat merc unit went full ***** and undid everything you just did.

Welcome to multiplayer games, seems like they're not for you however.

Are you serrious, it's a problem that another unit did what you wanted to do?

Quote

3: And that, along with computer telling me where I can and cannot go, is the antithesis of "carving out your destiny."

This game has a 25 year+ background with the Great Houses being the most powerful forces and tones of literature related to it. You're not leading great house in this game, you're a small unit. You're apparently thinking that the game is something it's not.


You may want aspects of the game to change, but certain things like the great houses are always goign to be more powerful than the units due to the nature of the history and background. You may not like it that way, and yeah it might be fun to have more control, but it simply ain't gonna happen so stop losing sleep over it.

[Noth]

Livewyr, on 12 December 2014 - 01:00 PM, said:

I would think you can scratch both itches though. (Having individual unit territory, within the overarching faction territory.) Sort of like having a District according to your unit. (You can struggle within your faction for more territory, or you can expand the overall territory and take over the whole map for your faction.) Player Choice.

Feel that if you try and please both you will either please neither or piss off one or the other. Both are almost opposite of each other. Faction warfare is all about the faction, your glory comes from how well your unit does, but it is not the only thing that matter in the war. Clan warfare is all about your unit and that unit is all that matter in the battle. You want to defend a planet or take planets? Expand outside your unit to get people to join up for the battle, use your diplomacy skills to talk to other units to get them to assist you. In short it is not all about you, but about the faction.

Besides, this is exactly as it has been described. We've been told for month and possibly even years that only border planets would be up for fighting and that only certain ones would be in conflict, which basically says that you cannot choose any planet to fight for.

[50 50]

Firstly,I'm stoked that the team was able to get Community Warfare added in a BETA state earlier than expected. Was pleasantly surprised to get the patch before the weekend and see what it was about.
So I think you're jumping the gun there a bit early on with the release expecting x y and z.
There is some further information about where they are heading and some of the future goals they are wanting to achieve which sound very good.

Keep in mind the scale of things however. We are looking at a galactic map spanning hundreds of worlds. As individuals and units dropping into the conflicts we have a chance to earn personal glory but we are the pawns for the house lords and the Khans of the clans.
In the end it is not up to us to determine which planet is to be contested, at least not yet. Perhaps that is something that will emerge with the faction loyalty points.

There are a lot of features yet to be enabled in the community warfare so we just need to be patient and enjoy it as it unfolds.

Constructive dialogue on the features is always a good thing.

[Davegt27]

I knew this was going to happen

I have only been around since June but based on the amount of crying on the forums there is nothing PGI could make or do that would make people happy

I had asked in several threads what is your idea of CW what do you want to see
I never received an answer.

But let’s over look all that and offer a few suggestions

1) Star lanes' or Jump corridors these would be like railroad tracks to different star systems connecting the inner sphere planets this would facilitate a sort of island hopping campaign

http://en.wikipedia....gging_(strategy)

basically how it would work is you click on the faction and you see the inner sphere map, click again and you see red connecting lines between the star systems (sort of like a rail lines with major and minor lines connecting them) this would give a logical step by step of an invasion corridor.

2) Jump ship recharge time its illogical to expect after you take a planet that the opposing force can retake it right back. The gathering of forces and the Jump time to that system would dictate when you could try to take or take back a planet

For example we have been fighting over turtle Bay; you have seven days of fighting whoever is on top at the end of seven days gets that planet for a certain amount of days (I picked 7 because some people can only play on weekends)

More on Jumping from system to system you can bypass major jump points but it will cost you in time this is to encourage a system be system campaign

This is also the major reason why battles are fought along territorial fronts also major star systems give greater rewards

Skirmish/spy/harassment, missions: this is where the other maps come into play
your unit receives orders for a spy mission location HPG manifold location (space) you go as a smaller unit and fight as a 12V12 or smaller you win you get a C-bill bonus and your faction gets reduced jump drive time

Faction heads, Group and Unit leaders: the faction head (or leader) decides the general direction of the campaign (I recommend PGI that way they can enhance game play)

Group or major unit leaders they decide by vote (would take coordination) which planet in there invasion corridor they want to attack. Basically you receive orders from PGI (faction head) these are the planets up for attack or defense the major unit leaders say yes or no

Minor units or mercenaries/loyalists/pugs etc., they are under contract to major units they go where they are told they cannot decide which planets get attacked just if they want to be part of the attack or defense.

Not very well written but I hope you get the idea

Davegt27

[Davers]

Livewyr, on 12 December 2014 - 01:00 PM, said:

I would think you can scratch both itches though. (Having individual unit territory, within the overarching faction territory.) Sort of like having a District according to your unit. (You can struggle within your faction for more territory, or you can expand the overall territory and take over the whole map for your faction.) Player Choice.



I didn't ask "Why do I have to?" I asked "Why should I?" (I.E: there is no strategic or diplomatic element at all.)

Eventually they will have a 'Clan War' system, like WoT's at least for Mercs. Maybe House Units too. But that will be in version 2.