79 replies to this topic

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 28 January 2015 - 04:03 AM, said:

LOL Tell the players to start a second account... I have!

If they did do that, can they separate the mixed Mechs they have in house now, or do they need a new Mech Stable rebuild with the "other Mechs" from scratch on this new account? Pretty tall order if no separation is provided.

[Soldryn]

NO. just NO.

every time this subject comes up, the only solution (rarely spoken, VERY heavily implied) is for player run factions.

NO

i GUARANTEE that IF PGI allows ANYONE to take control of a faction, the person or persons "in-charge" will immediately turn their faction into a popularity contest to decide who gets to stay in it, or join it.

NO

[Russ Bullock]

Will have design review for our next meeting

[Alexander Steel]

I hope you go with the Carrot and not Stick approach. Give people/Loyalists good ways to encourage mercs and the like to do things they want, not ways to punish or kick people out of a faction for not following orders.

[Ax2Grind]

Joseph Mallan, on 28 January 2015 - 04:03 AM, said:

4.0 is D&D the rest were AD&D. Amateur.


LOL Tell the players to start a second account... I have!

I still me some AD&D.

I think there could be a more eloquent solution than just starting new accounts...maybe allow the creation of "toons" for a single account...where you have an IS and a Clan identity for CW...either one has a limited mech garage and you can only play one at a time, but it means anyone could enjoy their full garage. Public queue would still just be your full garage.

Or give me the option to port half my garage to the other account. That would be nice.

Edited by Ax2Grind, 28 January 2015 - 04:37 PM.

[Deckard Caine Sender]

I think either of those ideas could work but do have some weaknesses.

The first would need some form of time lock on switching just to reduce the possibility for people to game the system by going "OK, 12 of us are going to switch to faction X and defend planet Y. The rest of you come beat us up." Just to be very clear I am not saying that you or your group would do that, just that someone would try it.

The second option has the same potential issue as the first with the added drawback that we would either have to log out/log in to change accounts to play different mechs or wait on PGI to implement some sort of multi-account identity manager.

[Cementi]

How do you decide who runs the factions and makes those decisions though? The first person to claim they are the head of a faction, do the devs play favorites and say that this player now runs all of a faction, sell the rights to the highest real money bidder.

This would open a whole can of worms with the amount of elitisim that would happen if the factions were directly given to players. Some units would get black listed and would not even be able to play because the person who ran the faction felt they were noobs or something.

Sorry no, you may not like us mercs. However you will have to accept that the way they did it was the only way.

However I do think they need to implement a way for units to hire other units to allow for some player politics. For example my unit has allready had talks with another unit to join their faction as soon as our current contract is up, would be nice if our coffers had a use and there could be a bidding war for some of the better merc corps. No delusions of grandeur here claiming we are just saying it would be nice.

[Joseph Mallan]

Soldryn, on 28 January 2015 - 10:05 AM, said:

NO. just NO.

every time this subject comes up, the only solution (rarely spoken, VERY heavily implied) is for player run factions.

NO

i GUARANTEE that IF PGI allows ANYONE to take control of a faction, the person or persons "in-charge" will immediately turn their faction into a popularity contest to decide who gets to stay in it, or join it.

NO

A Player should never have that kind of authority... Unless all players have it. I ran a Campaign in Clan Space, Each Player had a Warden and Crusader Clan. Full TO&E! It was cool to see how they handled the game from teh Top down.

[Insects]

Red Legs Greaves, on 03 January 2015 - 10:41 AM, said:

Contracts would go along way in keeping people fighting for a certain side.

Getting mercs to follow the short term money is the map balancing mechanism of the game.
That is how PGI will prevent houses being wiped out, increase pay until mercs decide to fight on that side for a week and reclaim territory.

[Joseph Mallan]

Ax2Grind, on 28 January 2015 - 04:36 PM, said:

I still me some AD&D.

I think there could be a more eloquent solution than just starting new accounts...maybe allow the creation of "toons" for a single account...where you have an IS and a Clan identity for CW...either one has a limited mech garage and you can only play one at a time, but it means anyone could enjoy their full garage. Public queue would still just be your full garage.

Or give me the option to port half my garage to the other account. That would be nice.

I have asked after this in a fashion. Was told there is no plans for it... at this time. Although disappointed, a glimmer of hope was allowed to remain that maybe someday...

[Alexander Steel]

joelmuzz, on 29 January 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

Getting mercs to follow the short term money is the map balancing mechanism of the game.
That is how PGI will prevent houses being wiped out, increase pay until mercs decide to fight on that side for a week and reclaim territory.

Sure, but the amount they have been using seems really really small. What's an extra 50K when the difference between a loss and a win is 4-6 times that? It's better to be on the winning side, even more so when you don't even get that pay out if you are losing.

[Insects]

Alexander Steel, on 29 January 2015 - 05:28 AM, said:

Sure, but the amount they have been using seems really really small.

They will just keep raising and lowering until it influences enough merc players to steer the map dots in the desired direction.

[Ax2Grind]

joelmuzz, on 29 January 2015 - 05:52 AM, said:

They will just keep raising and lowering until it influences enough merc players to steer the map dots in the desired direction.

It has never been enough to entice my unit into going anywhere. I wish there was a contract so good it was impossible to ignore...but that is not the case.

[Devil Fox]

Ax2Grind, on 29 January 2015 - 03:50 PM, said:

It has never been enough to entice my unit into going anywhere. I wish there was a contract so good it was impossible to ignore...but that is not the case.

Unit's in FRR would beg to differ... oh wait they went for other reasons

But yea the win only condition, the low payout, the contract bonuses are really negligible in CW long term provided you are winning the exchanges and earning some sizable wads of C Bill's.

[Anarcho]

Different gameplay for mercs? (diferent objectives)
NO

Different reward system for mercs?
YES

Loyalists need a reason to stay loyal, give then camos/mechs/titles, something more solid.
Mercs, well, they want MONEY, give then a raggle tool, and more Cbills maybe?

[Devil Fox]

Anarcho, on 17 February 2015 - 03:24 AM, said:

Loyalists need a reason to stay loyal, give then camos/mechs/titles, something more solid.
Mercs, well, they want MONEY, give then a raggle tool, and more Cbills maybe?

So I want camos/mechs (only if unique) or titles I need to bed with some loyalists whilst not being able to play with alot of my friends because we want to arbitrarily lock down content in a F2P to one crowd or another?

There has to be another way to reward mercs or loyalist unit's without hammer dead the rewards for one or the other. I think more personalised contracts for merc unit's stipulating their responsibility, more rigorous checks on what fronts they can fight on from the contract, and even adjust the rewards based on contract length. But let them gain LP for faction rewards, this way loyalists can have some small say in the front merc's get signed up for and the need for them.

Throw this in with logistic based mechanics for moving troops around the front, jumpships, transport costs, upkeep, etc etc, to provide a small bleeder effect to the CB's earned by merc unit's (not merc players), afterall you sign the contract as a unit, not as an individual.

[Anarcho]

Apostal Sinclair, on 17 February 2015 - 04:38 AM, said:

So I want camos/mechs (only if unique) or titles I need to bed with some loyalists whilst not being able to play with alot of my friends because we want to arbitrarily lock down content in a F2P to one crowd or another?

There has to be another way to reward mercs or loyalist unit's without hammer dead the rewards for one or the other. I think more personalised contracts for merc unit's stipulating their responsibility, more rigorous checks on what fronts they can fight on from the contract, and even adjust the rewards based on contract length. But let them gain LP for faction rewards, this way loyalists can have some small say in the front merc's get signed up for and the need for them.

Throw this in with logistic based mechanics for moving troops around the front, jumpships, transport costs, upkeep, etc etc, to provide a small bleeder effect to the CB's earned by merc unit's (not merc players), afterall you sign the contract as a unit, not as an individual.

If you want some unique, you have to fight for. Yes a unique mech/skin would be suitable for loyalists since they are with the faction they choose im the good and in the bad. Mercs can go and come as they please, if a front is getting too hard, bail out.

[Almond Brown]

Ax2Grind, on 28 January 2015 - 04:36 PM, said:

stuff

Or give me the option to port half my garage to the other account. That would be nice.

And I would be happy with just "some (in my case Clan) Mechs" be portable. I will buy whatever extra's afterwards.

Deckard Caine, on 28 January 2015 - 05:09 PM, said:

I think either of those ideas could work but do have some weaknesses.

The first would need some form of time lock on switching just to reduce the possibility for people to game the system by going "OK, 12 of us are going to switch to faction X and defend planet Y. The rest of you come beat us up." Just to be very clear I am not saying that you or your group would do that, just that someone would try it.

The second option has the same potential issue as the first with the added drawback that we would either have to log out/log in to change accounts to play different mechs or wait on PGI to implement some sort of multi-account identity manager.

That first option is available now. Just needs 2 12 mans on comms to organize it. Easy peazy so not real draw back that should prevent.

[Devil Fox]

Anarcho, on 17 February 2015 - 05:22 AM, said:

if a front is getting too hard, bail out.

At present that's more a loyalist saying... I see most mercs rotating between IS and Clan still end up on the fronts that at present provide the challenge and difficulty, the only IS loyalist factions that hold their ground are FRR (they have no where to run with their back to a wall). Steiner is now giving a good account of themselves against the Falcons, Kurita is happier to go south at the present time, Davion/Marik are 50/50 on sending unit's north... simply because their just forced to defend rather then become an offensive force.

But if we're going to give loyalist unit's unique rewards, the same should apply to the merc unit's, unique Merc faction Skins (who wouldn't play as Greydeath or Kell Hounds... hell the Northwind Highlanders!). If one side of the coin get's rewards for their effort, thus should the other as they are still hopping around on contracts to protect those loyalists resources, unit's and planets. Merc's were always for hire, no matter the price, they'll fight where they think they can make a difference, but just like the loyalists need incentives for their time, so do the merc's.

Edited by Apostal Sinclair, 17 February 2015 - 02:30 PM.

[Necromantion]

Please have a look at this topic i set up with a suggestion to address this concern:
http://mwomercs.com/...ntial-solution/