28 replies to this topic

[Tastian]

12 man units think that CW is for them and them alone. They say PUGs should not have their own PUG queue and should get out. Some PUGs are cowering under this overlord mentality and asking "Please may we have a small corner of space?" But I say PUGs should fight PUGs and 12 mans should fight 12 mans and all can play in the same universe. Currently the player base is not large enough for 2 universes. And currently, the PUGs getting stomped by 12 mans are just leaving. And currently, the wait times are getting longer and longer and the map turning into a ghost town.

So, turn on a solo queue in CW. And add a "first battle available in my faction" option instead of queueing up for specific planets.

Oh, and dial up incentives. Currently every planet is the same and every faction ladder is the same.

Edited by Tastian, 07 January 2015 - 10:48 AM.

[wanderer]

Quote

Are you saying this is bad? Should people not be allowed to play games the way they want to play games? Are you suggesting that people should be shoehorned into a specific mold or go home?

They are allowed to.

You want to play in a game of PUGs effectively,go play in solo queue. That's the "I'm an army of one special snowflake" queue.

Don't go into the "team queue" (CW) and QQ about you how get stomped by teams. If there were no options to play solo-PUG, that'd be one thing. But there are.

Would I like to see smaller, more PUG-friendly (but much less influential) CW options? Yes. Community Warfare should be about units, organized warfare, armies rather than randoms being the majority of play.

The vast majority of the game caters to PUGs. And that's not "community" anything,that's Joe Pug sitting in his basement not knowing or caring what he shoots, as long as it blows up real good.

[TamCoan]

wanderer, on 07 January 2015 - 11:08 AM, said:

They are allowed to.

You want to play in a game of PUGs effectively,go play in solo queue. That's the "I'm an army of one special snowflake" queue.

Don't go into the "team queue" (CW) and QQ about you how get stomped by teams. If there were no options to play solo-PUG, that'd be one thing. But there are.

Would I like to see smaller, more PUG-friendly (but much less influential) CW options? Yes. Community Warfare should be about units, organized warfare, armies rather than randoms being the majority of play.

The vast majority of the game caters to PUGs. And that's not "community" anything,that's Joe Pug sitting in his basement not knowing or caring what he shoots, as long as it blows up real good.

Sorry but that's a very elitist way of looking at it. Just the wording of the posts talks down to people. There are two simple facts that make that kind of attitude a detriment to the life of the game.

1) PGI is a business; they need their entire user base involved in their game. Without everyone, they will fail and go out of business.
2) The vast majority of mechwarrior fans are in it for nostalgia. The average age range of players is late 30s/early 40s. Adults in that age range simply do not have the time required to devote to 12-man groups night after night. They are your PUGs who only have a random hour to jump into a match and play. They are also the group of people who can afford to throw the most money to the game. Alienating the shear buying power of this group is a bad idea.

They need to add richness to the game mode that appeals to groups and solo players alike. Alienating a large portion of their player base will only bring about the end of the game. Sure you can sit on your throne secure that your “skills” in your 12-man is so vastly superior to all others, but you will sit on that throne alone long after the IP license has been lost.

[Tastian]

wanderer, on 07 January 2015 - 11:08 AM, said:

They are allowed to.

You want to play in a game of PUGs effectively,go play in solo queue. That's the "I'm an army of one special snowflake" queue.

Don't go into the "team queue" (CW) and QQ about you how get stomped by teams. If there were no options to play solo-PUG, that'd be one thing. But there are.

Would I like to see smaller, more PUG-friendly (but much less influential) CW options? Yes. Community Warfare should be about units, organized warfare, armies rather than randoms being the majority of play.

The vast majority of the game caters to PUGs. And that's not "community" anything,that's Joe Pug sitting in his basement not knowing or caring what he shoots, as long as it blows up real good.

Guess what? The PUGs and small groups are doing exactly that - going to the solo queue. And you know what? CW is a ghost town.

Edited by Tastian, 07 January 2015 - 01:13 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

more missions. many players (myself included) have played the hell out of this game and are now easily bored by repetition.

[Sethliopod]

They might want to remove the ability for solo players to drop CW if they don't want them playing it.

[wanderer]

And y'know what?

I'm OK with PUGs right now staying in the solo queue.

That's why there's a solo queue in the first place.

PGI made CW require teams to do best (heck, even in Assault/Conquest/Skirmish). PUGs are not teams.

There is a PUG queue. That is the solo queue. They belong there, and yes- PUGs < groups. Always have, and this is just another reminder. You will never be at your best without an organized group backing you up.

Unless and until there's CW designed for PUGs/small groups, they should generally expect to be rightfully stomped by units. Repeatedly.

If PGI builds 4-player-sized CW maps/contracts, that's where PUGs would belong. The only "equality" will be segregation, the same as we have in non-CW play.

Until then, your PUGs and soloers are playing MWO. Just not much CW mode, because at this point it's just the same result as when we had a queue that pitted PUGs vs. groups before, and history repeated itself in a process any veteran MWO player would have told you (me included) from a mile away.

Just remember, it's only a beta!
There is no balancing factor to having 12 random players being random vs. a large, organized, and focused group. None. The PUG generally loses.

Quote

They might want to remove the ability for solo players to drop CW if they don't want them playing it.

Makes it easier to slap fillers into not-quite-full groups. Of course, when there are no groups on one side,this turns into 12-man target practice.

Edited by wanderer, 07 January 2015 - 12:50 PM.

[Mystere]

Apnu, on 07 January 2015 - 09:57 AM, said:

To answer the OP: A more complete game.

CW is, as far as I'm concerned, 20% done at best.

You're too generous.

Apnu, on 07 January 2015 - 09:57 AM, said:

Players have fled it because there's just one game mode, two maps, and of those two maps, one has a significant advantage to the defenders if they bring long range weapons. Also the time to find a match is pretty bad. Even with tricks and re-queuing every 5 minutes to get a game, its awful.

That is a good thing, because if I can take your base, then that means you're probably going to have a hell of a time taking it back from me.

Edited by Mystere, 07 January 2015 - 12:49 PM.

[Gorgo7]

wanderer, on 07 January 2015 - 10:36 AM, said:

Nothing, as it stands.

The majority of the playerbase soils itself at the idea of organized play, and would rather go into the solo queue where they can play bad builds and be special snowflakes.

You -could- build smaller CW maps off the current non-CW ones, and reduce numbers accordingly and CW shifts/rewards as well. Fewer targets, smaller targets. 15 minute time limits.

Call them "raiding" contracts vs. the current world-conquering/defending ones. 4-man (same drop deck) groups, maximum "group size" of two, meaning it'd be almost exclusively PUGsville, but you could team up with -one- friend. 5% of the world-effect of a full contract for conquest purposes,15% of the full contract/loyalty rewards, and you don't get a unit tag on the world (raids don't count, only a full contract would).

This idea is genius! I would love to play on the already set maps in a four man (or four PUGs) with a lance sized drop deck.
(or whatever)
Nice thinking and thanks for posting!
For those who would pick fight over this post, grow up! This person has a good idea, try supporting it or offering a better one instead of name calling.