66 replies to this topic

[hybrid black]

A wise person asked “What can realistically be done to allow skill to effect CW more than it does now?”

The 12 mans are not meant to be the back bone, there the group that pushing you over the 50/50 wins to loss to take a planet, they gather the masses and give the focus, drive and a purpose. CW is more than just the game played it’s the politics, the game outside of the game that affects the overall map. The rivalries, the hate and the joy of seeing a plan work out, CW is not just winning games, its playing all that the game gives us and seeing outside of box, thinking ahead and sometimes gritting your teeth to fight next to someone you don’t like. Its giving up something to be better at the hole game, not just in drops.

[ThisMachineKillsFascists]

.No, you rush base, dont even shoot at the enemy and win. Coordination matters. Skill does not that much.

Edited by ThisMachineKillsFascists, 11 January 2015 - 09:18 PM.

[Lily from animove]

there is skill involved, the success of every game depends on skill, its just elss piloting ksill and miore skill of coordination. Yet piloting is still an important part of how fast you can take out or disable an opponent and the objectives.

But clanwar is a cimmunty event, a single pilot can ahve influence but will not alwyays decide a match. and so in CW a single match will not decide the ownership of a planet.

and so what premades for public pugs are, that are the big units in CW.

[oldradagast]

Far less than in the Public Queue.

At least there, the system TRIES to match you via ELO, and teams play against other teams, while solo players are pitted against each other.

CW, in its current form, is an utter joke. Nevermind the laughable maps, repetitive gameplay, and limited mech selection - the total lack of skill-based matchmaker renders a good number of the games utterly meaningless since they are decided the moment the teams are created. Disorganized bands of PUG's vs. 12-mans... "ggclose." Such games are common and are nothing but a waste of over a half-hour of everyone's time.

As for the rest of CW, assuming both teams are actually of comparable skill, even then, less skill is involved in a CW game than in a Public Queue? Why? Fixed, 100% predictable objectives.

In a Public Queue game, you have a general idea where the enemy will be, but without scouting, you are not 100% sure. You can also make use of most of the map terrain on most maps. Meanwhile, in CW, we have 100% clearly defined alleys and killzones where players must blunder down each and every game. By removing a good chunk of the element of surprise as well as any need for scouting or ability to pull off true flanking maneuvers, CW games, by definition, require less skill to play since certain entire aspects of warfare are removed from the system.

I will admit that CW, in theory, could require a bit more skill in mech build and selection since you bring 4 mechs within a weight limit, but since the part of the game has already been solved via limited viable builds (in part because of the horrible maps and single objectives), any skill in that part of CW is long gone. Now, it's just copy paste.

[Davers]

oldradagast, on 11 January 2015 - 06:22 AM, said:

Far less than in the Public Queue.

CW, in its current form, is an utter joke. Nevermind the laughable maps, repetitive gameplay, and limited mech selection

As for the rest of CW, assuming both teams are actually of comparable skill, even then, less skill is involved in a CW game than in a Public Queue? Why? Fixed, 100% predictable objectives.

Meanwhile, in CW, we have 100% clearly defined alleys and killzones where players must blunder down each and every game.

LOL if it is so bad why are you making so many posts about it? A solo only queue won't change the maps, tactics, repetitive gameplay, limited mech selection, and lack of skill compared to the public queue. Seems you have everything you already want in the solo queue.

[Adiuvo]

The only thing in CW that matters is numbers. The way you fix this is to force some method for there to be real attrition and essentially remove people's capability from dropping on a planet.

It's not a particularly nice thing, but if CW is ever to be taken seriously it will have to be required.

[Davers]

Adiuvo, on 11 January 2015 - 02:59 PM, said:

The only thing in CW that matters is numbers. The way you fix this is to force some method for there to be real attrition and essentially remove people's capability from dropping on a planet.

It's not a particularly nice thing, but if CW is ever to be taken seriously it will have to be required.

Even that will still favour the faction with the most players. I would rather not see a solution like this that benefits people making many alt accounts.

[Adiuvo]

Davers, on 11 January 2015 - 03:03 PM, said:

Even that will still favour the faction with the most players. I would rather not see a solution like this that benefits people making many alt accounts.

It would still favor that faction, but much less so since there's only so many skilled players in the game.

As for alt accounts, PGI could prevent new players from joining the queue. That should be done regardless honestly... but if someone wants to grind out tons of alts to the point where they would be effective in CW, I honestly wouldn't mind them having a bit more of an impact due to the time involved.

[Kjudoon]

::: raises hand:::

Someone define "skill" for me please.

Edited by Kjudoon, 11 January 2015 - 03:08 PM.

[Davers]

Adiuvo, on 11 January 2015 - 03:06 PM, said:

It would still favor that faction, but much less so since there's only so many skilled players in the game.

As for alt accounts, PGI could prevent new players from joining the queue. That should be done regardless honestly... but if someone wants to grind out tons of alts to the point where they would be effective in CW, I honestly wouldn't mind them having a bit more of an impact due to the time involved.

I understand that. But surely you realize that putting a limit on the number of drops that one can do is bad. Honestly, in that situation who would ever choose to drop against Lords and similar groups? Everyone would track where the comp groups went and try to avoid them like the plague. No one wants to have their CW experience cut short because of a bad drop. That's not how you build CW. You guys would just be fighting turrets and everyone else would just shrug and say 'Well, we would have lost that planet anyway.' Not fun for anyone.

I hope PGI realizes that for comp groups to have any meaning, there has to be a LOT of them around. Otherwise you have 6 groups seal clubbing and everyone hiding from them. PGI needs to make this a game where comp groups WANT to play, and I am afraid that would be very difficult for them at this point.

[oldradagast]

Davers, on 11 January 2015 - 02:53 PM, said:

LOL if it is so bad why are you making so many posts about it? A solo only queue won't change the maps, tactics, repetitive gameplay, limited mech selection, and lack of skill compared to the public queue. Seems you have everything you already want in the solo queue.

You miss the bigger picture.

PGI is a business, and MWO - while a game for us - needs to stay profitable to continue to exist. If PGI flounders by wasting a fortune on CW while failing to fix anything that's wrong with it, the horrible CW experience will lead to the game losing more players or failing to recruit new blood because of the failures of CW. If that happens, my fun in the Public Queue is at risk if PGI fails to achieve their goals and MWO fails as a game and a business.

There's more to this than the usual "get off my lawn, newb - CW is for manly men!" arguments that I hear so often around here. I couldn't care less about those people... except their pig-headed stubborn behavior and desire to score easy wins at the expense of the game itself puts my fun at risk... hence my posts on the topic.

[Davers]

oldradagast, on 11 January 2015 - 03:48 PM, said:

You miss the bigger picture.

PGI is a business, and MWO - while a game for us - needs to stay profitable to continue to exist. If PGI flounders by wasting a fortune on CW while failing to fix anything that's wrong with it, the horrible CW experience will lead to the game losing more players or failing to recruit new blood because of the failures of CW. If that happens, my fun in the Public Queue is at risk if PGI fails to achieve their goals and MWO fails as a game and a business.

There's more to this than the usual "get off my lawn, newb - CW is for manly men!" arguments that I hear so often around here. I couldn't care less about those people... except their pig-headed stubborn behavior and desire to score easy wins at the expense of the game itself puts my fun at risk... hence my posts on the topic.

But won't the players still have the public queue, which by your statements, is superior? LoL puts out lots of optional game modes, but I imagine that 5v5 Summoner's Rift is still the most played by far. It is their 'bread and butter queue', where the majority of players play. I imagine MWO's Public games to be the same thing.

[oldradagast]

Davers, on 11 January 2015 - 03:53 PM, said:

But won't the players still have the public queue, which by your statements, is superior? LoL puts out lots of optional game modes, but I imagine that 5v5 Summoner's Rift is still the most played by far. It is their 'bread and butter queue', where the majority of players play. I imagine MWO's Public games to be the same thing.

Again, you miss the point.

PGI is not a company with a lot of resources, and MWO is not a game with a lot of people. If the current utter failure of CW results in excessive resource loss on PGI's part or excessive loss of players because of how simply lousy it is, MWO itself is at risk... and then my Public Queue fun ends with it.

I couldn't care less about the screaming try-hards who love to talk out of both sides of their mouth: "CW is a place of real skill!' and "We don't need a match-maker because thrashing disorganized PUG groups with no hope of victory is fun.. .and, uh... just like real war... I'm the best player ever!" The problem is their willingness to drive every player away from the game and sink PGI's product just to score a few more meaningless wins puts MY fun at risk... which is why I'm speaking out on the subject.

Edited by oldradagast, 11 January 2015 - 04:00 PM.

[Davers]

oldradagast, on 11 January 2015 - 03:59 PM, said:

Again, you miss the point.

PGI is not a company with a lot of resources, and MWO is not a game with a lot of people. If the current utter failure of CW results in excessive resource loss on PGI's part or excessive loss of players because of how simply lousy it is, MWO itself is at risk... and then my Public Queue fun ends with it.

I couldn't care less about the screaming try-hards who love to talk out of both sides of their mouth: "CW is a place of real skill!' and "We don't need a match-maker because thrashing disorganized PUG groups with no hope of victory is fun.. .and, uh... just like real war... I'm the best player ever!" The problem is their willingness to drive every player away from the game and sink PGI's product just to score a few more meaningless wins puts MY fun at risk... which is why I'm speaking out on the subject.

My point, which you have missed (see what i did there! ) is that, in your opinion, CW sucks. Not just MM problems, but pretty much every aspect of the maps and game mode. Why are you so interested in getting more players into a game mode that has the least tactics, high Cbill entry cost, and is just the most boring and repetitive thing ever? After all, PGI could add solo queues and VOIP tomorrow, but neither will address 90% of your concerns about the game mode itself. It's like you are saying "This game mode is utter crap. How can I get more people to play it". Shouldn't you spend your time making more "Hey, the Public Queue is where it's at and is super fun come play with me there" posts?

[oldradagast]

Davers, on 11 January 2015 - 04:18 PM, said:

My point, which you have missed (see what i did there! ) is that, in your opinion, CW sucks. Not just MM problems, but pretty much every aspect of the maps and game mode. Why are you so interested in getting more players into a game mode that has the least tactics, high Cbill entry cost, and is just the most boring and repetitive thing ever? After all, PGI could add solo queues and VOIP tomorrow, but neither will address 90% of your concerns about the game mode itself. It's like you are saying "This game mode is utter crap. How can I get more people to play it". Shouldn't you spend your time making more "Hey, the Public Queue is where it's at and is super fun come play with me there" posts?

If you can't figure out why wanting a company - particularly a small one with limited resources - who produces something you like to be successful even if you're not currently interested in ONE of their products, I can't help you.

CW is currently a failure. I'm sure some people liked the New Coke, too, but that didn't save it, did it?

We can either discuss ways to fix it or we can listen to more of the usual nonsense: "I get to inflate my wins in CW by bashing PUG's over and over again, so it's the best thing ever... and why are the queue's so empty and wait times so long? Stupid PUG's - get back here and be beaten! CW is hardcore mode - but only for other people!"

Edited by oldradagast, 11 January 2015 - 04:31 PM.

[Davers]

oldradagast, on 11 January 2015 - 04:28 PM, said:

If you can't figure out why wanting a company - particularly a small one with limited resources - who produces something you like to be successful even if you're not currently interested in ONE of their products, I can't help you.

CW is currently a failure. I'm sure some people liked the New Coke, too, but that didn't save it, did it?

We can either discuss ways to fix it or we can listen to more of the usual nonsense: "I get to inflate my wins in CW by bashing PUG's over and over again, so it's the best thing ever... and why are the queue's so empty and wait times so long? Stupid PUG's - get back here and be beaten! CW is hardcore mode - but only for other people!"

Bad analogy, as New Coke did not doom the company. In fact it created a resurgence in popularity and name recognition for Coca Cola. Personally I am not against some kind of Elo or improved matchmaking in CW. But even with that, it does not change the very fundamentals of the game that you have problems with.

[oldradagast]

Davers, on 11 January 2015 - 05:13 PM, said:

Bad analogy, as New Coke did not doom the company. In fact it created a resurgence in popularity and name recognition for Coca Cola. Personally I am not against some kind of Elo or improved matchmaking in CW. But even with that, it does not change the very fundamentals of the game that you have problems with.

One issue at a time. If the other issues in CW - which are issues - are addressed but a match-maker is not added, we will still be left with a huge percentage of totally pointless, one-sided games that are decided at match start. That would negate the time and money spent on fixing the other issues since the vast majority of the game's population would still have zero interest in playing.

The painful reality is that any game system that over and over again randomly pits people together without remotely factoring in skill levels (or in-game coms) while expecting them to waste a half-hour or longer per game is a failure. That is the current state of CW, and until that is fixed, every other change made to it is basically polishing bull droppings.

Edited by oldradagast, 11 January 2015 - 05:33 PM.

[Davers]

oldradagast, on 11 January 2015 - 05:32 PM, said:

One issue at a time. If the other issues in CW - which are issues - are addressed but a match-maker is not added, we will still be left with a huge percentage of totally pointless, one-sided games that are decided at match start. That would negate the time and money spent on fixing the other issues since the vast majority of the game's population would still have zero interest in playing.

The painful reality is that any game system that over and over again randomly pits people together without remotely factoring in skill levels (or in-game coms) while expecting them to waste a half-hour or longer per game is a failure. That is the current state of CW, and until that is fixed, every other change made to it is basically polishing bull droppings.

You do know that adding match making will increase the time between matches exponentially? To get drops in a reasonable amount of time PGI would have to close the Public Queues.

The more I think about it, the best thing would be to remove solos from CW. If people want to play it, they can join a unit and play it. Otherwise they can play the Public Queue. There really isn't a way to balance pug vs pre made, just like there isn't a way to really balance comp teams vs regular teams.

Edited by Davers, 11 January 2015 - 05:43 PM.

[HlynkaCG]

Please define what you mean by "skill" in this case.

[oldradagast]

Davers, on 11 January 2015 - 05:39 PM, said:

You do know that adding match making will increase the time between matches exponentially? To get drops in a reasonable amount of time PGI would have to close the Public Queues.

The more I think about it, the best thing would be to remove solos from CW. If people want to play it, they can join a unit and play it. Otherwise they can play the Public Queue. There really isn't a way to balance pug vs pre made, just like there isn't a way to really balance comp teams vs regular teams.

Except match-making works fine in the Public Queue - games are found in a reasonable amount of time and blow-outs are less common than in CW.

CW's problem is a small - and dwindling - player base. Adding new maps, more generators, and other random junk does nothing to change the fact that a staggering percentage of the games are utterly pointless wastes of over a half-hour of time because of the total lack of a matchmaker. Games are decided at the drop screen - "ggclose." After a few of those experiences, the average user is going to walk away, not waste his or her time looking for team-speak, scouring the forums for a unit to join, spending a fortune and weeks leveling the meta-mechs of the day, etc.

It has been determined in the past that about 85% of this game's population would be considered casual gamers. That's 85% of the game's population that currently has NO reason at all to play CW. Until that is fixed, every other change made to CW is basically a waste of PGI's resources since there will soon be almost nobody left playing it.

Edited by oldradagast, 11 January 2015 - 05:50 PM.