186 replies to this topic

[oldradagast]

Tasker, on 21 January 2015 - 07:39 PM, said:

tl;dr: This guy wants to participate in Community Warfare but doesn't want to participate in the 'community' part of it, or socialize with anyone, or organize with anyone. He wants to just drop in by himself and expect magical Alexander at Gaugamela type battle planning in the 60 second drop window.

The thing nobody seems to get is that it's not just the solo players who are leaving CW.

My own example: decent player, decent mechs, and part of a decent small unit on coms. And I still left CW - with a slightly winning record - because the games were horrible. A good number of them were decided at match drop thanks to the laughably unbalanced "match-making." All it did was swing wildly from "Oh, look our 5 man + a 7 man vs. PUG's - we win!" to "our 4 man and some PUG's vs. a 12-man - we lose!" At 30-minutes a game, in a game mode with badly designed maps and repetitive gameplay, it's just not worth it.

So, if CW can't hold the interest of somebody like me - a decent player in a unit on coms - how the heck is it supposed to survive in the general community for any length of time? Adding more maps will not change the fundamental problems, chief of which is 30-minute games being decided before the match begins by pairing grossly incomparable teams against each other... and that doesn't even get to the horrible map design, repetitive game play, unbalanced objectives, etc.

[Joseph Mallan]

oldradagast, on 22 January 2015 - 04:31 AM, said:

The thing nobody seems to get is that it's not just the solo players who are leaving CW.

My own example: decent player, decent mechs, and part of a decent small unit on coms. And I still left CW - with a slightly winning record - because the games were horrible. A good number of them were decided at match drop thanks to the laughably unbalanced "match-making." All it did was swing wildly from "Oh, look our 5 man + a 7 man vs. PUG's - we win!" to "our 4 man and some PUG's vs. a 12-man - we lose!" At 30-minutes a game, in a game mode with badly designed maps and repetitive gameplay, it's just not worth it.

So, if CW can't hold the interest of somebody like me - a decent player in a unit on coms - how the heck is it supposed to survive in the general community for any length of time? Adding more maps will not change the fundamental problems, chief of which is 30-minute games being decided before the match begins by pairing grossly incomparable teams against each other... and that doesn't even get to the horrible map design, repetitive game play, unbalanced objectives, etc.

If the swinging is that hard, the games should not be lasting 30 minutes. 16 -20 but 30? If the game lasts that long you were balanced pretty good.

[Wildstreak]

NextGame, on 22 January 2015 - 02:14 AM, said:

To be brutally honest, MWO "community" is basically just "Sore Losers & Jealousy Online".

Lost a game? Find something to blame i.e. it was the pugs fault, it was the premades fault, clan mechs OP, thunderbolt OP, blah blah blah.

People need to get over themselves, but (spoiler alert) they wont.

Ultimately, if you are easily offended, ignore the forums and turn off chat in game, problem solved.

Everyone is fallible, and you can't change people, especially over something as trivial as MWO.

No, it is a community of people who come from different playstyles trying to all play in the same pool. Sometimes it works & sometimes not.

Some things being blamed can actually be justified, you just do not agree with that.

People can be changed if done right, you just want to be a stick in the mud refusing to do so.

NextGame, on 22 January 2015 - 02:46 AM, said:

I've never played in a drop with or against you, so I've no idea.

It's a cultural thing (possibly human nature even) to place blame externally, because it's the easy option, and an attitude that's very difficult to change, especially for people who have fallen into the "blame everything else" mindset in the first place.

More Generational as proven by tests but as said above there are times external blame is justified. That is why societies have Justice systems.

[Tasker]

oldradagast, on 22 January 2015 - 04:31 AM, said:

The thing nobody seems to get is that it's not just the solo players who are leaving CW.

My own example: decent player, decent mechs, and part of a decent small unit on coms. And I still left CW - with a slightly winning record - because the games were horrible. A good number of them were decided at match drop thanks to the laughably unbalanced "match-making." All it did was swing wildly from "Oh, look our 5 man + a 7 man vs. PUG's - we win!" to "our 4 man and some PUG's vs. a 12-man - we lose!" At 30-minutes a game, in a game mode with badly designed maps and repetitive gameplay, it's just not worth it.

So, if CW can't hold the interest of somebody like me - a decent player in a unit on coms - how the heck is it supposed to survive in the general community for any length of time? Adding more maps will not change the fundamental problems, chief of which is 30-minute games being decided before the match begins by pairing grossly incomparable teams against each other... and that doesn't even get to the horrible map design, repetitive game play, unbalanced objectives, etc.

Isn't the timer in CW games actually something like 30 minutes? So basically, you got a match that played to the whistle and you complained that it was grossly imbalanced? Okay. Buddy, if you were being dropship camped, that thing woulda been over in ten, tops.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mirkk Defwode, on 21 January 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

So because I disagree with the state of the game it's my fault. Alright, first, Balance is making it so everything is functional, viable, and people want to use it. It means things are not undesirable. Not every game achieves this, infact its exceptionally rare to actually reach this vaunted goal. But saying the game is in a balanced state right now to me is just off the mark.

As it stands for weapons, as I called that out, I don't see what they're balanced around. Is it the heat scale? Timing? DPS? Functionality? Range? Classification?

Are there mechs that people define as undesirable? I see a lot of posts about that...so those would be unbalanced.

My view here is of the title as a whole organism with all the little systems as they're integrated together.

As for communication - sure there is 3rd party stuff, but some days (most days) I don't really want to interact with people, I want to relax, play, have fun. I can go do that with other competitive shooters, but I'm a old fan of Battletech. So I want to play the game I've invested money into and a significant portion of effort. I'd like to see it become something great. So I post feedback with what I think is amiss. If you disagree that's okay. Though I don't think the game is centered around the units, or if we need voice comms it should be built in-game then it's more readily available than me randomly jumping between 2, 5, 10, 50 different comms servers as the groups are randomly compiled.

I've never been in a group in-game with anyone off the forums, infact I invited a ton of folks I talk to often on the forums to my friendslist...I've only ever been on at the same time as 2 of them. So there's a no-go for being in a party.

Or maybe I'm just doing it all wrong...

Well... Yes It is your Fault.
It is your opinion
You formed it
you embrace it
You choose to stick with it.

Just like my liking the CW system is due to the same formula
My Opinion
I formed it
I embrace it
I choose to stick to it.

See Blame is equal!
Also M-W Dictionary is better than Wiki
1bal·ance noun \ˈba-lən(t)s\
: the state of having your weight spread equally so that you do not fall

: the ability to move or to remain in a position without losing control or falling

: a state in which different things occur in equal or proper amounts or have an equal or proper amount of importance

People here are more interested in Equality than Balance.

equal·i·ty noun \i-ˈkwä-lə-tē\
: the quality or state of being equal : the quality or state of having the same rights, social status, etc.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 22 January 2015 - 08:03 AM.

[Mirkk Defwode]

Joseph Mallan, on 22 January 2015 - 07:56 AM, said:

Well... Yes It is your Fault.
It is your opinion
You formed it
you embrace it
You choose to stick with it.

Just like my liking the CW system is due to the same formula
My Opinion
I formed it
I embrace it
I choose to stick to it.

See Blame is equal!
Also M-W Dictionary is better than Wiki
1bal·ance noun \ˈba-lən(t)s\
: the state of having your weight spread equally so that you do not fall

: the ability to move or to remain in a position without losing control or falling

: a state in which different things occur in equal or proper amounts or have an equal or proper amount of importance

People here are more interested in Equality than Balance.

equal·i·ty noun \i-ˈkwä-lə-tē\
: the quality or state of being equal : the quality or state of having the same rights, social status, etc.

Game balance is different than balance is described by the dictionary which focuses more on physical balance.

Here is an authority on how it is defined
http://www.gamasutra...eo_.php?print=1

Keith Burgun said:

Keith Burgun
Why is balance important, anyway?
Gameplay is all about making choices and in a poorly-balanced game, many of the choices available to the player are essentially rendered useless. And this, in a nutshell, is why game balance is so important -- it preserves your game elements from irrelevance. In an imbalanced game, one or more "dominant strategies" quickly emerge, limiting other strategies useless except for some un-intended purpose (such as getting used as a handicap mechanism, or comedic reasons).
An example of this would be the "tiers" in competitive fighting games. There are usually three or so tiers of characters, with those characters agreed by the community as being "the best" in the top tier. Assuming that a player is attempting to win the game, choosing any of the characters besides those "best" characters is simply not a viable option.
Before I go on, I think it's important to be clear about what I mean by "dominant strategy". A dominant strategy, in the context of game design, is something that emerges due to game imbalance. A clear example of dominant strategy would be "blocking the opponent from getting three in a row", in Tic-Tac-Toe. That's a game that is rendered completely un-playable due to the obviousness of the sole strategy actually available to an aware player. This is the same way that dominant strategy damages or ruins games (although rarely to the same degree).

Much of game balance is a teetering act, and needs to be engineered around the gameplay you're trying to make as well as the audience you're shooting for. If there is a portion of the audience that cries foul or a dominate majority use a limited few items of the numerous available then there is very likely something that is wrong with either those items, or everything else.

Either way you are correct in saying it's an opinion. But There are lots of folks on either side of this fence and it's something that i think PGI needs to address publicly as to where they stand compared to these issues. Otherwise there will be continued debate and hostility in this community.

Edited by Mirkk Defwode, 22 January 2015 - 09:10 AM.

[ZealotTheFallen]

I found the number one player and group I have ever had to fought against. Complete immature and rude remarks. -----cobra. Kurita faction. From start to finish, The verbal insults and harrassing was nothing to be proud of. And jumping thru the computer as a wonka candy bar to personally give them hugs and kisses with a tool. First time I got that angry and said nothing, was enough to get me to never pug in CW. I hate it, but still fight with my faction, to support my friends and fellow players in small groups of only 4-6. But it is not worth the time or trouble in CW. 12 man only way to win against clan or very good pug groups. In the distant pass, three battles were fought back to back. 3 different pug teams scores Defence 48-23. Attacking 48-28 Defending 32-48. This was an excellent and great fun fight, against one of the most honorable clan group I have play against.

I found the number one player and group I have ever had to fought against. Complete immature and rude remarks. -----cobra. Kurita faction. From start to finish, The verbal insults and harrassing was nothing to be proud of. And jumping thru the computer as a wonka candy bar to personally give them hugs and kisses with a tool. First time I got that angry and said nothing, was enough to get me to never pug in CW. I hate it, but still fight with my faction, to support my friends and fellow players in small groups of only 4-6. But it is not worth the time or trouble in CW. 12 man only way to win against clan or very good pug groups. In the distant pass, three battles were fought back to back. 3 different pug teams scores Defence 48-23. Attacking 48-28 Defending 32-48. This was an excellent and great fun fight, against one of the most honorable clan group I have play against.