31 replies to this topic

[Lord Ikka]

So, as a discussion topic:
How does everyone view the fact that it is powerful (in the form of numerous members/high skill) mercenary units becoming the driving factor in CW?

I'm neither for nor against this, just wondering about everyone else's opinion. As a big lore fan, I'm just finding it amusing that, unlike in lore, the mercs have such an impact on how the map changes. Is this something that should be encouraged; the weekly changing of factions by the big mercs that seems to shift focus from one side to another in a major way?

Any thoughts?

[Kjudoon]

Obvious cause: contracts are too short, no penalties for flipping too quickly, only breaking contracts. Too little benefit for loyalist forces too.

Edited by Kjudoon, 18 January 2015 - 11:19 AM.

[Xetelian]

We're in beta so things will likely change in regards to how often you can change and how much its going to cost.

I'm out 1,500,000 because my faction was switched (not by a unit leader, not in a unit) to Kurita spontaneously

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

A fair number of units are typically just flipping between one Great House and one Clan. Why? Because most of us have put time, money, and effort on both IS and Clan robots and as such, we want to be able to play all our stuff and the argument that "you still have the normal queues to play your other faction robots" is an unacceptable argument to pretty much 90% of us.

[Void Angel]

Lord Ikka, on 18 January 2015 - 07:14 AM, said:

So, as a discussion topic:
How does everyone view the fact that it is powerful (in the form of numerous members/high skill) mercenary units becoming the driving factor in CW?

I'm neither for nor against this, just wondering about everyone else's opinion. As a big lore fan, I'm just finding it amusing that, unlike in lore, the mercs have such an impact on how the map changes. Is this something that should be encouraged; the weekly changing of factions by the big mercs that seems to shift focus from one side to another in a major way?

Any thoughts?

There's no functional difference between a mercenary company and a faction loyalist unit. Without some kind of differentiating factor, the mercs are going to drive the changing landscape of the battlefield, because they're the ones that can switch sides and effect changes in the balance of power.

[Davers]

I dunno, mercs seem pretty influential in the lore.

As for in game, there is every reason to be a merc, and none to be a faction player. A merc can get 60 free mechbays to the faction player's 5. Mercs can get like 30000MC compared to a faction player's 3000. Not to mention all the GXP and Cbill rewards that a merc can get 10x as much as a faction player. Now throw in all the RP stuff that seems important to faction units, but can be a real turn off to players who just want to shoot robots and make Cbills.

[Alexander Steel]

I'm ok with it. It keeps one power from taking over as the merc faction can swing the war against them once PGI makes the rewards for knocking down the big guy large enough.

[Void Angel]

Wh... what are you talking about? I want my 60 free mech bays... There's no functional difference between a 'merc unit and a faction unit - the only benefit to joining a unit is cooperative CW and Group Queue play, not extra MC and mech bays, etc.

[Vlad Ward]

LP rewards. Mercs can grind to max in every house. Perm Faction units can't.

[Void Angel]

Oooooh, that's right. I'd completely forgotten about the MC and bays. =) So I guess that's true... but without a truly unbreakable permanent affiliation, I don't see an obvious remedy.

[Alexander Steel]

They can, they just choose not to.

[Tarogato]

@op

It bothers me a lot, actually. I see the most powerful teams in the game switching contracts every two weeks (I think the minimum contract is one week?) and wherever they go, that faction temporarily dominates in some regard or other.

I signed up for faction warfare, not Mercs-Fight-Whoever-They-Wanna-Fight-This-Week Warfare.

Brainstorming: what if loyalists provided part of the paycheck for mercs? Reduce merc contracts by half (or ⅓) and put it on the loyalists to provide the other half (or final ⅓) of the contract. As such, multiple loyalist units could collaborate in offering x amount of C-Bills to a merc unit for as long as that merc unit is Doing Its Job. Rogue mercs obviously wouldn't find themselves being sponsored by a faction they're seeking to undermine and mercs will go to whoever offers them the highest bid naturally. Factions who don't "own up" to their bid could easily screw themselves over as far as player politics, as well as mercs that take contracts and fail to perform as expected.

[Davers]

Tarogato, on 18 January 2015 - 02:23 PM, said:

@op

It bothers me a lot, actually. I see the most powerful teams in the game switching contracts every two weeks (I think the minimum contract is one week?) and wherever they go, that faction temporarily dominates in some regard or other.

I signed up for faction warfare, not Mercs-Fight-Whoever-They-Wanna-Fight-This-Week Warfare.

Brainstorming: what if loyalists provided part of the paycheck for mercs? Reduce merc contracts by half (or ⅓) and put it on the loyalists to provide the other half (or final ⅓) of the contract. As such, multiple loyalist units could collaborate in offering x amount of C-Bills to a merc unit for as long as that merc unit is Doing Its Job. Rogue mercs obviously wouldn't find themselves being sponsored by a faction they're seeking to undermine and mercs will go to whoever offers them the highest bid naturally. Factions who don't "own up" to their bid could easily screw themselves over as far as player politics, as well as mercs that take contracts and fail to perform as expected.

So the large factions would be able to afford the big mercs, making them even larger. Smaller factions would be at more of a disadvantage, and small merc companies would find themselves out of work entirely, since who would bother to pay a merc company who can't even field a full 12 man regularly?

Plus who would be in charge of making the decisions on who can or cannot participate in CW? Having the entire CW experience run by some kind of oligarchy is a good way to kill the game.

[Ax2Grind]

First off, we are all Mercs currently. All of us. Once PGI makes a true distinction and creates an actual Faction progression you might some changes to what is currently going on, but until then we are in the same "bucket", have the same choices, and get close to the same rewards depending on the contract we take. RP all you want but all of us signed a "contract" to get paid to fight for someone. Mercs. You are one.

Secondly, there is no way to stop a unit from making an impact. No matter where they end up, if they play the game well, and are focused they will help drive the game. They don't even have to be big. SA and NS are great examples of units that have stayed 100% loyal to a single faction, I believe, and have made a huge impact for their factions. BWC is another group that comes to mind that has stayed with one single faction to help drive it's success. MS, CI, QQ, Lords, and 228 are great examples of roving bands of Mercs...and yes they impact things wherever they go through their numbers and their quality of pilots but I think you need to put those numbers in perspective.

Sometimes these roving bands of mercs can't even put a full 12 set of pilots together. Sometimes all they are playing with is one 12 man. Sometimes they have one to maybe three 4-12 mans all going at once (depending on the group). These numbers become significant due to the fact these are fairly cohesive teams playing (average skill level) and the lack of general population in CW. I think in the debate of skill versus population this showcases that unit skill does indeed make a difference, although it can still become overwhelmed or negated past a certain point. My point is just that you will still see them have an impact because their high average skill level will make it so....whether you make contracts 2 weeks or a month. If decent units can't make an impact in the war, then something is wrong.

Lastly, while many players have invented RP reasons for a number of these Merc groups to be jumping around, even talking about groups trying to undermine entire factions, at least for the majority of the groups that I am aware of this is untrue. The main reason for jumping factions has been to play the entire garage. The second most common reason is to check out how the various factions are working together, looking for a good fit diplomatically and for good fights. And lastly there is the gathering of those free mech bays through getting tier 2 of every faction.

[Tarogato]

Davers, on 18 January 2015 - 02:44 PM, said:

So the large factions would be able to afford the big mercs, making them even larger. Smaller factions would be at more of a disadvantage, and small merc companies would find themselves out of work entirely, since who would bother to pay a merc company who can't even field a full 12 man regularly?

Plus who would be in charge of making the decisions on who can or cannot participate in CW? Having the entire CW experience run by some kind of oligarchy is a good way to kill the game.

And that's why I preceded it with the word "brainstorming"; good counterarguments, much appreciated. I'm sure there's more that could be done to flush idea out, but I'm not over attached to it.

[Vlad Ward]

The thing I'm seeing a lot from faction units is a call to find ways to punish or restrict the movements of mercs, who are really just other people playing the same game over the interwebs. That's a pretty crappy attitude to take, in my opinion. Any solution of that variety will just drive players out from an already player-starved CW.

Edited by Vlad Ward, 18 January 2015 - 03:22 PM.

[Tarl Cabot]

Vlad Ward, on 18 January 2015 - 03:21 PM, said:

The thing I'm seeing a lot from faction units is a call to find ways to punish or restrict the movements of mercs, who are really just other people playing the same game over the interwebs. That's a pretty crappy attitude to take, in my opinion. Any solution of that variety will just drive players out from an already player-starved CW.

We should not punish those units that currently does have a larger, unified player base who wants to play the game in many different ways due to current settings, be it IS vs IS, IS vs Clan and Clan vs Clan, regardless of any pacts made by a combined faction units. I will say once things get more fleshed out, things may need to be put into place that is not as freewheeling as it is now but that would be more in line to restrict types of griefing actions.

On the other hand, leaders do need to step out of their RP suits and review their actions and words, for the betterment of the community as a whole, and not just from their faction's viewpoint when it is clouded by RP lens. Currently PGI may not have provided all the tools/designs for us to interact with each other expect at the end of a barrel, it is up to the leaders and the player base to determine how we actually view each other as well as how those new to the game, whether or not they are new to the IP.

Those who had played the MPBT versions, from 9th Sword of Dragon to Draaguns to others sprinkled among the population, many may not have been directly involved nor aware of the details that went on at the highest levels between the Houses (via constitution and final approval) and Kesmai, it was always for the health of the community. With that said, we do not really have that here, yet. PGI is currently is not providing any sort of direction, or I should say, a format for us to follow. That can be both and bad, cause at times we can be our own worse enemy and things can get toxic. As mentioned in the latest segment:

Quote

42. Will we see the FedSuns and Lyrans unite/Similar lore effects? Will we see lore impact planets/territories, or will it be player motivated only? Paul likes letting players create their own alliances for now... "I like the player driven politics personally."

There will always be, hmm, hotheads, or those who become excited about a subject and are so close to the subject matter that they can not see it from the outside, but ultimately it will be how the majority of us conduct ourselves that will determine how others, especially outsiders and the new players, will perceive this community.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 18 January 2015 - 04:07 PM.

[Ano]

It's a difficult trade off.

If there are top-flight units (and other units, for that matter, in sufficient numbers) switching "sides" every few weeks then it's unlikely that there'll ever be a significant change to the map. The flip side is that making it particularly onerous to change faction IS going to significantly limit players who have invested time and/or money in both IS and clan equipment.

I wonder if a greater, longer-term goal (with corresponding unique rewards) might drive people to picking a side and sticking to it for a longer period? Say (for example) a clan invasion "storyline" where each week, there are (say) 48h where all clan players can attack/defend planets on a predetermined "route to terra", and all IS houses can defend those planets (nb: that doesn't mean that the IS are perma-defending, "attack" and "defend" here serve the narrative, not the mechanics). At the end of the 48h the planet statuses are locked and CW returns to "normal". Each week for a number of weeks, this repeats, moving the group of planets eligible for attack/defend based on results.

Players who play in this mode for X weeks without changing faction would be eligible for whatever rewards seem appropriate (unique variants, unique camo patterns -- the rewards should be visible ingame) and an end-of-story competition could help decide the "outcome", before resetting and repeating.

Edited by Ano, 18 January 2015 - 04:58 PM.

[Alexander Steel]

I don't know... the map seems to be pretty fluid now. I would imagine it'll be even more so with 3 planets a day on each faction border up for bids.

[ZenFool]

Actually I'm seeing a great deal of incentive to switch sides with the current set up. I don't want to punish merc groups who switch, but I sure as $#%^ don't want to BE punished for getting a perm contract. Which is exactly the problem right now. There is NO reason for a unit to be loyal to one side and every reason to switch. This will only become worse when they start handing out mc and bays.