69 replies to this topic

[Mirkk Defwode]

oldradagast, on 01 February 2015 - 12:40 PM, said:

The thing is one doesn't need to nerf anything to get PUG's more into CW:

1) Add decent CW tutorials: Put the CW maps into the Training Grounds and make a simple tutorial where the player walks around shooting the generators. Then, the next "level" in the demo, he has to shoot the generators while not dying to the base turrets. This isn't going to make a new player good at CW, but it will get around the maddening frustration of basically having no clue what is going on.

In my first CW games as the attacker, I only had any idea what exactly to shoot and where to go by reading the forums. That is absurd in this day and age - it reminds me of reading "Nintendo Power!" magazine in the late 1980's to figure out how to play the games back then... except this is 20+ years later and we have the memory space to program meaningful guides and tutorials into the game.

2) Keep the completely new players out of CW: There is no good reason for a player with under 25 games (still in cadet bonus period) and no mechs of his own to be in CW. He will simply be demolished. Instead, have the game point him to the tutorial instead when he tries to go to CW, and have it clearly explain what is needed to enter CW.

3) Add some form of optional skill-based match-making to CW: I've said it a thousand times, and I'll say it a thousand more since CW is supposedly the future of this game, but any game mode that randomly pits PUG's of unknown skill against practiced teams who work together is simply wasting everyone's time.

ROFL-stomps teach people nothing. If stomping people was a viable form of education, we could teach calculus just by handing out tests on the subject and failing students until they magically learned it. Similarly, we could make somebody a champion boxer just by punching them in the face repeatedly. Why some folks think that MWO is exception to this rule is beyond me, but CW badly needs a way to ease new players into it. Without, they'll just get stomped a few times, laugh at the absurdly of PUG's vs. 12-mans, and quit CW, if not MWO, entirely, which isn't good for PGI or anyone in this game.

I suggest you take a look at Star Conflict and see their tutorial system. I think mirroring that design would be the best way to introduce people to MWO as a concept as well as into CW and every other system for this game.

[Khereg]

oldradagast, on 01 February 2015 - 12:40 PM, said:

2) Keep the completely new players out of CW: There is no good reason for a player with under 25 games (still in cadet bonus period) and no mechs of his own to be in CW. He will simply be demolished. Instead, have the game point him to the tutorial instead when he tries to go to CW, and have it clearly explain what is needed to enter CW.

I'm generally more for inclusion rather than exclusion under the premise that players can't learn until they're thrown into the pool, but in this case I think you have an excellent point. In fact, I'd go further: 100 game minimum before getting into CW. The reasoning:

1. Time spent to learn tactics - 100 games should give most players enough time in the cockpit to be a credible addition to a team, whether PUG'ing or in a formal unit. There are always exceptions, of course, but generally true. I know for myself 25 games didn't get me there and even after 100 I was still pretty green. But if you make it much more than that it will seem too much of an investment for new players before receiving the payoff. 100 games at roughly 15min/game = 25 hrs of play time. That's not a crazy amount, but not trivial either.

2. It can be construed as another goal for a new player to work towards. All games are built around an incremental rewards system (acheivements, anyone?) and entry into CW could be viewed as another "graduation" of sorts. It could even be written into a narrative where the first 25 matches are true introductory training with a cadet bonus, the next 75 are advanced training, maybe with another bonus, like a free mech appropriate to designated faction, and then and only then are you trusted by your house/clan/unit to enter the main conflict that is CW.

If an idea like this one isn't already in the CW suggestion list, it should be included ASAP. Besides, this should be easy for PGI to code... (I'm sure that has been said before without fully understanding what it would take).

[Almond Brown]

It is funny how the same complaint of many CW vets, PUGS, also come out of the PUG game play area. Can't get a decent PUG game as its full of PUGS f'ing it up for my Team. LOL!

P.S. There is plenty of Tutorial info to be had if desired and come on, CW is not any kind of "Rocket Science" minded mode right. Fight Attrition or Zerg. Ok opening the Gates can be hard for the true newbs...

MWO does have a hefty learning curve. Nothing some time and effort in the TG can't help with. Building Mechs is a personal thing, and is fun and is not forced, so that good. If someone doesn't care to take a week to learn how to DRIVE a Mech, then that is one them and they have little input. We hear it all the time, that input, but it is easily recognized.

So in a nutshell. PUGS don;t take the time to Learn the game properly. The many say that PUGS are ruining their PUG playground. Now many say that PUGS are ruining their CW playground. How soon it is forgotten. We were all PUG's once and someone had to put up with our weak sauce BS over that time.

Edited by Almond Brown, 02 February 2015 - 09:43 AM.

[Das Grab]

Even for players that have been around that the gates can be hard to open when some weapons are lower on the mech. where mechs with higher weapons have a better time.
Seem like ppl dont want pugs around.

[Apnu]

Das Grab, on 27 January 2015 - 01:57 PM, said:

Players are saying that PUGs should stay out of CW.
Well i think they shouldnt.

Fixs PGI could look at.

1) Using a voip.

2) setup a lance coms, like BF4 has.

3) force PUGS to be on ts3. not a good at all.

So there are games out there that have ideas on how to fix the comms idea.

4) Put PUGs in Assault, Skirmish and Conquest with randoms from their faction for quick one-off fights on planets in play for CW. Leave Invasion as it is -- the domain of highly organized groups.

5) Have lobbies so PUGs can collect before the drop, try to get a plan together then launch when the lobby is full.

[Ax2Grind]

Apnu, on 02 February 2015 - 02:20 PM, said:

4) Put PUGs in Assault, Skirmish and Conquest with randoms from their faction for quick one-off fights on planets in play for CW. Leave Invasion as it is -- the domain of highly organized groups.

5) Have lobbies so PUGs can collect before the drop, try to get a plan together then launch when the lobby is full.

Lobbies....would help....how do we still not have....lobbies. Must be lost tech.

[Kjudoon]

Ax2Grind, on 02 February 2015 - 03:47 PM, said:

Lobbies....would help....how do we still not have....lobbies. Must be lost tech.

William Shatner? Is that you?

[oldradagast]

Das Grab, on 02 February 2015 - 01:08 PM, said:

Even for players that have been around that the gates can be hard to open when some weapons are lower on the mech. where mechs with higher weapons have a better time.
Seem like ppl dont want pugs around.

Look at any thread where I've tangled with idiots like roaddrunk and the crew, and you'll see that's spot on.

If you mention any idea to bring more players into the game, the blast you for "catering to bads," and if you suggest any improvements, you're a "bad" who wants to "wreck the game."

The stupidity and arrogance of certain loons on this forum is unreal. I also find it hilarious that they are willing to devote an insane amount of time to become "great" at a flippin' video game while also taking the time to try to kill that game at the same time... trying to get rid of "noobies," blasting anyone who disagrees with them as bads, spewing idiocy everywhere, etc.

Anyway, lots of good ideas here... I hope PGI listens.

[Roadbeer]

oldradagast, on 02 February 2015 - 05:08 PM, said:

Look at any thread where I've tangled with idiots like roaddrunk and the crew, and you'll see that's spot on.

If you mention any idea to bring more players into the game, the blast you for "catering to bads," and if you suggest any improvements, you're a "bad" who wants to "wreck the game."

The stupidity and arrogance of certain loons on this forum is unreal. I also find it hilarious that they are willing to devote an insane amount of time to become "great" at a flippin' video game while also taking the time to try to kill that game at the same time... trying to get rid of "noobies," blasting anyone who disagrees with them as bads, spewing idiocy everywhere, etc.

Anyway, lots of good ideas here... I hope PGI listens.

Nobody wants to get rid of noobs or PUGs, they can be taught, we just want to get rid of bads who want an easy button.

Like you.

[Kjudoon]

Roadbeer, on 02 February 2015 - 10:55 PM, said:

Nobody wants to get rid of noobs or PUGs, they can be taught, we just want to get rid of bads who want an easy button.

Like you.

Those are Derps, remember?

[Roadbeer]

Kjudoon, on 02 February 2015 - 10:56 PM, said:

Those are Derps, remember?

I stand corrected

[Karpundir]

Why do we need so many threads talking about the role of solo players in CW?

PGI is implementing more tools to better integrate solo players and unit players within factions, so please give this topic a rest and let the game catch up to all of you!

In the meantime, solo players should look at the suggestions I made in this post on a similar train of discussion.

[Joseph Mallan]

oldradagast, on 02 February 2015 - 05:08 PM, said:

Look at any thread where I've tangled with idiots like roaddrunk and the crew, and you'll see that's spot on.

If you mention any idea to bring more players into the game, the blast you for "catering to bads," and if you suggest any improvements, you're a "bad" who wants to "wreck the game."

The stupidity and arrogance of certain loons on this forum is unreal. I also find it hilarious that they are willing to devote an insane amount of time to become "great" at a flippin' video game while also taking the time to try to kill that game at the same time... trying to get rid of "noobies," blasting anyone who disagrees with them as bads, spewing idiocy everywhere, etc.

Anyway, lots of good ideas here... I hope PGI listens.

So Name calling elevates you to a higher level of IQ does it? It's been my experience that when someone is calling names, they are actually feeling they are losing an argument/debate.

Bringing more players into a game is good, Letting everyone be awesome at the game is bad. Keeping it tough, challenging and fun, will draw the right level of players to a game. to support it. Now what is THE right level? The game must be a blend that will satisfy Me and my taste for challenge yet not frustrate Lil Billy Newb to much.

Most folks here don't want to get rid of Newbs(new players), we want to limit Noobs(buffoons unwilling to put in ANY effort).

[Leeroy Mechkins]

The problem is too few units in some factions. So it ends up PUGs vs UNIT.
Which is total steamroll for the UNIT.

If there are equal number of units in IS and Clan, then it ends up UNIT vs UNIT or UNIT+PUGs vs UNIT+PUGs.
Which is more of an even game.

In UNIT+PUG vs UNIT+PUG, you may end up with bad PUGs but so may the other side, so it evens out over time.

Edited by Leeroy Mechkins, 03 February 2015 - 09:04 AM.

[oldradagast]

Roadbeer, on 02 February 2015 - 10:55 PM, said:

Nobody wants to get rid of noobs or PUGs, they can be taught, we just want to get rid of bads who want an easy button.

Like you.

Roadbeer, I wouldn't play a game with you if you were the last player in this game. But, hey - I also don't get my jollies from killing easy targets - unlike your kind, who think PUG-rolling is somehow integral to this game - so you're not worth the effort.

[N0MAD]

Joseph Mallan, on 03 February 2015 - 03:31 AM, said:

So Name calling elevates you to a higher level of IQ does it?

we want to limit Noobs(buffoons unwilling to put in ANY effort).

Wow Sailor, both these comments in the same post? really?

[Ax2Grind]

oldradagast, on 03 February 2015 - 03:55 PM, said:

Roadbeer, I wouldn't play a game with you if you were the last player in this game. But, hey - I also don't get my jollies from killing easy targets - unlike your kind, who think PUG-rolling is somehow integral to this game - so you're not worth the effort.

The kindness you display towards Roadbeer is noted. I can imagine his relief.

Do you ever notice that while not a single Roadbeer post suggests that PUG-rolling is integral to the game, you seem to bring it up in almost every post? Apparently you think PUG-rolling is good for this game. Shame on you. Stop the hate. Haters like you ruin this game.

[Roadbeer]

oldradagast, on 03 February 2015 - 03:55 PM, said:

Roadbeer, I wouldn't play a game with you if you were the last player in this game. But, hey - I also don't get my jollies from killing easy targets - unlike your kind, who think PUG-rolling is somehow integral to this game - so you're not worth the effort.

You seem to presume a lot about premades, but your constant banging of that drum proves that everything you said about being in a group is a lie.

That's the difference between you and I though. I would play with you, I would show you that not all, most, or many groups are what you make them out to be. That we're accommodating to new/underskilled players and try to ingratiate them into a community.

The communities you seem hell bent on destroying.

Good luck with that, Cupcake.

[Joseph Mallan]

N0MAD, on 03 February 2015 - 04:06 PM, said:

Wow Sailor, both these comments in the same post? really?

Was wondering if someone would catch it!

Have I ever claimed to be an intellectual? Or even Smart?

Sailors are a lower form of marine Life NOMAD, please get your nomenclature correct. I am a Jarhead, Devil Dog, Leatherneck or Bullet Catcher. Sailors are Navy.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 04 February 2015 - 04:43 AM.

[N0MAD]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 February 2015 - 04:40 AM, said:

Was wondering if someone would catch it!

Have I ever claimed to be an intellectual? Or even Smart?

Sailors are a lower form of marine Life NOMAD, please get your nomenclature correct. I am a Jarhead, Devil Dog, Leatherneck or Bullet Catcher. Sailors are Navy.

Etymology
The word marine is from the English adjective marine, meaning of the sea, via French marin(e), of the sea from Latin marinus ("of the sea") itself from mare (“sea”), from Proto-Indo-European *móri (“body of water, lake”) (cognate with Old English mere (“sea, lake, pool, pond”), Dutch meer, German Meer, all from Proto-Germanic *mari).^[8]

The word marine was originally used for the forces of England and exact one-word translations for the term do not exist in many other languages except for the Dutch word marinier. Typically, foreign equivalents are called naval infantry or coastal infantry. In French-speaking countries, two phrases exist which could be translated asmarine, troupes de marine and fusiliers-marins; similar pseudo-translations exist elsewhere, e.g., Fuzileiros Navais in Portuguese. The word marine/marina means "navy" in many European languages such as Dutch, French, Italian, German, Danish and Norwegian.

Sailor, i know what a marine is..now you do to..

Edited by N0MAD, 04 February 2015 - 05:22 AM.