184 replies to this topic

[Impossible Wasabi]

The Space Pope wonders if the game, especially CW as a mode, has the player numbers to allow locking Mercs in place in such a fashion without adversely affecting things like wait time/number of matches, etc.

When another game tried to implement a sort of "High Command" that decided who/when/what to attack it pretty much killed the population (WW2OL/Battleground Europe) because many people just did't find it fun to follow the orders of a some self-named general or expert tactician and the units/squads that kept the game alive simply quit when they were boxed in.

Edited by The True Space Pope, 08 February 2015 - 06:55 AM.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Prussian Havoc, on 07 February 2015 - 05:03 AM, said:

Allow Faction LOYALISTS to vote (simple subtab under the Faction Tab) on which factions to "let" Mercenary Contracts against. Then once established, ANY Mercenary Coros Unit could pick one (if you have 50 or less members) or two (if your Unit has 51 or more members) Attackable Enemies of your EMPLOYING Faction. This ENEMY(S) of your EMPLOYER would be the only Faction your Mercenary Corps Unit could attack, though a Mercenary Corp Unit could defend its EMPLOYER from ANY attack by external Factions.

I think this is the key. We need to be able to vote on the next set of worlds to be attacked, or give the algorithm some kind of direction. After that allow units to set up bounties on kills/wins on certain planets. At that point I would actually be ok with giving mercs more freedom to switch factions and work for the highest bidder. Ideally, placing a bounty on a planet should take money out of unit coffers (not directly paying the mercs, but rather to set up the bounty).

[Alexander Steel]

Quote

As a rule, Mercenary Corrps Units do NOT have Jumpships and indeed lucky to even have Dropships. (And NO, there are ZERO exceptions within MWO player Units, No one's Unit is Wolf's Dragoons here.)

House units rarely had jumpships assigned to them and only them. What happened was when it came time to fight the logistics arm of the nation sent the jumpships to the units that needed them and moved them around. That's why during the 3057 Marik/Liao/Davion conflict Davion was particularly crippled when the Jumpships that were in Steiner Space ((moving units to the Clan Front Lines and supplying them with materials)) were held by the Steiner military and only allowed to go back to Davion space after the conflict was over.

House Davion had plenty of house units to fight Liao and Marik, they just had no way to get them into the battle because most house units don't have dedicated jumpships.

This makes sense from a logistics point of view as battles over planets can take MONTHS ((in the lore)) and having a bunch of jump ships sitting around in space asking to get captured or even just doing nothing was a waste.

Of course during real wars both mercs and house units relied on privately owned Jumpships. I think one novel estimated that 25-50% of all jump ships were privately owned.
That was when FASA said there were only 2-3 Thousand Jump Ships in the IS. However this was later talked about as being unreasonable so they adjusted that to be military owned jumpships with a total jumpship number around 30,000 or so.

Quote

As of 3055, approximately 3,000 JumpShips operate in the Inner Sphere according to older canonical sources[18] (up from some 2,000 in 3025[19]). However, this has been dismissed in recent publications[20] as being inadequate to meet the observed shipping of bulk goods in the Inner Sphere, where there are prolific references to planets with populations of billions feeding neighboring worlds, exporting petroleum products[21] and shipping bulk materials like iron ores. These are materials consumed in gigaton quantities on any developed planet with a population in the billions, and obviously cannot be met (for many planets) by the small cargo holds of common freighter DropShips like the Mule and the limited capacity of the Invader and Merchant JumpShips. The actual number of JumpShips is presumably closer to 30,000, or the 3,000 figure may refer only to military Jumpships.

Edited by Alexander Steel, 08 February 2015 - 12:41 PM.

[Prussian Havoc]

Alexander Steel, on 08 February 2015 - 12:37 PM, said:

House units rarely had jumpships assigned to them and only them. What happened was when it came time to fight the logistics arm of the nation sent the jumpships to the units that needed them and moved them around...(snip)...

VERY definitive post (and quoting Lore too!), thank you for these incites.

One could only hope PGI takes increasing notice of such information as they continually refine the game so vey many of us find so very compelling!

Rouken, on 08 February 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:

I think this is the key. We need to be able to vote on the next set of worlds to be attacked, or give the algorithm some kind of direction. After that allow units to set up bounties on kills/wins on certain planets. At that point I would actually be ok with giving mercs more freedom to switch factions and work for the highest bidder. Ideally, placing a bounty on a planet should take money out of unit coffers (not directly paying the mercs, but rather to set up the bounty).

EXCELLENT ideas... I hope the PGI Moderators cull your contribution here for serious consideration in game refinement. Thank you.

The True Space Pope, on 08 February 2015 - 06:52 AM, said:

The Space Pope wonders if the game, especially CW as a mode, has the player numbers to allow locking Mercs in place in such a fashion without adversely affecting things like wait time/number of matches, etc.

When another game tried to implement a sort of "High Command" that decided who/when/what to attack it pretty much killed the population (WW2OL/Battleground Europe) because many people just did't find it fun to follow the orders of a some self-named general or expert tactician and the units/squads that kept the game alive simply quit when they were boxed in.

Beta is as Beta does.

NOTHING is in stone yet...





...other than there needs to be a viable means of monetization in order to keep PGI solvent. We ALL saw what happened to IGP's other game MechWarrior:Tactics.

Those serves have long been cold and $120 Legendary Founders like myself are out in the Canadian cold on that one.


But back on topic, gamers want a GOOD CW EXPERIENCE.

It is my opinion, and I may be alone in this (alone and naive!) but I do not want to game CW so much here in the Beta that my Faction has GAME-BREAKING freedoms or unrestrained, organizational power.

I WANT A CHALLENGING MW:O COMMUNITY WARFARE EXPERIENCE.
(and to a lesser degree, I want as much BattleTechiness as PGI can give me. MRBC, COM Guards Package, Second Star League and ilClan - Punitive Powers to control their respective Grand Alliances if a suitable group of Inner Sphere or Clan gamers/Units ever brought to Russ a proposition for a Star League / ilClan meeting a host of prerequisites. (Sry that is a pretty deep concept with far-reaching implication and I just don't have the time right now to go further into detail.)

And I believe others would also want an undergirding system of suitably "BattleTechiness" Checks and Balances that would give rise to the Organizational Dynamics necessary to realize a profoundly fun, engaging, profitable Community Warfare experience.


As always your comments would be greatly appreciated.

[Vassago Rain]

Any system where the players themselves decide who gets to have fun, what is fun, and how to have fun, is doomed to failure.

Excluding huge sandboxes, where you can simply move away to somewhere else (hint, hint, hint), it doesn't work out. MWO isn't EVE. If I want to take a week long contract with wolf to farm some bears, whoever feels they're khan can't forbid me from doing this. They also can't lock me into playing for wolf for 2 weeks, for instance.

[Sam Slade]

Vassago Rain, on 08 February 2015 - 11:12 PM, said:

.
. If I want to take a week long contract with wolf to farm some bears, whoever feels they're khan can't forbid me from doing this. They also can't lock me into playing for wolf for 2 weeks, for instance.

Game mechanics can and should... 'faction hopping' is a bad thing. If merc contracts were reputation(more then K/D stats) based then we'd have the start of a good system: bring on Outreach and to hell with then entitled 'do what I want!' babies.

[Prussian Havoc]

Vassago Rain, on 08 February 2015 - 11:12 PM, said:

Any system where the players themselves decide who gets to have fun, what is fun, and how to have fun, is doomed to failure.

Excluding huge sandboxes, where you can simply move away to somewhere else (hint, hint, hint), it doesn't work out. MWO isn't EVE. If I want to take a week long contract with wolf to farm some bears, whoever feels they're khan can't forbid me from doing this. They also can't lock me into playing for wolf for 2 weeks, for instance.

Then "Public Queue" is for you my MWT-friend.

Seriously though, CW is for those who want MORE than wanton, reckless, thoughtless DEATHMATCHES.

So YES, I am advocating for PGI to put on belly up to the bar and put into place BattleTech-like RULES, RESTRICTIONS, EMPOWEMENTS AND ENABLEMENTS.

There NEEDS to be consequences for our CW behavior...





...or all we will end up with is senseless 12-player v 12-player DEATHMATCHES on fancy new maps.




If you want Public Queue - have at Public Queue 24/7 if you want thoughtless Big Stompy Robots great! - PGI has Public Queue for you.

Just don't look to prevent a real "thinking-man's BattleTech game" (as was described in the first MWO advertisements back in 2012) from FINALLY being developed here in Community Warfare.

Yes, C O M M U N I T Y Warfare, thus the connotation of communal checks and balances, right / privileges / consequences and Repurcussions.




Public queue awaits all others.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Prussian Havoc, on 09 February 2015 - 11:48 PM, said:

Then "Public Queue" is for you my MWT-friend.

Seriously though, CW is for those who want MORE than wanton, reckless, thoughtless DEATHMATCHES.

So YES, I am advocating for PGI to put on belly up to the bar and put into place BattleTech-like RULES, RESTRICTIONS, EMPOWEMENTS AND ENABLEMENTS.

There NEEDS to be consequences for our CW behavior...





...or all we will end up with is senseless 12-player v 12-player DEATHMATCHES on fancy new maps.




If you want Public Queue - have at Public Queue 24/7 if you want thoughtless Big Stompy Robots great! - PGI has Public Queue for you.

Just don't look to prevent a real "thinking-man's BattleTech game" (as was described in the first MWO advertisements back in 2012) from FINALLY being developed here in Community Warfare.

Yes, C O M M U N I T Y Warfare, thus the connotation of communal checks and balances, right / privileges / consequences and Repurcussions.




Public queue awaits all others.

I agree, to a degree.

What we need is a GM of some sorts, to guide the action, to act as the ruler of each house and illKhan of the clans, ect. Ordering specific targets and the like.

Too much power in the hands of the players, and we get a situation like we have in Liao right now, where players are limited to attacking only either Davions, or clans. because of a treaty with Marrik. And considering davions seem to never defend, they're pretty damned easy to just ghost drop against and take planets from.

[wanderer]

I'm more for a system where it's a mix.

Give players multiple options each time. Small successes in smaller-scale (Paul's 4v4) lead to assaults and taking planets, but give players multiple planets to 4v4 "raid" to get there. Game makes part of a decision, players make part, everyone's happier.

Oh, and as far as Liao goes, it was, in part due to the concept of Liao not being stupid. If we'd fought Marik and Davion both, we'd likely have fewer planets than the FRR at this point- or none at all. Smaller factions make alliances to survive, larger factions use those smaller factions to extend their effects (pummeling Davion twice as hard, for example) or as buffers (FRR, which until recently was absorbing some of the forces hitting Davion and Kurita- and is now being used in some ways as a proxy defensive barrier).

[Prussian Havoc]

Flash Frame and wanderer, great contributions that improve on critical aspects of my post.

Thank you.

Edited by Prussian Havoc, 10 February 2015 - 08:35 PM.

[Ax2Grind]

Any word from the Dev's on this particular thread? Making some planet battles an event? PGI?

As to the current discussion, I would love more depth regarding our factions...a real loyalist faction and a true merc faction would be great. As long as we stay away from arbitrary control of an entire faction by the players I think there is a lot that could be done to make this game richer and far more interesting. Until we get those factions fleshed out though we are all in the same boat...a bunch of pseudo mercs with loyalist rewards floating around in the IS.

[Prussian Havoc]

Ax2Grind, on 11 February 2015 - 02:57 AM, said:

Any word from the Dev's on this particular thread? Making some planet battles an event? PGI?

As to the current discussion, I would love more depth regarding our factions...a real loyalist faction and a true merc faction would be great. As long as we stay away from arbitrary control of an entire faction by the players I think there is a lot that could be done to make this game richer and far more interesting. Until we get those factions fleshed out though we are all in the same boat...a bunch of pseudo mercs with loyalist rewards floating around in the IS.

Unlike our sister-effort MWT (May her soul rest in eternal IGP-Peace) Dev's and Mod's RARELY if EVER participate in thread discussion / serve notice of Dev acknowledgement of a particular tidbit of #DecGrist4TheDevMill. Though I continue to hope some PGI harvesting of ideas from these forums are taking place.

While it would be nice to THINK this is a true Beta where PGI might take some risks in fleshing out the extremes of organizational interdependencies and intra-relational checks and balances... I think the reality is just a bit different. Unlike a true Beta, the population currently "in game" constitutes such a large segment of the #PayingPublic for PGI that no real chance can be taken when it comes to fleshing out features that might be considered divisive or overly constructive. Whereas in other Beta's the eye is on the prize of FUTURE gamer monetization... with such a long lead time for CW, PGI's eye is on the Prize of satisfying the most gamers currently in game, while crafting the code and features with an eye toward the Steam Launch in late Spring/Summer timeframe.


And yes, I too would like to see increased differentiation between Merc and Loyalist, between Level 1 and Level 20 as well as a future WoW-like expansions to 25th Level and beyond: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4172516

[Lindonius]

Prussian Havoc, on 09 February 2015 - 11:48 PM, said:

...or all we have ever, have and will ever have is senseless 12-player v 12-player DEATHMATCHES on the same couple of crappy maps

FTFY.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Is it bad that the lore junkie in me has gotten so apathetic that I can't even find myself to arsed enough to care?

[AztecD]

so im asuming tukayyid was lost to clanners?

[Prussian Havoc]

AztecD, on 11 February 2015 - 04:54 PM, said:

so im asuming tukayyid was lost to clanners?

BREAK BREAK BREAK

Yes, the Clans liberated Tukayyid on 03FEB.

But as of right this minute (past NA-cycle Ceasefire) FRR has two efforts still underway on Tukayyid... If they succeed for the Inner Sphere / FRR, the inner Sphere will reclaim this very Loretastic world.


More to follow (most assuredly!!!)...

BREAK BREAK BREAK

Edited by Prussian Havoc, 11 February 2015 - 09:35 PM.

[Prussian Havoc]

BREAK BREAK BREAK

This just in, CLAN COMMON DEFENDERS WIN THE THIRD BATTLE OF TUKAYYID.

The FRR attack on Tukayyid has been met with overwhelming response for Clan Defenders thoughout the length and breadth, of Clan Space. Battles in Sector One and Three raged on till well past NA-cycle Ceasefire. BOTH sectors were eon by the Clans, maintaining the world at only 40% lost to the a very concerted and relentless FRR attack.

I say again the world of Tukayyid remains a Clan Liberated world despite this lasted and Third Battle for Tukayyid.

The Second Battle of Luthein occurred approximately 4-days ago when House Steiner had the option to Attack Tukayyid.

BREAK BREAK BREAK

[Molossian Dog]

Prussian Havoc, on 11 February 2015 - 10:02 PM, said:

...
The Second Battle of Luthein occurred approximately 4-days ago when House Steiner had the option to Attack Tukayyid.
...

?

[Tom Sawyer]

When one group of players drops at ratio of 3 to 1 then even if the 1 wins all the battles they loose the objective.

Oh well, at least we are earning a ton of creds and having fun.

[Bigbacon]

Black Nationalist Gul Dukat, on 04 February 2015 - 01:23 PM, said:

Somebody made a comment about 4 ECM Hellbringers negating all LRMs.

Stop bringing LRMs. That's your short-term fix. Your strategy sucks and doesn't work in CW, change it. (On a somewhat related note they generally also suck in solo, group, and comp play as well.)

TAG and NARC exist as options and I think for balance reasons NARC should counter ECM considering the otherwise uselessness of it (I don't use LRMs ever so I don't know 100%that it does but I do know that the loading screen tips say it does not. Please correct me if I'm wrong) but until that day comes you should probably

stop

using

LRMs

"nah man, I was super 1337 pro in MW2-4 using LRMs and I'm just going to chill in the back and not be able to maintain locks because I force that responsibility on my team, who, on a good day, can sometimes remember to press 'R' but wait, why are you all dead, my team sucks, my LRMs don't work at close range, nerf clans, nerf 9S."

STOP

USING

LRMs

This has been a CSJ PSA

should this just say

"If it isn't META, don't use it"?