153 replies to this topic

[Herodes]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 February 2015 - 05:51 AM, said:

The Maximum number of players may or may not include you OR I. PGI cannot be worried about the individuals. That includes you or I. Thinking otherwise is selfish in the grandest scale.

I know. Nor am I worreid about PGI. They either deliver what I want and get my money or our ways will part. There is no drama about that, that is (business) life. I do not hold any grudge in this matter against anyone, I just hope there will be a game I like and can continue to like.

Joseph Mallan, on 11 February 2015 - 05:59 AM, said:

And the casual crowd (like myself) need to be willing to face teh odds in a hard mode.

Of course. Dying and being wiped is not the problem per se as long as there is fun. In a good CW being defeated can be very entertaining, think Clan invasion where the IS gets stomped for years. All that matters is how it is done and if there is an entertainment value for everyone in it.

[Joseph Mallan]

Herodes, on 11 February 2015 - 06:11 AM, said:

I know. Nor am I worreid about PGI. They either deliver what I want and get my money or our ways will part. There is no drama about that, that is (business) life. I do not hold any grudge in this matter against anyone, I just hope there will be a game I like and can continue to like.




Of course. Dying and being wiped is not the problem per se as long as there is fun. In a good CW being defeated can be very entertaining, think Clan invasion where the IS gets stomped for years. All that matters is how it is done and if there is an entertainment value for everyone MOST in it.

If you try to make everyone happy you will likely fail to make anyone happy. Otherwise, I like how you think.

[Herodes]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 February 2015 - 06:30 AM, said:

If you try to make everyone happy you will likely fail to make anyone happy. Otherwise, I like how you think.

Not everyone, just the highest possible number of players. And somehow I doubt that these forums are a good indicator for a path to choose. Looking at the game overall and the latest months I do have hope. After all, CW is Beta and there is always room for improvement and change. Wait and see.

[Mystere]

Slightly off topic, but ...

Herodes, on 11 February 2015 - 06:11 AM, said:

Dying and being wiped is not the problem per se as long as there is fun. In a good CW being defeated can be very entertaining, think Clan invasion where the IS gets stomped for years. All that matters is how it is done and if there is an entertainment value for everyone in it.

I've played enough PvP games over the years to know that the highlighted statement is not very accurate. For a whole lot of people, dying (i.e. losing) in a game to someone is not fun at all. As such, I really wonder why such people even bother to play PvP games.

The best example I have is Age of Conan. Many people cried out loud demanding a "hard mode" "no-holds-barred" "open world" PvP server. When Funcom finally created "Blood and Gore" servers, these servers were overflowing with players ... for about a few weeks. Then the population in these same servers started to crash until they became ghost towns. And last I checked, Age of Conan became a mainly PvE-focused game. At least that's how I saw it -- current AoC players are free to correct me.

And the lesson is: People declare that they want to play PvP, but can't handle losing to other players. Why else would people have demanded (at one time or another) in the public queue, and now the CW queue, the following queue separations:

• New solo players only
  
  • afraid of experienced players, understandable
• Experienced solo players only
  
  • new players are terrified of them?
• solo only queue
  
  • what we have now
• Solo players and 2-mans only
  
  • 2-mans didn't like getting stomped by bigger groups, or just missed stomping solos?
• Solo players up to 4-mans only
  
  • small groups didn't like getting stomped by bigger groups, or just missed stomping solos?
• Small groups only
  
  • didn't like getting stomped by bigger groups
• Non 12-man groups only
  
  • didn't like getting stomped by 12-mans
• 12-mans only
  
  • victims of their own success?
• Anything goes
  
  • crazy players like yours truly

Edited by Mystere, 11 February 2015 - 09:20 AM.

[WVAnonymous]

Good discussion. VOIP in game is allegedly going live next week, so we'll all be on comms. It will be interesting to see if that has any effect.

I like the 4 v 4 suggestion, except I would only do that on the really old (i.e. small) maps like the forest and maybe River City. It would be ideal for a C-bill farming concept and may be an easier entry point for new players (can't melt under the focused fire from 12 mechs).

As far as IS/Clan goes, we in OLD (currently proudly supporting FRR) can carry almost any match in CW as long as we can get six or more in the match and the other side has no team bigger than 4. If the other side is 8 or more LORD or EMP, it doesn't matter how many we have, we just try to get a few kills in. CI and 228's are pretty solid as well. I don't think we've ever lost to a pure PUG group on the other side unless we had fewer than four in the match.

That being said, if I want to be in the solo queue and am feeling like I have the need to win, I run Warhawks.

[Jon Gotham]

Herodes, on 11 February 2015 - 05:29 AM, said:

I think in the end it is really easy. I will not support a game that expensive with my hard earned cash any more if PGI develops it for others and not for me or my amusement. I won't give them money so that they develop a game for you. I want a part of it if I pay.
Even if I don't have the time to play competetive I do love BT and the gameplay as much as anyone else and I support the game as a casual player. With money, a lot of money.
I have spent countless $$ for MWO in the last years but if it goes "join a unit and go pro or the game is no longer for you" I won't let the door hit me on my way out. I don't want the opposite of that, go solo or go home

It is really simple and up to PGI to do the math and try to please a maximum number of paying customers. I don't care how they achieve this goal but I do know that my support ends when I am virtually cut off the fun.




This is quite an unfair statement. Who tells you that casual players don't have hopes and visions and aren't capable of supporting and maintaining a healthy community? Just because they play less or not as well as others? That's not it at all-don't assumeThis is an assumption that I think is blatantly false and arrogant. You can't just dismiss people's opinions and wishes like that. The pro solo guys do And PGI can't dismiss their money just like that. At least I hope so. they seem to not want mine

My post was not aimed at people such as yourself matey. You stated why you can't and I respect your reasons. However nearly everything you said also applies to me in your post (bold,underlined).
The assumptions flow freely from the pro soloists too, usually much more ignorance in tow. Communities grow from interaction, they don't work so well when everyone only focuses on themselves. Groups do well because they focus on each other, form bonds bigger than the 10 min match length.
You said I just can't dismiss people's opinions and wishes, but the aggressive pro solos are already doing just that. More than that, they have effected physical change to my enjoyment. I'm not dismissing anything, but I wish people would admit why they want what they want, then be honest that what they want negatively impacts others.
I'm a casual player too-I solo about 90% of the time, even in CW. People in the situation you are, seem to be the fringe cases and I understand completely. However the rest, who refuse to meet us even halfway, are a big problem. A problem that is changing the game. It's at real risk of falling very short of what it could be.

[Almond Brown]

Only 6 more days until the "Steering Wheel Under Hive" gets its VOICE. Yeehaaw! It will surely be a glorious new era in MWO's vast collection of new era's.

P.S. I am quite certain, I am a Card carrying member of said SWUH.

Edited by Almond Brown, 11 February 2015 - 09:30 AM.

[Herodes]

Mystere, on 11 February 2015 - 09:12 AM, said:

I've played enough PvP games over the years to know that the highlighted statement is not very accurate. For a whole lot of people, dying (i.e. losing) in a game to someone is not fun at all. As such, I really wonder why such people even bother to play PvP games.

I admit that this is my first ever PvP game and I am not an experienced gamer. I am however not here to play some robot PvP but to play Battletech, to have a Battletech experience. With that in mind, losing is acceptable as long as the immersion and the fun are there. Of course winning is better and only losing or being wiped is a terrible experience. But we all get better and we all win some matches eventually.

[Herodes]

kamiko kross, on 11 February 2015 - 09:28 AM, said:

My post was not aimed at people such as yourself matey. You stated why you can't and I respect your reasons. However nearly everything you said also applies to me in your post (bold,underlined).
The assumptions flow freely from the pro soloists too, usually much more ignorance in tow. Communities grow from interaction, they don't work so well when everyone only focuses on themselves. Groups do well because they focus on each other, form bonds bigger than the 10 min match length.
You said I just can't dismiss people's opinions and wishes, but the aggressive pro solos are already doing just that. More than that, they have effected physical change to my enjoyment. I'm not dismissing anything, but I wish people would admit why they want what they want, then be honest that what they want negatively impacts others.
I'm a casual player too-I solo about 90% of the time, even in CW. People in the situation you are, seem to be the fringe cases and I understand completely. However the rest, who refuse to meet us even halfway, are a big problem. A problem that is changing the game. It's at real risk of falling very short of what it could be.

Thanx for your post. I am however not experienced enough to make a valid judgement concerning those matters, I can only state my personal point of view and the hope that the end result will be something we can all enjoy. I wouldn't like to wear PGI's shoes these days

[Nightmare1]

Sounds like wild opinion; how do you know, specifically, the Clan to IS, premade to pug ratios unless you were able to individually check each and every pilot?

For my part, I am experiencing roughly equal numbers of matches with pugs and premades. I can't say that there is a noticeable imbalance at this time.

That being said, I'm not a fan of fighting alongside pugs. They can't follow orders to save their own lives and often foul up what should be smooth operations.

[Kael Posavatz]

And if all else fails...



Team work OP, please nerf!

[Mordin Ashe]

No pugs => no CW. I support anything that will improve position of pug players against coordinated teams.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mordin Ashe, on 11 February 2015 - 09:46 AM, said:

No pugs => no CW. I support anything that will improve position of pug players against coordinated teams.

So you support practice and better team work?

[mania3c]

Mystere, on 11 February 2015 - 09:12 AM, said:

And the lesson is: People declare that they want to play PvP, but can't handle losing to other players. Why else would people have demanded (at one time or another) in the public queue, and now the CW queue, the following queue separations

do you really believe this? I am also avid PvP player for 15 years..and most pvp players don't mind losing as long as game feels fair...Maybe you are talking about yourself?

Joseph Mallan, on 11 February 2015 - 09:56 AM, said:

So you support practice and better team work?

Why are hardcore players so afraid, they will have to face true resistance in form of another premade? this is really lol-worthy..

Edited by mania3c, 11 February 2015 - 09:59 AM.

[Mordin Ashe]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 February 2015 - 09:56 AM, said:

So you support practice and better team work?

Always. But simple reward multiplier for pugs facing big group could help in this regard. In CW you can't achieve much without cooperatrion, and this rule would basically tell the pugs "for every piece of cooperation you perform in this difficult match we will reward you disproportionally well". And this could work.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mordin Ashe, on 11 February 2015 - 10:00 AM, said:

Always. But simple reward multiplier for pugs facing big group could help in this regard. In CW you can't achieve much without cooperatrion, and this rule would basically tell the pugs "for every piece of cooperation you perform in this difficult match we will reward you disproportionally well". And this could work.

People are complaining cause the present cooperation bonuses are not enough as it is. No we cannot us a carrot to get folks to work together. That is already proven.

[Clownwarlord]

What would fix CW and the pug bashing? Simple more pugs in CW. The reason is if you drop solo right now you get a 12 man group or groups on the other side quite a bit. Now if the CW player base expanded only in the SOLO players wanting to play it (not saying there will not be group in it) you will see more pug on pug matches. That does not mean that 12 mans wouldn't drop against pugs but it means there will be more pugs for the 12 man to have a chance to drop against a different group of pugs every time allowing other pugs to go against other pugs.

Now if the player base grows in all three categories (solo, small group, and 12 mans) the wait time will then not be based off of trying to get other teams to face but cataloging the teams to face a more balanced enemy. In other words metrics would be allowed to be introduced to make more balanced matches. This would solve the CW issue, but growing player base is tough for any game and some times takes time and some times games never find it. It will be tough to see what PGI can do to solve this issue for CW. In the mean time you can always drop in the other match making cues (solo and group) to get matches that will be more balanced.

Suggestion though for those who want to do CW now would be join a group if you want to win or have a chance of winning. If you don't mind losing then solo drop, your chance of winning go down but you can still see what CW is about and most assuredly find out the metas of the game.

If you are a clanner:
- stormcrows
- timber wolves

If you are an inner sphere:
- thunderbolts
- lights

Just some of the metas of CW.

Edited by clownwarlord, 11 February 2015 - 10:14 AM.

[Mystere]

mania3c, on 11 February 2015 - 09:59 AM, said:

do you really believe this? I am also avid PvP player for 15 years..and most pvp players don't mind losing as long as game feels fair...Maybe you are talking about yourself?

I think the numerous whine threads and posts here on the MWO forums related to this topic is proof enough of my statement. In addition, my post history on the same topic should give a clear picture of my position on the matter.

And for the record, I never stated "most players". But you did.

mania3c, on 11 February 2015 - 09:59 AM, said:

Why are hardcore players so afraid, they will have to face true resistance in form of another premade? this is really lol-worthy..

I can't give you an answer to that one. Only unit players can. I play solo only, and always have, even in CW.

[Mystere]

Mordin Ashe, on 11 February 2015 - 10:00 AM, said:

Always. But simple reward multiplier for pugs facing big group could help in this regard. In CW you can't achieve much without cooperatrion, and this rule would basically tell the pugs "for every piece of cooperation you perform in this difficult match we will reward you disproportionally well". And this could work.

Although I am not strongly opposed to such a thing, it almost smells like this:




It may actually work. It just "smells".

I prefer my general solution, with a sample provided here.

Edited by Mystere, 11 February 2015 - 10:19 AM.

[Mordin Ashe]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 February 2015 - 10:06 AM, said:

People are complaining cause the present cooperation bonuses are not enough as it is. No we cannot us a carrot to get folks to work together. That is already proven.

Work together is rather complicated term. It has many little hamsters running in their wheels in the background for "working together" to happen.

Pugs require simple solutions. How about "form a deathball for profits"? Simple enough, has some cooperation in it, would be true if there was a multiplier... You need simple things like this to make pugs work.

EDIT: Mystere: Yep, pretty much, but the nature of reward multiplier could make some of the smell go away. You don't get flat bonus for doing nothing. You just get reward better if you actually do something. Still kind of a a participation trophy, but then again every compensation is.

Edited by Mordin Ashe, 11 February 2015 - 10:18 AM.