17 replies to this topic

[Necromantion]

So after being back for about a month and a half from a few month hiatus and getting back into the swing of things with the start of Community Warfare I have noticed a significant seeming disjoint regarding community warfare which seems to revolve around lore/rp and related aspects.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The big problem:
A lot of the disjoint seems to revolve around merc units and their implementation, and the impact this has had on loyalist units and the lack of control that loyalist units can have on things within their own faction with huge merc units floating around.

In light of that I have indeed noticed there are a lot of factors at play here, primarily there are very few incentives other than a modest but not really super coaxing increase in loyalty and CBill earnings as a loyalist. When being a 100% committed player to a faction you think there would be a bit more perks than that, no?

On the flip-side Mercs are able to play for clans, can have contracts as short as 1 week or opt out when they feel like paying a penalty if they see fit and there are all kinds of goodies to gain from reputation rewards for each faction, Cbills, GXP, Mech bays, MC, Cockpit items and so forth.

Now that being said, the notion of being able to play both factions, Clan and IS, is appealing to a lot of players as it allows you to use all of the Mechs you've bought or ground out cbills to pay for then level and honestly in any game it would be poor form for a company to not allow you to use things you paid or worked for.

However should faction hoppers really be able to have sway on the alliances/agreements and aims of loyalists to as great a degree as they can now since they can ghost drop/defend against allies of certain factions etc? Probably not.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So this begs a question:
PGI, what is your stance on lore and its implementation as far as community warfare? Are you looking to focus on the PvP aspect while adding pieces of lore related goodies to make things more diverse and interesting while keeping things balanced or?

We know this is an Multiplayer FPS game, not an RPG game and how things have been implemented are indeed in light of that with you focusing balancing things around that rather than lore based elements and trying to keep population balanced via CBill/Loyalty incentives which are questionable in their allure.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Potential solution:
I saw a thread the other day that proposed a fantastic solution that would potentially make the loyalists as well as the lore fascinated a bit more happy while keeping Merc units as active and happy without the discord:

http://mwomercs.com/...amp-suggestion/

TL:DR version:
1) Allow Loyalists control over most of the attack lanes which would force Mercs to have to assist factions when joining up

2) Create increased bonuses for Merc unit matches when they play on a planet picked as a desired attack lane by loyalists

Things like that...

Honestly I think that would be throwing a huge bone to loyalists and alleviate the concerns about "unruly Mercs" causing disjoint between allied units/factions.


Thoughts?

Edited by Necromantion, 14 February 2015 - 12:10 PM.

[Crockdaddy]

I kinda like this idea. It adjusts the game itself to promote faction play and gets the MERCs paid if they play ball ... which if you think about it ... Factions are hiring MERCs for specific tasks. I am sure some guys will punch some holes into this idea but I find it appealing.

[Necromantion]

Indeed, I am not saying that this post of Bird is all encompassing but hey I think it would be a great start, with more input and brainstorming im sure it could alleviate some of the issues were seeing in the community now.

I think the notion of loyalists being able to choose SOME of the attack lanes or designate planets to be "high priority" for the faction would be best because im sure in battle tech every once and a while some merc unit did something that was a no-no? (Dont quote me on that as i am in no way omniscient with battle-tech lore)

[Cementi]

To add to this (and possibly make it simpler) a voting system could be put in. Everyone in a faction gets one vote per attack phase to choose which planet to attack. Whichever planet gets the most votes gives attackers a cbill and loyalty bonus. The big units could still somewhat dictate where people attack without giving them outright control over the faction. Sorry I am still super against giving any players or units direct control over a faction as the eliteisim would get completely out of hand.

[Necromantion]

Oh I wasnt implying a single specific unit would have control at all, rather any loyalist (units signed to a permanent faction contract) would be able to vote on planets.

That way merc units taking temporary contracts wouldnt have influence over those things and this would allow PGI to implement other criteria and incentives for mercs to work with units they join up with while letting the loyalists not feel mercs are causing issues with their diplomatic agreements and so forth.

[Gyrok]

Necromantion, on 14 February 2015 - 12:09 PM, said:

So after being back for about a month and a half from a few month hiatus and getting back into the swing of things with the start of Community Warfare I have noticed a significant seeming disjoint regarding community warfare which seems to revolve around lore/rp and related aspects.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The big problem:
A lot of the disjoint seems to revolve around merc units and their implementation, and the impact this has had on loyalist units and the lack of control that loyalist units can have on things within their own faction with huge merc units floating around.

In light of that I have indeed noticed there are a lot of factors at play here, primarily there are very few incentives other than a modest but not really super coaxing increase in loyalty and CBill earnings as a loyalist. When being a 100% committed player to a faction you think there would be a bit more perks than that, no?

On the flip-side Mercs are able to play for clans, can have contracts as short as 1 week or opt out when they feel like paying a penalty if they see fit and there are all kinds of goodies to gain from reputation rewards for each faction, Cbills, GXP, Mech bays, MC, Cockpit items and so forth.

Now that being said, the notion of being able to play both factions, Clan and IS, is appealing to a lot of players as it allows you to use all of the Mechs you've bought or ground out cbills to pay for then level and honestly in any game it would be poor form for a company to not allow you to use things you paid or worked for.

However should faction hoppers really be able to have sway on the alliances/agreements and aims of loyalists to as great a degree as they can now since they can ghost drop/defend against allies of certain factions etc? Probably not.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So this begs a question:
PGI, what is your stance on lore and its implementation as far as community warfare? Are you looking to focus on the PvP aspect while adding pieces of lore related goodies to make things more diverse and interesting while keeping things balanced or?

We know this is an Multiplayer FPS game, not an RPG game and how things have been implemented are indeed in light of that with you focusing balancing things around that rather than lore based elements and trying to keep population balanced via CBill/Loyalty incentives which are questionable in their allure.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Potential solution:
I saw a thread the other day that proposed a fantastic solution that would potentially make the loyalists as well as the lore fascinated a bit more happy while keeping Merc units as active and happy without the discord:

http://mwomercs.com/...amp-suggestion/

TL:DR version:
1) Allow Loyalists control over most of the attack lanes which would force Mercs to have to assist factions when joining up

2) Create increased bonuses for Merc unit matches when they play on a planet picked as a desired attack lane by loyalists

Things like that...

Honestly I think that would be throwing a huge bone to loyalists and alleviate the concerns about "unruly Mercs" causing disjoint between allied units/factions.


Thoughts?

I am actually glad I read this post. I totally agree with this sentiment entirely. It would give the game a lot of depth to have the ability to dictate focused attack lanes.

[Crockdaddy]

Gyrok, on 14 February 2015 - 07:16 PM, said:

I am actually glad I read this post. I totally agree with this sentiment entirely. It would give the game a lot of depth to have the ability to dictate focused attack lanes.

Oh and Dear Coordinator say, DIE! CLANNER! and a good idea overall.

[Lily from animove]

Cementi, on 14 February 2015 - 03:56 PM, said:

To add to this (and possibly make it simpler) a voting system could be put in. Everyone in a faction gets one vote per attack phase to choose which planet to attack. Whichever planet gets the most votes gives attackers a cbill and loyalty bonus. The big units could still somewhat dictate where people attack without giving them outright control over the faction. Sorry I am still super against giving any players or units direct control over a faction as the eliteisim would get completely out of hand.

No only the permanent aligned players should ba allowed to vote and only those who made wins, with a token system, otherwise mercs make a simple alt account permanently align this and screw everything up.

If you do not prevent ghostaccounts screwing up the system you need a bit more than simply rules.

Edited by Lily from animove, 14 February 2015 - 10:52 PM.

[Necromantion]

Thats a good point about ghost accounts not sure how pgi would handle that aspect, one account per Mac address?

[HARDKOR]

Maybe weight an vote by total LP gained. Each LP is one vote. Then alt accounts would be worthless and while you could split your vote all you would really be doing is lessening the impact of your real accounts vote. This would also let those who run dual accounts throw their full weight behind their vote.

[Necromantion]

HARDKOR, on 15 February 2015 - 10:47 AM, said:

Maybe weight an vote by total LP gained. Each LP is one vote. Then alt accounts would be worthless and while you could split your vote all you would really be doing is lessening the impact of your real accounts vote. This would also let those who run dual accounts throw their full weight behind their vote.

Good idea, using LP earned by loyalists as a weight factor would alleviate the issue of troll accounts!

[HARDKOR]

Or make it more tiered and go with each rank = 1 vote.

This would make it so the guy who plays casually is still going to get 2-6 votes but the person who plays 40 hours a week can have up to 20 votes. The people who play more should have a greater say but everyone should have a voice.

Edited by HARDKOR, 15 February 2015 - 11:40 AM.

[Necromantion]

Indeed, perhaps things like unit activity should be taken into account too?

[Necromantion]

Once this gets a bit more brain storming and I talk to Birdey again im going to put up a very structured post using everyones input on the suggestion forums!

[slide]

IMO this is what needs to happen. This is from a Merc Corp leader

- Mercs need to be recognized as independent of any faction.

- Units (merc and faction) need to accrue loyalty points based on their units participation with a faction the same as a player does.

- Unit Loyalty Points (ULP) or "reputation points" have a scale similar to the players which awards each player in that unit a bonus of some sort. ULP must scale depending on number of players so that a small unit has just as much chance as a big one.
Example rewards: faction specific discounts on mechs, paint etc, higher payouts depending on ULP, ultimate reward is ownership of one or more planets (which then gets you a tag), points required to get a planet would be astronomical requiring at least 6 months of steady play. Playing solo or small groups will still accrue ULP. ULP are accrued when a tagged member plays, not just as a 12 man, players do have a real life. ULP accrues at 1 point per match per unit member who plays 2 if you win. An example of the scaling I have in mind would be a 20 member unit gets to level 1 at 1000 points. A 100 member unit gets to level 1 at 5000 points (5 times as many members). Once a unit reaches a specific requirement it cannot go back until that level is reached. Ie you can't just kick 80 members once you reach 1000 points and then reinvite them once you get the reward.

-More ULP allows more "voting" rights on a factions direction "alliances, attack lanes etc". Mercs have no voting rights but get more rewards if fulfilling the factions wishes, penalties if they do their own thing. Ie they attack an aligned factions planets they lose ULP

- Mercs cannot get their tags on a planet until such time as it is awarded as a land hold by that faction for services rendered (as part of ULP rewards) moving around by it's very nature will slow this process down however rewards can be adjusted as they are now to encourage mercs to move on when needed. If a land hold is lost to another faction, bad luck you should have defended it better ( maybe limit attack times to the units (nominated) prime time to be fair, it would suck losing your planet when you are all asleep). Land hold's can be awarded in various ways either a random planet or based on it's worth dependent on the units level of ULP. Land holds could be upgraded over time depending on a planets relative worth or bonus rewards. Lots of ways of doing this. Additionally a land hold grants voting rights in that faction. A merc unit relinquishes any land hold if changing faction. If a unit can establish a historical link to a planet that would be their land hold should they achieve it. Ie Robinson Rangers would get Robinson, the Seraphim would get Asuncion etc.

Benefits-
-It would encourage players to join units.
-Would encourage mercs to stay with a faction longer whilst allowing them freedom of movement should they still wish.
-Loyalist units will be rewarded more for being loyal, likely to get land hold sooner.
-Would encourage units to get their non active players involved more (lots of players doing little will slow a units ULP progression due to scaling) would need to be a little careful about this one can't go around kicking people out for not playing for 1 night.
-Units in general will have more reason to fight and do what is in the factions interests.

Solo players-
-none of the above encourages or rewards solo players (intentionally) match rewards need to go up significantly but there are a tonne of other thread about that.

[Necromantion]

Interesting perspective Slide, i should have clarified in my original post that Merc were implied to be their own faction through the hierarchy of things that I laid out first.

Interesting spin on LP with the ULP, that is a very interesting dynamic to add more depth. Some people may find it to be a bit too nitpicky but depending on how it was implemented

I would be all for it though honestly when a unit does the majority of the work to attack or defend a planet I have no issues as to how the current tags are given but your idea would indeed throw the loyalists another bone and encourage more people to go loyalist perhaps. My opinion on this would hinge on what PGI intends to do with any benefits from number of planets owned, if any.

Regarding the RP side of things, this is where I have an issue, who is to say that any one unit just because they have "Lore rights" to a planet should get it? I mean if they contribute nothing at all to its capture Im sorry but that is just taking the whole work for what you earn aspect and throwing it out the window for the sake of Lore/RP which I am not at all for when it compromises fairness in any aspect.

[slide]

Fair call on the RP planet bit, I only thought of it because Marik and Davion currently have allowed the Seraphim to keep asuncion regardless. It's not a big deal.

Mostly my post is about giving units a purpose to keep playing and give people a reason to join one in the first place. It also gives players a way of influencing the direction of a faction without "running it". Merc groups are and should be powerful, but they should not be dictating the overall success or failure of a faction to the degree that they are now.

Also the current system encourages everyone to be Mercs as once you reach level 20 with your faction (which some have already and it has only been about 10 weeks) then you either gain nothing or move on. Sure you can keep stockpiling LP but that will just equate to more free stuff if they ever go past Level 20.

IMO the ultimate goal in this game is to get your unit's/factions name on a planet. All the other grinding is just a prelude to that. ATM it is the good or the larger units that can win planets and with that monopoly it will effectively chase other people, particularly pug players or those who don't have much time, away. My suggestion gives even the worst of players a chance if they play long enough. A unit of 1 could potentially do it. Of coarse I don't know what happens when we run out of planets but with over 3000 up for grabs it is going to be a while before that is an issue. (I doubt there are 3000 players in CW regularly ATM let alone 3000 units)

Edited by slide, 15 February 2015 - 08:29 PM.

[Necromantion]

Ultimately the way that turret drops and the numbers that a faction can throw at a planet can outweigh a smaller and more skilled resistance with the way that things are currently set up. PGI would have to greatly change things to make it to where numbers will not have as much sway sadly so unless that changes large Merc units will always put a lot of weight behind whatever faction they join.

That being said at least the suggestions would allow the loyalists to point the Mercs in a specific direction rather than having them potentially following personal agendas that would fall outside of the interests of their faction they join up with. But I do agree there should be greater incentives to join units rather than float around and get people who solely pug drop to hook up with groups.

I agree, sadly the grind will have to end some time and im sure that they introduced rewards for each faction rather than just for LP earned for any faction as a whole because PGI had intended for people to move around factions. I mean why would they give cbill/LP incentives to factions that are low on population. If anything describes PGI's stance on things these two factors would indicate a sole PVP focus for the game disregarding lore to provide a better pvp experience.

Once again though, regarding the name on a planet thing, regardless of whether you look at lore or just in light of a pvp aspect the better/larger groups always win right? I have no issue still with the way names are put on planets, honestly the one thing i dont like is how easy it is to flip the name on a planet via defending it even just once or counterattacking a single time when a planet was only attacked once. I think that you should have to fight as many fights as were done by whatever unit that successfully put their tags on it.