48 replies to this topic

[Summon3r]

this is neither here nor there tbh, none of the major complaints appear to be at the forefront of being dealt with. planets mean zero. mercs still do as they see fit. zerg is still zerg

im for a reset tho, especially after this event lol. will only take 1.5 days to eliminate the clans to there home world

[MechaBattler]

We have more maps and a few things got refined. But I don't feel like it warrants a reset.

[Fragnot]

If they want CW to be a sustainable game mode into the future, I think they should do resets four times per year and call them seasons. At the end of a season they can give away goodies to players/Units that performed well; then wipe stats, reset the map, and start a new season.

[InspectorG]

Make holding planets worth something.

Otherwise, whats the purpose?

[Mirumoto Izanami]

Fragnot, on 31 March 2015 - 07:58 AM, said:

If they want CW to be a sustainable game mode into the future, I think they should do resets four times per year and call them seasons. At the end of a season they can give away goodies to players/Units that performed well; then wipe stats, reset the map, and start a new season.

They will also need to add something show that a player's game they just played has an effect on what's going on. Something noticeable. Average players will not play CW if they feel what they do has no effect, and you want average playing, because larger playerbase is better. It doesn't have to be game changing or impactful, but it does need to be noticeable.

[Mystere]

Fragnot, on 31 March 2015 - 07:58 AM, said:

If they want CW to be a sustainable game mode into the future, I think they should do resets four times per year and call them seasons. At the end of a season they can give away goodies to players/Units that performed well; then wipe stats, reset the map, and start a new season.

I say no to seasons.

What we need are more and better game modes and maps. Make each planetary conquest a campaign instead of the highly-abstract "take 8 out of 15 squares for the win" CW we now have.

[Metus regem]

Mirumoto Izanami, on 31 March 2015 - 08:18 AM, said:

They will also need to add something show that a player's game they just played has an effect on what's going on. Something noticeable. Average players will not play CW if they feel what they do has no effect, and you want average playing, because larger playerbase is better. It doesn't have to be game changing or impactful, but it does need to be noticeable.

Maybe give a discount to mechs and equipment that are build on worlds that your faction controls?

[Mirumoto Izanami]

Mystere, on 31 March 2015 - 08:22 AM, said:

I say no to seasons.

What we need are more and better game modes and maps. Make each planetary conquest a campaign instead of the highly-abstract "take 8 out of 15 squares for the win" CW we now have.

Why not both? (regular resets and end game rewards and more modes)

[cSand]

Kilo 40, on 30 March 2015 - 08:43 PM, said:

won't make a bit of difference as long as CW continues to cater to large groups and ignores the rest of the player base.

I don't even play CW and I realize that current CW game mode is for large groups

that's the whole point!

But adding some game modes for smaller maps / groups would be OK too.

Edited by cSand, 31 March 2015 - 08:45 AM.

[Mystere]

Mirumoto Izanami, on 31 March 2015 - 08:23 AM, said:

Why not both? (regular resets and end game rewards and more modes)

Instead of performing resets, tweak various community warfare parameters (e.g. win conditions, drop weights, drop sizes, alliances, planetary benefits) to skew progress of the "war".

This is neither CoD nor Halo. This is neither LoL nor Starcraft. This is:

People need to be creative, innovative, etc.

Edited by Mystere, 31 March 2015 - 08:49 AM.

[Kilo 40]

cSand, on 31 March 2015 - 08:43 AM, said:

I don't even play CW and I realize that current CW game mode is for large groups

that's the whole point&#33

*sigh*

GROUP queue is for groups, just like solo queue is for solo players. "community " warfare should be for the entire "community".

[Joe Decker]

Mystere, on 31 March 2015 - 08:48 AM, said:

Instead of performing resets, tweak various community warfare parameters (e.g. win conditions, drop weights, drop sizes, alliances, planetary benefits) to skew progress of the "war".

This is neither CoD nor Halo. This is neither LoL nor Starcraft. This is:

People need to be creative, innovative, etc.

I agree - Russ should also discuss this Stuff here in the Forums and not on Twitter. I don't care about Twitter and I guess many others don't aswell.

CW needs Skirmish Battles before Invasion Mode could even be played...

And at least a couple of Planets for each Faction need some Meaning to begin with. Like special Buffs for certain Faction specific Mechs or Stuff like that.

Planets that are suffering from constant Battles should loose their Buffs while Planets that experience longtime Peace should prosper and generate new Buffs.

Units that got Tags on Planets should gain Income depending on the Status of the Planets they own and should be allowed to invest in Fortifications on their Planets which will give them several Bonuses like more Sectors to fight about or better Turrets, a Repair Hangar, Bonus Artys or UAVs or whatever...

Planet Invasions should take several Days (how long exactly should depend on how fortified/populated/important a Planet is) and not 8 Hours...

House Units should receive Money depending on the Amount and Wealth of Planets the Faction holds so they can fortify every Planet who doesn't have a Merc Unit Tag. And House Units should make the Calls which Planets to attack and if and where to defend.

Delete the Algorithm and give Faction Players (not Mercs) the Ability to pick Planets !

There needs to be a Reason to be a House Unit as at the Moment there is none.

Clans should make no Contracts with Mercs but should have BETTER Mechs so we will see Quality vs Quantity...

Implement a Bounty System (just for the Fun ) where you can put a Bounty on single Players or whole Units.

Bring in Support Lines, Dropship max Range (no Teleporting allowed) and so on and on and on.

Map Reset is okey as long as it is Beta - but when CW is out of Beta there should not be any "Resets" at all or People will loose Interest in CW Gamemode completely. What is the Point of fighting when your Actions don't have any longlasting Impact ?

Edited by Joe Decker, 31 March 2015 - 09:25 AM.

[Green Mamba]

Wont make a difference as the map will pretty much be back like it was due to horrible game balancing and crying by certain players on the forums to take the imbalance even further due improper nerfs and buffs being added

[RG Notch]

Mystere, on 31 March 2015 - 08:48 AM, said:

Instead of performing resets, tweak various community warfare parameters (e.g. win conditions, drop weights, drop sizes, alliances, planetary benefits) to skew progress of the "war".

This is neither CoD nor Halo. This is neither LoL nor Starcraft. This is:

People need to be creative, innovative, etc.

I find it funny that they had to put that line on there, I guess that was easier than actually making the game anything like Battletech, but it does say it in the title, so it must be true. Anyways, good luck getting anything more than simplistic solutions from PGI. Three years in and people are still thinking that there will be major changes to the MWO MVP plan.

[Mystere]

RG Notch, on 31 March 2015 - 10:27 AM, said:

I find it funny that they had to put that line on there, I guess that was easier than actually making the game anything like Battletech, but it does say it in the title, so it must be true. Anyways, good luck getting anything more than simplistic solutions from PGI. Three years in and people are still thinking that there will be major changes to the MWO MVP plan.

Well, there is hope. We did get Ghost Heat, and I don't think anyone can claim that is anywhere near simplistic.

[RG Notch]

Mystere, on 31 March 2015 - 10:33 AM, said:

Well, there is hope. We did get Ghost Heat, and I don't think anyone can claim that is anywhere near simplistic.

Actually it is simplistic, in fact it's one of the easiest ways available. It may not be simplistic to explain or work with, but it is simple from their side. Many people suggested more complex but rational, unfortunately these things required more work than simply creating an arbitrary heat increases when you fire more than a certain number of weapons.
It's ok, we'll see what PGI manages. I'm pretty sure it's not going to involve much more than changing the number of mechs involved. I laugh at the idea of escort or anything beyond TDM with a secondary win condition. I have 3 years of PGI's "effort" to show, seems like the people preaching these ideas have only hope. Let's see how it works out.

[Mystere]

RG Notch, on 31 March 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

... seems like the people preaching these ideas have only hope ...

If there was really no hope, then I should have just pulled the "off switch" as The Big Guy Upstairs had ordered me to do so long ago, instead of starting another Angelic Rebellion.

But I digress.

[RG Notch]

Mystere, on 31 March 2015 - 10:52 AM, said:

If there was really no hope, then I should have just pulled the "off switch" as The Big Guy Upstairs had ordered me to do so long ago, instead of starting another Angelic Rebellion.

But I digress.

There's always hope. PGI could sell the rights to someone competent. MS could pull the license. PGI could go belly up and someone new can take over. There's always hope of progress. Hey at the least PGI only has the license until 2018 I believe. I can wait.

[Burktross]

is the gamemode fun yet?
i still don't think suicide rushing is fun :c

[Lawrence Elsa]

... Early April fools joke?