159 replies to this topic

[Sandersson Jankins]

Something I've had in my head for quite a while, might as well unleash the beast ™ here.

A big problem with "pugs" in CW is communication and lack of leadership. I propose an electoral system, in which players are able to elect one or more players for leadership roles. Hell, such a thing is nearly already in game with the fancy gold star and cap'ns insignia.

Alright, so lets say the players have not elected anyone for command. Now, say PGI takes the most common strategies for their maps. Not hard to find; players post them on the forum all the time. Take the EASIEST iteration of the EASIEST strategy (not talking about light rush or spawn camping here, if you reply to this with that you're dense) for victory. Now, have a slightly-sensual talking head command the team!

It's as easy as "Able company, your orders are to move to C4 by 29:00!" "Able company, your orders are to push into the gate and engage the enemy at 28:00! Avoid contact until then!"

And so on and so on.

You might need a combination of strategies, lest the maps get TOO predictable. Make the selected strategy for the computerized field marshall random, or something.

Perhaps give the players the ability to actively vote for the computerized field marshall.

I'd like suggestions regarding this; if I can flesh the idea out I'll make my own thread.

[oldradagast]

Avengar, on 13 April 2015 - 03:28 PM, said:

if CW is for premades than why can you Pug it? since you can then it means it's not just for premades if that is what they want remove the ability to pug it

Why?

Because the game, and CW in particular, lacks the population needed to keep that game mode alive without tossing in the PUG's and small groups. So, they are thrown to the meat grinder for the jollies of the "leet" crowd who claim that CW is the "land of real skill" while at the same time defending their "right" to have free wins handed to them by rolling PUG's.

It's a joke. Either PUG's and groups under a certain size have no business in CW - in which case ban them from the mode - or they are needed in CW to keep the population up, in which case they need a reason to keep playing since "target practice for 12-mans" is not a good one. To do anything else is just encouraging the hypocrisy and idiocy that has left CW on life support for months.

[Vxheous]

oldradagast, on 20 April 2015 - 03:04 AM, said:

Why?

Because the game, and CW in particular, lacks the population needed to keep that game mode alive without tossing in the PUG's and small groups. So, they are thrown to the meat grinder for the jollies of the "leet" crowd who claim that CW is the "land of real skill" while at the same time defending their "right" to have free wins handed to them by rolling PUG's.

It's a joke. Either PUG's and groups under a certain size have no business in CW - in which case ban them from the mode - or they are needed in CW to keep the population up, in which case they need a reason to keep playing since "target practice for 12-mans" is not a good one. To do anything else is just encouraging the hypocrisy and idiocy that has left CW on life support for months.

There is nothing that keeps pugs and small groups from using the in-game VOIP, or going to one of the faction TS Hubs to coordinate.

[MechWarrior5152251]

Triordinant, on 13 April 2015 - 04:48 PM, said:

Absolutely NOT. All those things can NOT be made up for with good communication. Slightly mitigated, possibly, but NOT made up for. Weekly group training sessions and pre-selected fully mastered and moduled meta 'mechs vs. a team that never trained together and half of them cadets in trials? Are you serious?

Trials are bad, at least since they took the FS9 S out of trial circulation, but skill is the even bigger gap. PUG players can all agree to go up the ridge in VOIP, then when you start up the ridge half (or all the last time I tried this) retreat half way up the ridge. I spend more time anticipating my own team terribads than I do anticipating enemy moves.

There is no minimum age to play this game and the elderly are probably worse than the kids (I raided with a 70 year old in my guild in WOW, it was excruciating).

Edited by MechWarrior5152251, 20 April 2015 - 03:10 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Avengar, on 13 April 2015 - 02:30 PM, said:

this is the
Pugs vs. Pre-mades are no fun for the pugs and drives people off except for the pre-mades which will eventually drive them off because of waiting times for matches are going to get longer
pre-made vs. pre-made and pug vs. pug. this would fix most of the complaints about balance.

But it would not end the complaining.

[Telmasa]

Vxheous Kerensky, on 20 April 2015 - 03:07 AM, said:

There is nothing that keeps pugs and small groups from using the in-game VOIP, or going to one of the faction TS Hubs to coordinate.

Neither of those things solve anything whatsoever when it comes to abusable one-sided gimmicking (like the ever-infamous spawncamp).

Nathan K, on 20 April 2015 - 02:37 AM, said:

1. For starting with a Jenner, no one ever starts a war with "Lets go as easy as we can on them".
(You CAN start off like this if you want, but I should not be forced to.)

2. For the Dire, lets see them try to bring that thing to recon.

3. I do not like others messing with my cockpit and like the stuff I have now.

4. PVE titles/badges in PVP not meaning much more then trolling? So they are just like the titles/badges we have now then.

1. Starting out small and light is a common theme in MW campaigns, and for good reason, I think. They often allow you a medium mech very early on, too.

2. Ever heard of Steiner scouts? You might take more time in the Dire, but you'll also have the freedom to scout anywhere you damn well please...including straight through the enemy encampment. If you're up against nothin' but other basic AI-controlled light mechs, that's just a turkey shoot.

3. Cockpit in PvP =/= cockpit in PvE, as I was describing it. Separate.

4. What titles/badges do we get now that don't mean much, aside from things like Richer Than Blake? I dunno. All the titles we have now signify some kind of PvP accomplishment; taking PvE accomplishments is just like saying "hey look, I hit a punching bag a while, look at the title I got!". It just doesn't seem to fit a competitive PvP environment, to me. But, heck, in the end there's not much reason why not, so I'll let this one go.

[krash27]

oldradagast, on 20 April 2015 - 03:04 AM, said:

Why?

Because the game, and CW in particular, lacks the population needed to keep that game mode alive without tossing in the PUG's and small groups. So, they are thrown to the meat grinder for the jollies of the "leet" crowd who claim that CW is the "land of real skill" while at the same time defending their "right" to have free wins handed to them by rolling PUG's.

It's a joke. Either PUG's and groups under a certain size have no business in CW - in which case ban them from the mode - or they are needed in CW to keep the population up, in which case they need a reason to keep playing since "target practice for 12-mans" is not a good one. To do anything else is just encouraging the hypocrisy and idiocy that has left CW on life support for months.

So what your saying is CW is just a fancy league that PGI built for comp teams? Its not actually community based?
Thats pretty much what I figured my self

krash27

[Uncle Totty]

Telmasa, on 20 April 2015 - 12:27 PM, said:

Neither of those things solve anything whatsoever when it comes to abusable one-sided gimmicking (like the ever-infamous spawncamp).



1. Starting out small and light is a common theme in MW campaigns, and for good reason, I think. They often allow you a medium mech very early on, too.

2. Ever heard of Steiner scouts? You might take more time in the Dire, but you'll also have the freedom to scout anywhere you damn well please...including straight through the enemy encampment. If you're up against nothin' but other basic AI-controlled light mechs, that's just a turkey shoot.

3. Cockpit in PvP =/= cockpit in PvE, as I was describing it. Separate.

4. What titles/badges do we get now that don't mean much, aside from things like Richer Than Blake? I dunno. All the titles we have now signify some kind of PvP accomplishment; taking PvE accomplishments is just like saying "hey look, I hit a punching bag a while, look at the title I got!". It just doesn't seem to fit a competitive PvP environment, to me. But, heck, in the end there's not much reason why not, so I'll let this one go.

1. ...and you can do that if you want. Why would you need to be FORCED to take a path you WANT to go down? "Title Awarded: 'Light Foot First'"

2. If it is something of importance, it would have more than just basic AI lights guarding it. Also...

2a. "Hey! Some one is coming this way! We got to move/destroy/get rid of this before they can look at/find out about/more about it!" "Title Awarded: 'Assault Recon'"

3. Why?

4. They gave me Urbie titles/badges just because I gave then $40.

[Zakie Chan]

As many have stated the inherent nature of the game puts the pug on the short end of the stick.

This is not a twitch shooter. Massed, accurate fires (aka fire superiority) is the deciding factor to any confrontation. Once a team loses 2-3 mechs, it greatly hinders their ability to regain fire superiority. Smart teams with fast mechs/good coms can at times regain fire superiority by maneuvering to maximize outgoing fires and reduce incoming fires. However, the sad truth is most mechs are slow and with small maps the short standoff distance makes it very hard to do.

A team who plays smart is usually on a 3rd party VOIP application. Typing takes too long and usually when the engagement starts it is too much of a distraction to chat to the pick up gamers and keep them informed.

Clear concise coms are more important than individual skill. Contact call outs and commands from leaders need to be accurate and quick. When a team does it well, it results in the "rolling" of the opposing team.

It takes all members of a team working together to pull out a victory, if the premade doesnt include the pugs and/or the pug cant pick out their movement and current target to engage, then the match is lost before the last shot is fired.

Fixing the game is very tricky because even if an entire team was on voice coms, if there is only 1 that cant follow basic coms brevity then it adds friction and clogs the essential information that needs to flow. The easiest cure is the pugs who care enough and want to improve/succeed join a team that has all the basics and the leadership in-place to bring new applicants up to speed with a teams standard operating procedures.

[Ashvins]

Now don't get me wrong here I do feel the CW is for group actions, but it is open for pugs. Because of this CW can and does cost people c-bill's to play pug's in CW. Just had a match where I slummed it and pug'ed a CW match. After use of consumables it cost me 45k c-bill's for the match and I did the most damage, highest kill's and highest assists in the match for my team.

It should not cost you c-bills to play a match PERIOD!!

Make little to nothing if you get face-stomped like we did in that match, yes. But it should never cost you more to play the match than you make. Even with consumable's cost.

This FACT drives the pugers away from CW. This needs to change. Even if they suffer a 28-48 loss like we did you should make a little something. The pug's in CW are effectively mercs for that match. As such they should at the very least end a match with a 0 balance outcome. Never a negative balance one, and if they win (humor me here) a good if not great c-bill reward.

This brings us back to the day's of rearm & repair where poor to mediocre pilots were loosing c-bills to play the game (hence the removal of rearm & repair).

Just my Opinion but pug's should get enhanced rewards for CW to make it worth their while to play. In fact any group under 4 should get enhanced rewards if the other team is an 8-12 man group. The smaller group is still likely to loose and likely to get seriously stomped hence possibly loose C-bill's in the match.

Yeah it would take some coding to do but not all that much (a few if/then statements and a multiplier on c-bill rewards).

[Telmasa]

Nathan K, on 20 April 2015 - 01:28 PM, said:

1. ...and you can do that if you want. Why would you need to be FORCED to take a path you WANT to go down? "Title Awarded: 'Light Foot First'"

2. If it is something of importance, it would have more than just basic AI lights guarding it. Also...

2a. "Hey! Some one is coming this way! We got to move/destroy/get rid of this before they can look at/find out about/more about it!" "Title Awarded: 'Assault Recon'"

3. Why?

4. They gave me Urbie titles/badges just because I gave then $40.

1. Because light mechs are the cheapest. If you were a brand new mechwarrior, you'd get started off in the cheapest light/medium mech and have to work your way from there; I suppose if you're part of a regimental military group, you might start off in trainee mechs that are heavier (like the Bushwacker, eh?), but I still doubt they'd chuck up in an Atlas right off the bat.

2. All depends...are they stretched thin by ongoing conflict? Is it a relatively backwater, minor world? Is it a recon thing of little importance to the overall campaign? (2a.: don't get complicated! lol)

3. Why not? It'd make more sense from a roleplay perspective.

4. *fine*, I don't care enough about the titles to pick at this point...(paytowin titles? lolol)

Ashvins, on 20 April 2015 - 03:19 PM, said:

Now don't get me wrong here I do feel the CW is for group actions, but it is open for pugs. Because of this CW can and does cost people c-bill's to play pug's in CW. Just had a match where I slummed it and pug'ed a CW match. After use of consumables it cost me 45k c-bill's for the match and I did the most damage, highest kill's and highest assists in the match for my team.
It should not cost you c-bills to play a match PERIOD!!
Make little to nothing if you get face-stomped like we did in that match, yes. But it should never cost you more to play the match than you make. Even with consumable's cost.
This FACT drives the pugers away from CW. This needs to change. Even if they suffer a 28-48 loss like we did you should make a little something. The pug's in CW are effectively mercs for that match. As such they should at the very least end a match with a 0 balance outcome. Never a negative balance one, and if they win (humor me here) a good if not great c-bill reward.
This brings us back to the day's of rearm & repair where poor to mediocre pilots were loosing c-bills to play the game (hence the removal of rearm & repair).
Just my Opinion but pug's should get enhanced rewards for CW to make it worth their while to play. In fact any group under 4 should get enhanced rewards if the other team is an 8-12 man group. The smaller group is still likely to loose and likely to get seriously stomped hence possibly loose C-bill's in the match.
Yeah it would take some coding to do but not all that much (a few if/then statements and a multiplier on c-bill rewards).

Or...don't jump on the consumable spam bandwagon?

Or...PGI could remove consumables in favor of Arrow IV & Long Toms & rely on light mechs to do their original job of scouting?

Or...at least nerf consumables to not be such an overwhelming edge to the game?

Lots of possiblities.

[Uncle Totty]

Telmasa, on 20 April 2015 - 09:35 PM, said:

1. Because light mechs are the cheapest. If you were a brand new mechwarrior, you'd get started off in the cheapest light/medium mech and have to work your way from there; I suppose if you're part of a regimental military group, you might start off in trainee mechs that are heavier (like the Bushwacker, eh?), but I still doubt they'd chuck up in an Atlas right off the bat.

2. All depends...are they stretched thin by ongoing conflict? Is it a relatively backwater, minor world? Is it a recon thing of little importance to the overall campaign? (2a.: don't get complicated! lol)

3. Why not? It'd make more sense from a roleplay perspective.

4. *fine*, I don't care enough about the titles to pick at this point...(paytowin titles? lolol)

1. But we are NOT brand new mechwarriors, and have clocked in MANY battles in the arena (PVP). Why not let us start off with one of our pride and joy arena mechs?

2. Then why would recon be needed in the first place? (2a. Or it could be a trap, and you have to get out of the area before the bomb goes off.)

3. How? They ARE the same mechs, are the not?

Telmasa, on 20 April 2015 - 09:35 PM, said:

Or...don't jump on the consumable spam bandwagon?

Or...PGI could remove consumables in favor of Arrow IV & Long Toms & rely on light mechs to do their original job of scouting?

Or...at least nerf consumables to not be such an overwhelming edge to the game?

Lots of possiblities.

...

Naga?

[ztac]

I see some invalid arguments on the teamwork notion being the only difference between a PUG and Premade.

This is a false concept , in a Unit you will have websites where builds and drop decks are discussed and thus maximised , The group has a premade strategy if they are organised. At this level thee is no way a PUG can ever compete! May as well just hand the game over to groups and tell solo players to no longer play!

[sycocys]

The 2 biggest differences between pugs and pre-mades -

Pugs tend to drop in terrible loadouts and pilot with ever more terrible standard queue bad habits.

Premade/unit players tend to run loadouts that are refined and tuned (meta), and pilot much more efficiently

Tactics/teamwork is a distant 3rd to these two things.

[Telmasa]

Nathan K, on 21 April 2015 - 03:05 AM, said:

1. But we are NOT brand new mechwarriors, and have clocked in MANY battles in the arena (PVP). Why not let us start off with one of our pride and joy arena mechs?

2. Then why would recon be needed in the first place? (2a. Or it could be a trap, and you have to get out of the area before the bomb goes off.)

3. How? They ARE the same mechs, are the not?
...

Naga?

1. 'Cause I'm looking at PvE as (hopefully) a whole new roleplaying experience, not just some additional mode like on War Thunder or whatever. So anything to do with the PvP part of MW:O would have nothing to do with what's going on over in singleplayer-campaign-land.

2. There's all kinds of possiblities! lol

3. Nooo, not the same. At least how I'm imagining it.

I also want to see a Dragon with a Long Tom running around...but yeah allowing mechs like the Naga to fit in the game would be great too.

[Uncle Totty]

Telmasa, on 21 April 2015 - 04:16 PM, said:

1. 'Cause I'm looking at PvE as (hopefully) a whole new roleplaying experience, not just some additional mode like on War Thunder or whatever. So anything to do with the PvP part of MW:O would have nothing to do with what's going on over in singleplayer-campaign-land.

2. There's all kinds of possiblities! lol

3. Nooo, not the same. At least how I'm imagining it.

I also want to see a Dragon with a Long Tom running around...but yeah allowing mechs like the Naga to fit in the game would be great too.

1. So you want a hole new game then. One that has nothing to do with MWO.

2. Please list...

3. So it my not even have MW/BT mechs in it? I am really starting to hate this game of yours.

[Telmasa]

Nathan K, on 21 April 2015 - 06:22 PM, said:

1. So you want a hole new game then. One that has nothing to do with MWO.

2. Please list...

3. So it my not even have MW/BT mechs in it? I am really starting to hate this game of yours.

1. More or less. Just the same, you know, Mechwarrior - Battletech - Crysis engine theme goin' on.

2. The list is limitless! lol

3. What? I meant not the same mech that you have in PvP mode - like, PvE/PvP two totally separate things (explained I think by my answer to #1).

[Aresye]

oldradagast, on 20 April 2015 - 03:04 AM, said:

Why?

Because the game, and CW in particular, lacks the population needed to keep that game mode alive without tossing in the PUG's and small groups. So, they are thrown to the meat grinder for the jollies of the "leet" crowd who claim that CW is the "land of real skill" while at the same time defending their "right" to have free wins handed to them by rolling PUG's.

It's a joke. Either PUG's and groups under a certain size have no business in CW - in which case ban them from the mode - or they are needed in CW to keep the population up, in which case they need a reason to keep playing since "target practice for 12-mans" is not a good one. To do anything else is just encouraging the hypocrisy and idiocy that has left CW on life support for months.

Oh for f**** sake man! If you want an example of idiocy just look in the mirror with your post. First off, you assume that every large unit (both lore based and competitive based) is there for the sole purpose of stomping pugs, in a mode that doesn't affect stats, Elo, etc. So the only possible reason this could even be used as an argument is for the reason of CBills, and even then, you can earn just as much, if not MORE CBills, by facing a team closer to your own team's skill. Facing nothing but pugs as an organized 12man is boring, and we're more likely to just gen-rush if we have the option just to get the game over with.

I take offense with your statement that lumps myself and all my unit's members into the same premade boogyman you and countless others have complained about since closed beta. I take offense because I specifically tell my guys to throttle back, not drop artillery, not spawn camp, etc. when facing a disorganized team. I take offense because I try to help the team of solos have a longer fight so they can earn more money. I take offense because I am the complete opposite of the mentality you have so graciously bestowed upon me without even knowing who I am.

But let's move on, because not only did you insult every unit that doesn't fit your narrow minded viewpoint of teams in a team based game, but you also insulted the same solo players that you seem to be trying to defend. You insulted them by saying they have no free will, like they were ripped from the solo queue and thrust into the CW queue against their will.

Why would solo players need to be barred from playing CW? Because they don't know any better? Is that what you're saying, because that's insulting them again if that's the case. Perhaps a disclaimer could be added to the faction screen, but other than that, your plan accomplishes nothing save for barring the solo players who enjoy CW from dropping there, and lowering CW population even further. There ARE solo players who drop CW on a regular basis. They don't mind occasionally facing a large group, because they take charge, put out, and try their best. Why should they be barred from playing a mode THEY enjoy?

Your argument sucks (I use the term "argument" loosely). It comes across less as an actual plan to solve CW population and team disparity issues, and more is just a giant insult to each and every person who plays CW, either group or solo. Simply put, not every group fits within your narrow opinion, and not every solo player is some helpless, "didn't know any better," pug. Stop assuming you know exactly how everybody else in this game thinks.

Edited by Aresye Kerensky, 21 April 2015 - 07:23 PM.

[Mystere]

Aresye Kerensky, on 21 April 2015 - 07:21 PM, said:

Oh for f**** sake man! If you want an example of idiocy just look in the mirror with your post. ..

He's Community Warfare's version of Mudhutwarrior.

<Damn! Did I just doom myself and everyone else here? Or is the "Do not speak his name three times" rule still applicable?>

Edited by Mystere, 21 April 2015 - 09:42 PM.

[Uncle Totty]

Telmasa, on 21 April 2015 - 06:40 PM, said:

1. More or less. Just the same, you know, Mechwarrior - Battletech - Crysis engine theme goin' on.

2. The list is limitless! lol

3. What? I meant not the same mech that you have in PvP mode - like, PvE/PvP two totally separate things (explained I think by my answer to #1).

1. (Look to 3)

2. No, the list is not limitless. Recon is made up of no more than these four steps: Get in, gather intell, get out, do not get caught doing it. Any thing more, and it is no longer recon.

3. So no, it is not a new game mode you are asking for. But a separate and entirely brand new game all together.