159 replies to this topic

[Commander A9]

The arrangement of quered-up opposing forces is fine as-is.

If a 12-man is the only group quered up to attack or defend, and random players attempt to oppose them, then I for one would rather have that match go forward of organized vs. pugs rather than be delayed via said 12-man stuck waiting for an opposing 12-man to quere up, or for 12 random pugs to oppose the already gathering players.

We don't get to pick who we fight when the pregame clock counts down, but when you click "attack" or "defend," you resign yourself to facing whoever is quered up against you. Effectively, you give your consent to facing whoever is on the other side, much like undocking in EVE Online or Star Citizen-you enter hostile territory, you give your consent to whoever wants to shoot you to pull the trigger.

If you don't want to fight the organized 12-mans quered up on a planet, go to a different planet. That's really all you can do. And that's really how it should be.

Short of that, consider joining a unit, and become part of the 12-man. Or use the Looking For Group feature, and network with your people. Use VOIP, Teamspeak, Mumble-come on; be brave, step up, take charge, organize things. Pre-planning!

But let us not think for a second that 12-man groups are the problem. Game mechanics are also not a problem. Really, there is no problem. These complains are coming from people who choose to drop alone, get assigned to random pug sides, and then get plastered when they encounter 12-man groups on the other side of the line.

We saw what happened to Clans when pugs went up against pugs during that hideous Community Warfare weekend event. I refuse to let that happen again. I also refuse to let 12 random players try to defend one of my faction's planets by themselves, or attack the enemy without another team to support them, especially if they do end up facing a organized 12-man unit. That's the perfect time to call for 12-man group reinforcements.

And just because they're pugs doesn't mean they suck. I have stepped up to command a pug team before, and it has resulted in victory, on both attack and defense. Someone has to be brave, step up, and take charge-the rest of the team must then do their best to follow orders. Failure to do so lowers your chance of success. This is not Call-of-Duty-Rambo time, so work together, survive together, win together. If teamwork is overpowered, then start practicing it.

Edited by Commander A9, 16 April 2015 - 08:01 PM.

[Aresye]

Triordinant, on 15 April 2015 - 06:11 PM, said:

What are we arguing about then? I agree CW was built for comp teams and is still Beta and flawed. You agree that the vast majority of players play in the public queue and CW is never likely to be the game mode played by the majority of players. What are we arguing about if we agree?

[Sandersson Jankins]

Commander A9, on 16 April 2015 - 07:56 PM, said:

LOTS OF WORDS THAT SANDERSSON AGREES WITH

And just because they're pugs doesn't mean they suck. I have stepped up to command a pug team before, and it has resulted in victory, on both attack and defense. Someone has to be brave, step up, and take charge-the rest of the team must then do their best to follow orders. Failure to do so lowers your chance of success. This is not Call-of-Duty-Rambo time, so work together, survive together, win together. If teamwork is overpowered, then start practicing it.

Nailed it, bud. It can be stressful, and you might end up being the un-sung hero when you're trying to jockey 11 other nerds, none of which have a microphone and the will to help you. But you're willing to do it if you must, and so am I. Hell, when I'm leading a pug team, there are gonna be un-affiliated players that outscore me by a large margin at times. I could count more than a few of those players in FRR. You know they'll show up at the same time every day, not say much, but get 2k+ damage on plenty of games. Those are some of my favorite players! Just amazing soldiers really, concerned only with doing their part to follow lead and to win.

I prefer this advice over that of "joining a unit" for some people. I prefer it because it actually improves the community! Joining a unit may be the best thing for you personally, but taking an active role to catalyze a victory and improve your team's enjoyment is so much better for the game at large.

[Telmasa]

Triordinant, on 16 April 2015 - 01:26 PM, said:

As far as I can tell, the only thing left that will draw in the casual crowd is PvE co-op and single player content.

Hey, even tryhards like me can enjoy good old-fashioned PvE & single player Mechwarrior.

I just wonder what introduction of that stuff might do to the public qeue.

[Triordinant]

Telmasa, on 17 April 2015 - 02:47 AM, said:

I just wonder what introduction of that stuff might do to the public qeue.

Everyone switches to PvE for a week. Unless PGI is able to make new PvE missions every week, they'll all flood back into the public queue and stay there until the next PvE installment arrives. It'd be a great way to spice things up. Play in the public queue for 3 weeks, then a week in PvE, then back to public again.

Edited by Triordinant, 17 April 2015 - 09:07 AM.

[Mystere]

Telmasa, on 17 April 2015 - 02:47 AM, said:

Hey, even tryhards like me can enjoy good old-fashioned PvE & single player Mechwarrior.

I just wonder what introduction of that stuff might do to the public qeue.

I already have a long list of PVE games that I bought but still need to finish. As such it makes no sense whatsoever for me to add another one.

[Mar-X-maN]

Adamski, on 14 April 2015 - 06:44 PM, said:

Its less the PuG vs Premade, and more the Low Elo vs High Elo.

People dedicated to the game and at getting better and building the best mechs, are also going to be more interested in joining other like minded players, which becomes a force multiplier.

The XL LRM Atlas is always going to be a drag on his team, it doesnt matter if he's on a premade or not, except after a while, the premade is going to get sick of carrying his deadweight and boot him. The PuG has no choice but to accept every player that comes along.

My three XL LRM Atlai and my other 13 trash build joystick controlled hero mechs paid for this game four times what its worth. Yes I expect you to suffer my playstyle. In fact I am offended that my taste is not catered to. I DO feel I am entitled to something if I pay good hard cash for it. Strange concept I know.

PS: I did 1300 damage including a dead enemy Daishi and Atlas in a lost skirmish match on the frontline in my XL LRM Atlas last week. This month two matches in lights where I got epic and great gameplay comments from people watching me play. I am not much interested in playing stalemate chess with premades.

Edited by Mar X maN, 18 April 2015 - 03:23 AM.

[Jon Gotham]

Triordinant, on 15 April 2015 - 12:44 PM, said:

LOL, I've never been part of any group, unit or clan in MWO or any other online game. When I play MWO, I play solo exclusively.

May I ask a question? I'm honestly not having a go at you with this question..ok? I'm genuinely curious.

If you don't want to be a part of any online community in an online game, why do you play mmos? What is the draw? For me the social aspect is the very thing that elevates them above single player games.

[Telmasa]

Mystere, on 17 April 2015 - 09:40 PM, said:

I already have a long list of PVE games that I bought but still need to finish. As such it makes no sense whatsoever for me to add another one.

Eh, dude, I still have 7 characters on Skyrim I want to play through the game with but haven't.

Then there's stuff like all-nighter staying up playing through all the Dead Space games on hardcore mode (oh my god, it's terrifyingly fun)...or conquering the world as Venice in Civilization V...or enjoying classics like Axis & Allies: Iron Blitz, 1830: Railroad Robbers & Barons, Spaceward: Ho! (I think it's a phone app now?!) or Master of Orion: II...there's also the Crysis/FarCry series...there's all sorts of RTS games (I like Sins of a Solar Empire best)....

Yeah, suffice it to say, I get it when it comes to gaming overflow. But, to me, the more variety, the better - cause then I have something available no matter what mood I happen to be in.

Face it, if PGI can pull off a PVE mode that truly recalls the fantastic campaigns of MW:3 & MW:4 (or even the older two games, really), but with the shiny graphics of the Crysis engine on a level comparable at least with the original Crysis, if not the latter two - that would be the bomb, even if guys like you and me are like, "ugh, great, here's another game I've gotta play that I don't have the time for!"

[Kenyon Burguess]

Telmasa, on 17 April 2015 - 02:47 AM, said:

Hey, even tryhards like me can enjoy good old-fashioned PvE & single player Mechwarrior.

I just wonder what introduction of that stuff might do to the public qeue.

russ said the pve was training mode. ppl don't get paid in training mode. so it should have no effect on the rest of the modes. should pve content be added beyond training, I doubt they will get paid for that either, devs don't like content that can farmed with little to no effort.

[Triordinant]

kamiko kross, on 18 April 2015 - 05:59 AM, said:

May I ask a question? I'm honestly not having a go at you with this question..ok? I'm genuinely curious.

If you don't want to be a part of any online community in an online game, why do you play mmos? What is the draw? For me the social aspect is the very thing that elevates them above single player games.

I just enjoy the current solo-only queue for what it is. MWO is the perfect "filler" game for when you have 30 to 90 minutes to spare because, unlike other online games, a solo queue match is guaranteed to never last more than 15 minutes and most of the time they last only half that. Since CW started, the majority of my solo queue matches have been good fights ending with scores around 12-9 or thereabouts (win or lose) so I'm having a blast.

Now, if it had a PvE single-player and/or co-op campaign (like all the previous Mechwarrior games) that had 30+ missions with roleplaying, resource management, and political intrigue thrown in (and new mission packs every 6 months), it would cease to be a "filler" and become a main game for me. I'd even pay for it.

Edited by Triordinant, 18 April 2015 - 07:05 PM.

[Telmasa]

Geist Null, on 18 April 2015 - 03:54 PM, said:

russ said the pve was training mode. ppl don't get paid in training mode. so it should have no effect on the rest of the modes. should pve content be added beyond training, I doubt they will get paid for that either, devs don't like content that can farmed with little to no effort.

Two points:
- Russ didn't say PVE was going to explicitly be only a training mode. He *did* mention stuff about making a tutorial mode, *and* adding separate PVE content. They haven't specifically said what that PVE content will represent, so I'm hopeful they'll draw inspiration from the old MW titles - hell, I'd be fine with it if they just straight up copied the campaigns altogether (assuming legally that's no problem).
- Of course nobody is going to get paid exp or c-bills, at least not in any form usable in the PvP part of MW:O. Why should they?

I know WarThunder and World of tanks do this to an extent, but I really don't think PGI has to follow that 'model'. I think a PvE mode would be perfectly fine with no rewards (as long as it's also no cost); or better yet, have an entirely separate interface, complete with everything (and more) that MW:4 campaign mode has.

Imagine, for a moment, that one day MW:O boots up, and there's a button for "Single Player" that takes you to a screen reminescent of this:



That would be the bomb!

[Uncle Totty]

Telmasa, on 18 April 2015 - 08:33 PM, said:

Two points:
- Russ didn't say PVE was going to explicitly be only a training mode. He *did* mention stuff about making a tutorial mode, *and* adding separate PVE content. They haven't specifically said what that PVE content will represent, so I'm hopeful they'll draw inspiration from the old MW titles - hell, I'd be fine with it if they just straight up copied the campaigns altogether (assuming legally that's no problem).
- Of course nobody is going to get paid exp or c-bills, at least not in any form usable in the PvP part of MW:O. Why should they?

I know WarThunder and World of tanks do this to an extent, but I really don't think PGI has to follow that 'model'. I think a PvE mode would be perfectly fine with no rewards (as long as it's also no cost); or better yet, have an entirely separate interface, complete with everything (and more) that MW:4 campaign mode has.

Imagine, for a moment, that one day MW:O boots up, and there's a button for "Single Player" that takes you to a screen reminescent of this:



That would be the bomb!

But I could still use my PVP content for PVE, right?

[Zolaz]

I am all for a PvE portion of the game so that people can figure out how to maneuver their mechs and play the game. Just like some people like farming scrubs, some people like farming AI so that they can feel awesome. If you get hung up on everything and cant hit anything, I personally dont want you on my team when I am playing ... PvE is a good place for you.

Let some AI talking head tell you how to fight in twice the time you could have gotten it from a real person in a unit. Some people arent able to interact with others or able to take criticism so computer generated content is made for them. PvE should just get you less c-bills and exp so that you want to leave the kiddy pool when you are able.

[Sandersson Jankins]

Mar X maN, on 18 April 2015 - 03:22 AM, said:

My three XL LRM Atlai and my other 13 trash build joystick controlled hero mechs paid for this game four times what its worth. Yes I expect you to suffer my playstyle. In fact I am offended that my taste is not catered to. I DO feel I am entitled to something if I pay good hard cash for it. Strange concept I know.

PS: I did 1300 damage including a dead enemy Daishi and Atlas in a lost skirmish match on the frontline in my XL LRM Atlas last week. This month two matches in lights where I got epic and great gameplay comments from people watching me play. I am not much interested in playing stalemate chess with premades.

I'm pleased to see that you use non-meta builds to good effectiveness. Good on you.

However, I'll be blunt with this. Hopefully not rude, though.

Buying a product from PGI entitles you to that product, and nothing more. You cannot buy votes, this ain't the US (or any!) Congress. I've spent plenty of cash as well, and I spent that cash on virtual currency and content.

I don't feel the content was worth it, but I am content with my expenditure because I'm happy to give a company that is at least TRYING to make a good BT game some money. I'm generally happy with the direction MWO takes, and I recognize that MY ideal game will not make them money, or appeal to a wide audience.

...so, what did you claim you're entitled to anyway? You simply said you were entitled to...what, your money's value? You agreed upon the value of that money when you made a free exchange with PGI.

If you're speaking of being entitled to play in the way you wish to play, no matter the criticism or insult from other players....then everyone that plays this game is entitled to that. As long as they are not breaking the code of conduct, they can do as they wish.

And if you think that only paying customers should have the right to play as they wish, you have a bad opinion and should feel bad.

[Telmasa]

Nathan K, on 18 April 2015 - 08:48 PM, said:

But I could still use my PVP content for PVE, right?

If it were up to me, I'd keep it totally separate. I don't really see why I'd want to take my 30+ fully mastered PvP mechs into a campaign mode and expect to have any sense of progression or accomplishment in the campaign mode. Plus it would negate the whole "free market" thing, which I think is a fun management aspect of MW:4's single-player campaign.


Again, though, that goes for any potential rewards too - no way should anybody be playing PvE 24/7 and getting progress for PvP content. Nooooo thank you, been down that road before with many other games, and would rather just keep it totally separate.

Edited by Telmasa, 19 April 2015 - 02:55 PM.

[Uncle Totty]

Telmasa, on 19 April 2015 - 02:54 PM, said:

If it were up to me, I'd keep it totally separate. I don't really see why I'd want to take my 30+ fully mastered PvP mechs into a campaign mode and expect to have any sense of progression or accomplishment in the campaign mode. Plus it would negate the whole "free market" thing, which I think is a fun management aspect of MW:4's single-player campaign.


Again, though, that goes for any potential rewards too - no way should anybody be playing PvE 24/7 and getting progress for PvP content. Nooooo thank you, been down that road before with many other games, and would rather just keep it totally separate.

You could have just that one mech of yours you love so much, and start off from there.

Also why not things like cockpit items and colors to PVE form PVP? Or titles and badges from PVE over to PVP?

Edited by Nathan K, 19 April 2015 - 04:05 PM.

[Telmasa]

Nathan K, on 19 April 2015 - 03:42 PM, said:

You could have just that one mech of yours you love so much, and start off from there.

Also why not things like cockpit items and colors to PVE form PVP? Or titles and badges from PVE over to PVP?

What, like getting to select one and only one mech for PVE and being locked to it the entire time? I don't think that'd be too great either, as much fun as running around only in my ERPPC Nova would be.

Shame on me, I need to read more carefully.

Still, what's to stop anyone from picking a Dire Wolf or Atlas and going from there? I'd rather be forced to start off with a more-or-less stock Jenner or something. Gimme an additional bit of challenge against the computer (so you don't have to make the computer cheat instead, y'dig?).

I feel like customizable cockpit finery ought to be limited to PvP - while in PvE we'd get 'premade' cockpits according to our faction, or maybe stuff would appear according to our accomplishments & progression through the campaign.

I also don't feel like PvE titles/badges would mean much in PvP; I bet it would actually get people trolled more than anything else. Maybe a lone title for completing a PvE campaign mode would be alright though.

Edited by Telmasa, 19 April 2015 - 10:59 PM.

[Uncle Totty]

Telmasa, on 19 April 2015 - 10:57 PM, said:

What, like getting to select one and only one mech for PVE and being locked to it the entire time? I don't think that'd be too great either, as much fun as running around only in my ERPPC Nova would be.

Shame on me, I need to read more carefully.

Still, what's to stop anyone from picking a Dire Wolf or Atlas and going from there? I'd rather be forced to start off with a more-or-less stock Jenner or something. Gimme an additional bit of challenge against the computer (so you don't have to make the computer cheat instead, y'dig?).

I feel like customizable cockpit finery ought to be limited to PvP - while in PvE we'd get 'premade' cockpits according to our faction, or maybe stuff would appear according to our accomplishments & progression through the campaign.

I also don't feel like PvE titles/badges would mean much in PvP; I bet it would actually get people trolled more than anything else. Maybe a lone title for completing a PvE campaign mode would be alright though.

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.

Edited by Nathan K, 20 April 2015 - 02:42 AM.

[sycocys]

Glossing over the PVE talk because PGI + AI = fail.

The #1 problem with pugs taking on CW is their refusal to get on comms or chat and do any amount of coordination. When they start doing this, even if they don't do it really well their matches turn instantly from rolls to +5-10 kills. The more we start seeing pugs come back against my unit the more we see them starting to work together and finally getting the concept of teamwork.

Had some matches like last night where they guys kept coming back after the first couple roustings (10-15 kills) and by the time I needed to log in that run they were putting up competitive fights in the 35-40 kill range and even beat us a few times.

So sure its frustrating to lose, especially when you get stomped but if you actually take the time to *cough* learn to play CW - you are going to find great matches even with a random collection of players. Still it would be easier to hop on your factions ts, or hassle them to start a centralized one - but the voip and text chat do work if you are willing to take advantage of those.