41 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Metus regem, on 18 April 2015 - 06:56 AM, said:

From what I've seen in PUGLife, I would say we already have heavily scripted, bad AI, that is the hallmark of MechWarrior PC games...

Which is why I drop solo in CW. You never know which 12-man tryhard team you're going to face.

[Fate 6]

CptGier, on 17 April 2015 - 03:40 PM, said:

YOu basically make your mech, your buddies make a mech and you play the objectives to win the missions and get to the end.....

That's literally what you do in PvP

[rolly]

Sandersson Jankins, on 17 April 2015 - 08:52 PM, said:

And Mortal Online stayed a hardcore, intense PvP experience, but was plagued by bugs, lag, and lack of funding.

Man, those of us that just want an amazing PvP-dominant experience, but with extreme persistency, community-driven events/story/plot/etc, and others are fugged.

I'd donate a kidney or a testicle to have a proper 17-18th century pirate or Battletech experience. I'll make do with this one though, but if PGI would use my donated organs to make this dream a reality, well....

I'm listening.

I hear you. They'd probably squander your donated organs in some way.

Fate 6, on 18 April 2015 - 07:07 AM, said:

That's literally what you do in PvP

Except without douchey players, try-hards, lemming rushes and poor teamwork, post mortem bitching over VOIP. Not saying that happens all the time, but I'll take that.

Chuanhao, on 17 April 2015 - 08:46 PM, said:

I can understand the need for a storyline.

but playing against an AI? Isn't it a downgrade from our current games where we play against thinking humans rather than rule-scripted bots?

The core question would be game modes. PVE may offer more variety like the games of old such as escort becomes a possibility. Using that example, If you think about it though, a real escort game versus humans would have only one result - and that is that the enemy team is willing to risk all to win the match.

If it is a choice between Solaris (against humans) than PVE (against AI), I would take Solaris as what they should focus on.

Play games like Insurgency Co-op. AI is well scripted and challenging tough. AI scripted has gone a lot farther than set path IF-AND-OR programming.

[Fate 6]

rolly, on 18 April 2015 - 07:13 AM, said:

Except without try-hards

Ah, so really you just want an easier experience.

[Paigan]

MechWarrior0975971, on 17 April 2015 - 02:56 PM, said:

[...]
Someone said "there are too many variables" and it occurred to me, PvE could be a very useful tool for rating mechs effectiveness.
[...]

That would be me.
Also, experience from ALL other games show that PvE balancing has nothing to do with PvP balancing.
Example:
The last SC2 Wings of Liberty mission is incredibly hard, yet ridiculously easy if you can just reach a critical amount of siege tanks. Once you have enough of them, their pure AoE firepower creates a shield of destruction that kills everything and anything, no matter how many enemies approach.
Massing siege tank in PvP however always results in catastrophic failure or a gamble at best.

PvE != PvP

Case closed ^^

Edited by Paigan, 18 April 2015 - 07:42 AM.

[Stealth Fox]

Mystere, on 17 April 2015 - 07:58 PM, said:

Now people want MWO to become a mainly PVE game because players could not stomach PVP even though they proclaimed they could.
Carebears!

[Mystere]

Seph MacLeod, on 18 April 2015 - 07:44 AM, said:

[Stealth Fox]

Mystere, on 18 April 2015 - 07:45 AM, said:

That's all I had really...

[Insects]

MechWarrior0975971, on 17 April 2015 - 02:56 PM, said:

Rather then people speculating on why this mech is awesome, and this mech is bad, we would have some pretty solid numbers to go with, that had nothing to do with lucky/unlucky drops.

I think it could be good in the opposite way.
PvE can take a different approach and remove all the quirks and ghost heat and stuff, just have the mechs in their raw form.
Reintroduce repair and rearm in PvE mode.
Repair/servicing/transport costs is the balancing mechanic, sure you can use a Timbergod, but its going to cost a whole lot more and take longer to repair each match than a cheap Urbie or Locust.

PvE can be imbalanced, own those bots! You dont have to worry about giving them a fair and enjoyable experience they are just fodder for everyones OP mechs to rip apart. Everyone wants to stomp the enemy, just the problem is that nobody enjoys being stomped. Except for bots, they have no feelings.

PvE can work better for role warfare with the classes properly fulfilling their roles on large maps against AI designed to behave itself rather than hide or poptart or whatever cheesy exploit humans always find to break the intended game design.

[CptGier]

Chuanhao, on 17 April 2015 - 08:46 PM, said:

I can understand the need for a storyline.

but playing against an AI? Isn't it a downgrade from our current games where we play against thinking humans rather than rule-scripted bots?

LOL, you say "Thinking humans" and then we get game after game, prolly 95% of games are 3-12 stomps or worse...that is hardly "thinking human" material. Thinking human material would see 95% of games ending in 8-12 or better. BUt most games its not even a game. Atleast an AI will make a game of it. Even if he cant out shoot you, an AI will never AFK, he wont bot, in the human sense of it, he wont TK...intentionally....he will play, it will follow the orders, it will fire at the enemy, and quite frankly, ive had 10x more fun in working with AI then I ever really have being stuck in teams of "thinking humans"....

BF2? Its so much more fun assaulting from post to post with my army of AI supporting me and me supporting them, while the enemy AI fights back. ITs kinda a struggle at times to push up. hopping from supply crate to supply crate, arty to clear my path....and it actually turns into a battle. In all honesty, i have more faith in my AI taking a post from the enemy then I ever do a side of humans. A little bit of arty support and AI can typically take w/e I ask them to. If im fighting alongside them? its nearly assured. Sure, the enemy has made a fight of it and pushed back...but still....its how the game is supposed to be played....both sides giving a go of it.

MWO? its hardly a fight or even fun. Its 2-5 miuntes of pew pew, flashy lights, little bit of noise and its over....2-12.......repeat 3500 times.

MW4, its scripted, its the same thing over and over, and yet it never quite got so redundant and boring I all together just quit playing it. I have played the MW4, MC1 and 2 campaigns so many times I cant even begin to count it. PVE is awesome lol. PVP might be when you are in your 12 man stomping puggies 12-2 3500 times....but im sure even that gets old...

Ive watched premade games on YT, its 2 death balls playing nascar, shooting stragglers for 5 minutes an the game ends.../yawn

Edited by CptGier, 18 April 2015 - 08:53 AM.

[sycocys]

Like I've been saying since I first saw what they did with CW - if you just made CW pvp campaigning from every prior Mechwarrior game you'd have knocked it out of the park.

There's a reason people still play the old mech games and that's because while they were simple you had this plethora of goals to accomplish to get further along in your conquests. It engaged players and would do the same exact thing if you implemented those elements directly into pvp.

[CptGier]

sycocys, on 18 April 2015 - 09:02 AM, said:

Like I've been saying since I first saw what they did with CW - if you just made CW pvp campaigning from every prior Mechwarrior game you'd have knocked it out of the park.

There's a reason people still play the old mech games and that's because while they were simple you had this plethora of goals to accomplish to get further along in your conquests. It engaged players and would do the same exact thing if you implemented those elements directly into pvp.

Not to mention salvage, it was fun to see a Warhawk, blow it up and salvage it...taking it against the enemy. MWO? Do we get something neat like that? naaawww.......

Ive lost count the number of times ive done missions in Mechcommander over just to salvage certain mechs. Timber on mission 3, the Warhawks in the 2nd to last mission, the Warhawk in that 8 ace mechwarrior mission....yeah...

Edited by CptGier, 18 April 2015 - 09:12 AM.

[Jon Gotham]

Chuanhao, on 17 April 2015 - 08:46 PM, said:

but playing against an AI? Isn't it a downgrade from our current games where we play against thinking humans rather than rule-scripted bots?

Are you totally sure?

[CptGier]

kamiko kross, on 18 April 2015 - 09:16 AM, said:

Are you totally sure?

Yeah, anyone who has faith in "thinking humans" hasnt played 4000 games in World of Tanks and actually paid any attention...unless Chaunhao is one of the "scrub reds" from WoT and couldnt tell the difference anyway....

[Nathan Foxbane]

CptGier, on 18 April 2015 - 09:12 AM, said:

Ive lost count the number of times ive done missions in Mechcommander over just to salvage certain mechs. Timber on mission 3, the Warhawks in the 2nd to last mission, the Warhawk in that 8 ace mechwarrior mission....yeah...

I'll restart the 8 Ace mission just to get that blasted jumping Timber Wolf. Same thing with the one that crops up in the second or third mission in the expansion.

[MauttyKoray]

PVE imo needs to be replayable missions ranging from 1-4 (or even up to 8? maybe 12?) players allowing you to simulate lances and warriors from the MW4 campaigns. You can have ones that limit the number of people possible (such as the 1 man scout mission or the 2 man sabotage run) and allow a variety of missions available for any number of players.

[Chuanhao]

Most of us have had our fair share of 12-0s, but we also have had our 12-11s.

AI -- is still AI. We can have the WATSON of MWO. That is technically possible. But it wont be. So it will depend on what we get in the form of AI. Hopefully its a good one.

MauttyKoray, on 18 April 2015 - 02:51 PM, said:

PVE imo needs to be replayable missions ranging from 1-4 (or even up to 8? maybe 12?) players allowing you to simulate lances and warriors from the MW4 campaigns. You can have ones that limit the number of people possible (such as the 1 man scout mission or the 2 man sabotage run) and allow a variety of missions available for any number of players.

I concede that the type of game mode above will require AI as it would be too difficult to MM all the possible playing modes from PVE missions from MW2,3,4 etc. I guess in situations such as a 1 vs 3 where it is the job of the 1 to scout a number of objectives with 3 trying to find him, it would be too difficult and too long to find two sets of players to actually play this.

But thinking about it further. Escorting that Whale, is well, Escort mode. Scouting in that RVN, Ring / UAVing / Narcing the enemy is well, Scouting mode. (Dont start on rewards though. That's a different topic). So one can play some of the roles already

Russ has promised some form of AI for the tutorial? Its a start.

Anyone want's to crowdfund a PVE with voiceover by Grace Park (like in Tiberium Sun was it?) .....

[Mister Blastman]

They already have bots in this game. What do you think half the playerbase is?

[MoonfireSpam]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 April 2015 - 03:31 AM, said:

I never proclaimed I could. But right now. after 3 years of playing PvP, I would like to have a story to follow so it feels like I'm getting something done. PvP is to much EPeen.

I just don't understand the whole PvP mentality. Its a bunch of faffing about accomplishing nothing in game.

It's just playing the game because it's fun.

I mean people have been playing multiplayer games since ever without any story just because they are fun as they are. Starcraft, DotA, League of Legends, Counterstrike, Call of Duty, Team Fortress, Quake, Street Fighter, Smash Brothers, Hearthstone etc.

Not to say that bot matches wouldn't be popular, they sure as hell are.

Oh and as far as the main topic, bots are a terrible way to balance anything.

Edited by MoonfireSpam, 18 April 2015 - 04:46 PM.

[Chuanhao]

Lets call it MWO:Offline :-)