1578 replies to this topic

[xxREVxx]

New mechs are great BUT...
How about some content, real content? Mobile repair for example...etc
Are other vehicles possible with this game engine?
Interesting maps. The graphics are great but between the DZ's being in the same spots tends to make for a wash, rinse, repeat type gameplay...gets old. Randomize the Domination spot and DZ's...mix them up.
How did LL have so much more and MWO just seems to be an FPS with maps the size of postage stamps?
I remember Timberline in MW4 taking time to find the enemy and having room to maneuver on said enemy. The new frozen city is definitely a push in the right direction.

[Vahgus]

Why isn't there any pve content retrofitted for pvp. eg: a patrol mission or sabotage mission that allows players to be both defenders and aggressors

Honestly I don't play much invasion mode matches in faction play when I do participate, because it is always over some stupid giant space gun. I'm tired of the giant gun I want something else to fight over at least once in a while.

I would also dare to say that you should take your numbers based solutions for faction play and flush them, because I'm sure I'm not the only one that migrated from faction play due to the lack of content. Words I'm sure you don't want to hear, but need to.

I've also suggested giving lesser units a chance to be awarded lesser planets for their efforts and even get bonuses from them...minor bonuses of course. However, it seems like suggestions that involve adding content get ignored. This is so disappointing.

Don't forget you have some players who prefer pve over pvp style of play playing this game. Ideas from both arenas will help this game evolve to what it should be. I shall hold off my opinion on pvp gaming since such ramblings wouldn't be productive here.

[Fluff My Garfield]

Visible, Proven Leadership

Synopsis:

The goal is simple: Give us (PUGers) an obvious indicator as to who we're dropping with that deserves to be listened to. Disorganization is rampant in PUG matches because we're all apparently equals so why should anyone listen to anyone else?

The idea is simple: A small dot next to players’ names that (based off color and size) shows how winning a commander they are. To get a bigger, brighter dot all of the below must apply:

• You must be a lance or company commander at the end of the battle,
  
• Your team must have won,
  
• Other players must choose to give you a +1 at the end of the match. Players only have a single +1 to give out EACH WEEK, regardless of how many games they play or money they pay.

Full post with poll is here: http://mwomercs.com/...ven-leadership/

[Apollo 42]

I know this sounds strange, but hear me out please, I would like to know why an online game as part of its system requirements, does not list bandwidth usage rates for the end user, such as an average per an hour. Many players of this great game have ISPs that are very limited in terms of plans and one can go over very easy in this day and age, and with no baseline to go on, how can one try to budget usage. I have briefly attempted to use an application that can track it, but the game becomes unplayable, which is not the point behind the test, but the very fact its running in the background skews the results and one can not get a honest answer. I did find a post about the topic, but as its almost two years old, I have to discount it heavily as that was before state rewind and many other updates to the game. I want to see the game continue to grow, but at the same time, I feel players need and want this information to be able maximize what they can do with the limits an ISP will impose, such as the now law where they can charge for overages, and at the same time refuse to have higher tier plans in this day and age where technology is encouraging everything to go digital and via streaming. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Edited by Apollo 42, 05 August 2016 - 08:59 PM.

[MW222]

Ogrecorps, on 05 August 2016 - 09:41 AM, said:

Visible, Proven Leadership

Synopsis:

The goal is simple: Give us (PUGers) an obvious indicator as to who we're dropping with that deserves to be listened to. Disorganization is rampant in PUG matches because we're all apparently equals so why should anyone listen to anyone else?

The idea is simple: A small dot next to players’ names that (based off color and size) shows how winning a commander they are. To get a bigger, brighter dot all of the below must apply:

• You must be a lance or company commander at the end of the battle,
  
• Your team must have won,
  
• Other players must choose to give you a +1 at the end of the match. Players only have a single +1 to give out EACH WEEK, regardless of how many games they play or money they pay.

Full post with poll is here: http://mwomercs.com/...ven-leadership/

Nice idea but there are to many variables for it to be of use, how would it be tracked or better yet how would it be implemented? Just taking command of a lance or matches with a click does not lead to a good match or show leadership. Voting is problematic.

I have to say “GAG, Urp!” The tier system does lend it's self to this but because of it's flaws I am not sold on promoting it. The before match showing of tier rank or doing so in game has an unproven value. Further to be of use it would have to be seen and YES heeded and not ignored.

Penny pilots, Credit card rookies and the bot users would have a undesired affect on this as well.
Points and achievements are awarded for lance in formation and assists and so on. The 20,000 assists cut off/ plateau could be used as an indicator but just an indicator, not the whole criteria.

Philanthropist: Get 12 assists in 1 match. (This should have a counter as is can be done multiple times.)


Big Daddy - Assault mech Achiv: for 20,000 assists.


Heavy Lifter - Heavy mech Achiv: for 20,000 assists.


The People’s Hero - Medium mech Achiv: for 20,000 assists.


Littlest Helper - Light mech Achiv: for 20,000 assists.

PUGers, public match players are not just singles but a lot of team players and associated players. Before the tier system I saw many players on a continual basics and knew who I could count on. Who to watch, who to target first and who to just stay away from. Now with the tier system I see maybe 1/10 of the people I use to recognize. Truth be known I do not know if it's because they have quit the game or are tiers above or below me.

I don't know where this will end up but I will sum it up with the advice I been offered and I have offered before.


DO.
Get a mic and get vocal in a game. Call targets. Get noticed by your play style and contributions. Assist other players and provide help, offer suggestions, praise and encouragement. The next thing you know players will be looking to you for leadership and will invite you to a team or want to team with you.


DON'T.
Yell at or denigrate other players. “I'm dead, we lost! Because you all suck! Is only going to get you muted.
Just because you know or think you know what you doing or the best tactic DO NOT assume that everybody else does. Not everyone has equipped them selves with the ESP module.


Use what you got, use what you brought. Go hard and Carrie heavy.

Note: If you keep getting hosed when you go left, stop going left or get the left turn module 8-).

Edited by MW222, 05 August 2016 - 09:31 PM.

[Arcanite]

Where is the replay's function and camera modes except cockpit camera and third person view???

[Pazryx]

I'm sure it's been said many times, but I think this game would greatly benefit from a online "practice mode". I think everyone here agrees that the learning curve for this game is extremely steep and it tends to dissuade new players (perhaps a primary cause behind the low rates of player adoption). I tried to introduce my fiend to the game and he gave up due to the steep learning curve. To put it in reference, he's a gamer and I got him into DOTA. That game has a super steep curve so that gives a frame of reference to me.

The idea: create an online mode against other players where players respawn. It would be for practice only and give no rewards. It would admittedly not be a refined gamemode, or be indicative of the actual game, but it would go a long way to helping players grasp the general piloting skills before they have to work on strategy and teamwork. I know PGI has mentioned that there is an extremely minimal AI and they question the return in developing a full AI. I appreciate that, and I think a good solution is to let new plays get acclimated against other new players without the harsh consequences of a quick death.

There are many things I would like to see added to the game, but I think building tools to help soften the learning curve (without changing the core game) would go a long way to helping the whole community.

[MW222]

Apollo 42, on 05 August 2016 - 08:59 PM, said:

I know this sounds strange, but hear me out please, I would like to know why an online game as part of its system requirements, does not list bandwidth usage rates for the end user, such as an average per an hour. Many players of this great game have ISPs that are very limited in terms of plans and one can go over very easy in this day and age, and with no baseline to go on, how can one try to budget usage. I have briefly attempted to use an application that can track it, but the game becomes unplayable, which is not the point behind the test, but the very fact its running in the background skews the results and one can not get a honest answer. I did find a post about the topic, but as its almost two years old, I have to discount it heavily as that was before state rewind and many other updates to the game. I want to see the game continue to grow, but at the same time, I feel players need and want this information to be able maximize what they can do with the limits an ISP will impose, such as the now law where they can charge for overages, and at the same time refuse to have higher tier plans in this day and age where technology is encouraging everything to go digital and via streaming. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Bench mark testing before and game is running is not hard to do and system configuration can make a large difference in performance. The below may help.


Use this site to get a base line read out of your connection.
TestMy.net http://testmy.net/
Then use a system configuration utility tune your TCP/IP setting for the best performance.
DR TCP/IP http://www.dslreports.com/faq/578
This web site will show you what service (s) can be turned off for better performance.
Black Viper | www.blackviper.com
Windows Service Configuration Information. Shut down unneeded services to free system resources.
Custom bat files can be easily be created to turn off and on services. Below is a how to and two examples of them.
Create Service-Stopping Batch Files to Optimize Your PC for Specific Tasks
http://lifehacker.co...-specific-tasks
Stopserv.bat
NET STOP "Cryptographic Services"

:NET STOP "DHCP Client"

:NET STOP "DNS Client"

NET STOP "Network Connections"

NET STOP "Norton AntiVirus Auto Protect Service"

NET STOP "Print Spooler"

NET STOP "Protected Storage"

NET STOP "Remote Access Auto Connection Manager"

NET STOP "Shell Hardware Detection

NET STOP "Symantec Event Manager"

NET STOP "Task Scheduler"

NET STOP "Themes"

NET STOP "Windows Management Instrumentation"

NET STOP "Windows Time"
Note: As you can see the Network and TCP/IP connection setting can be turned of for NON network play. That's why they commented out with a colon.
:NET STOP "DHCP Client"

:NET STOP "DNS Client"
Startserv.bat
NET START "Cryptographic Services"

NET START "DHCP Client"

NET START "DNS Client"

NET START "Network Connections"

NET START "Norton AntiVirus Auto Protect Service"

NET START "Print Spooler"

NET START "Protected Storage"

NET START "Remote Access Auto Connection Manager"

NET START "Shell Hardware Detection

NET START "Symantec Event Manager"

NET START "Task Scheduler"

NET START "Themes"

NET START "Windows Management Instrumentation"

NET START "Windows Time"
There are also free applications that can be downloaded that will perform the same function.
Jetboost
http://www.bluesprig.com/jetboost.html

ToolWiz has a game tourboMode.
http://www.toolwiz.com/

Use or search for one's you prefer.
Domain Name Speed Benchmark https://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
Use the DNSbench to see if you DNS servers are slow and what you can change them to for better performance.

Make sure you document any changes and keep a log of what you are doing so if needed is can be undone.

Hope this helps.

Edited by MW222, 06 August 2016 - 01:07 PM.

[blackbullitt]

make a level playing field where clan mechs are not so op, not getting any more money till this is fixed

[Valasharia]

blackbullitt, on 07 August 2016 - 12:39 AM, said:

make a level playing field where clan mechs are not so op, not getting any more money till this is fixed

Not sure what you are referring to here. I used to play nothing but Clan mechs, but lately I have added a number of Inner Sphere mechs to my collection when I noticed that the Clan was being continuously tweaked down and IS were being tweaked up. Right now I would say that IS mechs have been improved to the point where most of them are at least as good as those of the Clan. In fact I have gotten some of my best scores using IS mechs.

[Reaper One Nine]

Here are my suggestions, sorry if they were covered before, or am I?

Personal Drop Deck
In the early days we had a drop deck that we could load up with 4 mechs. Give us that back, or make it even bigger, much like that in FW, but at least let us build up four mechs we can easily jump to as we cycle through trying to level mechs.

More Achievements
We want more, well at least I do. Give us a top damage in match cheev based on chassis or class. Give us an assist one, scouting, tag, narc… all those things, especially when it comes to the lighter mechs will help get people settling into roles.

EXP Points
Give us a way to spend these, without having to convert to GXP. One idea, give us a map specific camo ability. Break it out into three or four groups if you have to, Urban, Green, Snow, Desert…. This supports the idea that almost every time you get orders to drop you have to take specific gear for the environment. Do the same thing with auto loading modules based on the map so I don’t have load them in every time wishing I would have used radar deprivation when I loaded in 360 targeting…

Maps….
Best idea I seen was a player based map editor. You don’t have to use them or accept them, but it seems to me it is a way to generate additional content at little to no cost after the editor has been built.

[Bloodyscab]

I've seen someone ask before, but just in case it isn't here: I want Engine Packs that I can buy for MC & CBills - like the mastery packs except for Engines.

For instance:
Engine Pack "300-320" - includes:
XL 300,305,310,315,320 for XX C-Bills or YY MC (at a 50% discount like the Mech Mastery Packs).
Engine Pack "325-345" etc..

[Makenzie71]

I really want one day to log on and everyone who launched a light mech goes out in an e-frame from exo squad, medium mechs are all VF-1 Valkyries in guardian mode, heavies are all tripods from the remake of war of the worlds, and assaults are all AT/AT's from Star Wars. I'm willing to bet that if it only runs for a day no one will get sued.

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

I would like to have the early adopter c-bill rewards changed to an equal MC value.

That way, if we want to play with parts for the mechs we bought we can buy the c-bill pack.

If not, we can convert our existing mech xp into gxp to apply to the new mechs.

Or add a mechanism to convert mech xp into gxp using c-bills.

Whichever is the least troublesome to implement.

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

For faction play: I would like to be able to configure drop decks based on the available maps.

For quick play: I would like to be able to configure mechs to drop for the game mode that is selected by the group-think.

It seems silly that I would purposely select lazer-vomit drop-deck for a hot map in FP, or take my 43kph Atlas for conquest.

For me, this feature would help take the sting out of being forced by group-think to play a game mode I just don't want to play because of the mech I selected. If I *have* to play a game mode because that one light pilot has a 16x modifier, then at least let me play it with a mech I would *want* to play it on.

And I would rather 'take it in the shorts' in FP because the opponent has greater skill ... not because my drop deck selection sucks on the map.

If implemented correctly, this feature might capitalize the 'f' in 'hf' for me.

[Digital_Angel]

Marshal Jim Duncan, on 13 August 2016 - 06:41 AM, said:

Or add a mechanism to convert mech xp into gxp using c-bills.

I'd just like the ability to convert GXP to Mech XP for a mech. It would have to basically be free or almost free (maybe a C-Bill cost). This would at least let us get a skill on a mech if we have enough with Mech XP and GXP combined, but not enough in either separately for that skill.

[Crazy Mike Golf]

Increased support for us old guys who love our ancient joysticks.

[Uncle Totty]

Fix the Timber Wolf's standing (flouting) cockpit item. Not sure why it has been left like that for so long.

[Lungbutter]

How about the ability to adjust your weapon groups while you wait for everyone to click READY instead of shooting your team mates in the back while you **** around with them after drop?

Also, how about a check box with the option to never see the "Congratulations! You've been awarded with a supply cache!" window ever again? I've gotten them before. I know how they work. Enough is enough.

[Gadjet85]

PGI. Going on a year on the battlefield and i have very much enjoyed the experience.

A fast easy feature suggestion that can help with the sometimes utter confusion upon initial drops in quick play.

The map in the lower right corner of the round ready player list. Add icons to show objectives, allied drop points, and ect. This could help with pre planning for the pug teams and help players familiarize themselves with the maps.

I feel it could be a better representation to the full battlegrid.

Gadjet.