Jump to content

Most Wanted Features!


1533 replies to this topic

#81 bar10jim

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 352 posts

Posted 04 June 2015 - 02:52 PM

View PostGrayDawn, on 03 June 2015 - 03:34 AM, said:


Significantly larger maps.- Already brought up. But yet this is another aspect that hinders this game to reach its full potential. It would also enhance the purpose (roles) of different 'mechs.



I would also like to see larger maps, but I seem to recall the general populace screaming that it too too long to find the enemy on maps like Alpine and Tourmaline. That is why the spawn points are so close together, and why we only use a small portion of the larger maps.

#82 Odanan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 8,200 posts
  • LocationBrazil

Posted 04 June 2015 - 03:09 PM

View PostEgomane, on 03 June 2015 - 05:55 AM, said:

  • Stock Mech / 3025 mode

Adding to this: instead of making a public stock mode (which would dilute the player base), PGI could just add a button in the Private Match settings: "Stock mode". When this is selected, all mechs will be loaded in the match in their stock loadouts. No need for each player to change the loadouts, do downgrades, etc.

#83 bar10jim

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 352 posts

Posted 04 June 2015 - 03:28 PM

Two things that should be quick:

1) A kill counter for Conquest mode;

2) On the Scoreboard (accessible with the TAB key); The enemy mech type/variant should be listed once it has been "identified" by an ally. "Identification" occurs once a friendly mech has acquired lock-on long enough to bring up the 'paper doll'. The first allied mech to identify a particular enemy in this way should also receive c-bills/xp for 'Scouting/Identification.' Now we have a bit of role-warfare introduced, and a reason to take the the 'Information Gathering' module. We have computers in our mechs that can determine what a mech is, and its loadout, at 700 meters. But as soon as it loses line-of-sight, it forgets what it just determined. Huh?

#84 Arctcwolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • 147 posts

Posted 05 June 2015 - 12:16 AM

More immersive CW. Planets with defenses and rewards matching their value. Conquering Rasalhague should be possible, but should have higher defenses than say a random Outer Rim world. Planetary conquer should take several days, not hours, depending on how fortified the world is. There should be tiers of missions. 12v12 being the top level, major offensive/defensive missions, but there should also be smaller size missions on both sides. attacking supply lines, support bases, secondary and tertiary objectives that may only require 4v4 or 8v8. once a planet is ready to be captured, there should be a much larger, final battle that either locks in the planet, or stalls the attackers a few days longer. something along the lines of 16v16, 20v20, or 24v24, perhaps in the largest city/capitol.

Also, allow us to pick more than just 4 targets to attack. The clans did jump past several worlds, knowing they would be cut off and not worth fighting for, and went back to clear them out later. we should have 8 or 12 possible targets to hit.

Finally, I think Comstar should have its own region on terra and surrounding it, with access to their own caches of star league tech separate from the clans and IS.

#85 White Bear 84

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,857 posts

Posted 05 June 2015 - 12:31 AM

A Tetatae mini game

Posted Image

#86 TheAdj

    Rookie

  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1 posts

Posted 05 June 2015 - 10:49 AM

I'd love to see some additional CW mission types, preferably ones that the attacker or defender can force on the enemy. Not everything has to change the outcome of planet ownership. I'd like to see things like supply raid/supply defend missions, where the key objective isn't to conquer a slice of the planet but to acquire consumables or change a slice value during actual invasion/counter/defend missions. This could tie into some of the things other people have suggested, like King of the Hill. Place 3 buildings with 3 capture areas on the map, force the attackers or defenders to hold 2/3 of those points until a timer expires to 'win' the game. Whoever wins gets some free consumables, they also get an area on that slice's CW map that will allow them to re-arm their ammo once per player per CW match or something like that. An alternative is force the attackers to hold 2/3 of those areas to gain that advantage for themselves, otherwise the defenders get it for free to give some home field advantage during invasion rounds.

What I listed above is not a mega-imba change, but it's enough of an advantage that people will fight over it hardcore and it will be fun. It's also not focused 100% on killing everyone, as much as I like blowing up mechs sometimes you need an alternative. I am sure you can take this type of concept and apply it to many different things and create a lot of content for players without a massive PGI investment.

#87 Fireeagle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Undertaker
  • The Undertaker
  • 416 posts

Posted 05 June 2015 - 11:20 AM

http://mwomercs.com/...ecs-more-zones/

#88 Lunataque

    Rookie

  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 2 posts

Posted 05 June 2015 - 12:02 PM

- I really want a option to make subgroups in our weapon groups. (with the same button firing 6 mediums lasers two by two, for example).

- We need a intelligent PvE mode

- The Cockpits of some Mechs, and the pilot looks, needs some work.

- Better damage models - Not the same thing every time you destroy a mech or a section of it.

That's it. Thank to asking PGI.

#89 K1ttykat

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 90 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC, Canada

Posted 05 June 2015 - 04:04 PM

#1 More colour in maps and effects.

#2 Mech skills with choices, something like my mockup http://imgur.com/BctFA5E

#3 Torso yaw decoupled from engine size

#4 Model swapping on destroyed side torsos and legs.

#5 Improved texture resolution on older mechs like the atlas: http://i.imgur.com/jgskeAs.jpg

#6 Improved weapon effects. Less white/yellow sparks and more variety. Different effects for different AC classes.

#7 Sounds for weapon impacts on structure. This would be a subtle audio queue that your armour is gone and also increase immersion.

#8 Weapon models for different laser/AC classes, not just the same one resized.

#9 Better integrated weapons on IS chassis. Some good examples are the hunchback AC and banshee lasers. IS chassis are not modular and weapons are highly integrated into the chassis. The current design of dynamic weapon geometry (with black boxes over every weapon hardpoint) makes IS mechs look modular.

#90 zudukai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,707 posts

Posted 05 June 2015 - 04:36 PM

new idea, record or recreate random low time to kill bursts by running the numbers and take 5 sec or so recordings, compressed into video clips of "CW news feeds" with preset angles (turret cams?) for cinematic effect while in CW lobby.

like the MW4 main menu side bar :D but you would see units and painted mechs and other cool team stuff.

#91 Nothing Whatsoever

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 3,655 posts
  • LocationNowhere

Posted 05 June 2015 - 06:55 PM

HTAL

- Toggle-able from existing Paperdoll, so that players can choose what they prefer.

Posted Image


Adjusted Heat System

- Set a lowered and universal value for Heat Capacity. Going with a doubled value for the first Shutdown we can avoid, I think we can test at 28 (so we can set the toggle as we currently can and go above that) and a max for an Automatic Shutdown at 44 Heat.

- The second factor is then adjusting Heat Dissipation. I think we could see going up to doubled values of 0.20 for SHS and 0.40 for DHS, but we can instead start with SHS at 0.15 and DHS at 0.30 to see how that works since we do have Heat Gen Quirks in place, and can tweak weapons as needed.


New Guidance Tracking and Ripple Fire for Missile Weapons

- The basic idea is to allow all missiles to follow the Crosshair / Reticle when fired. Artemis, TAG and NARC would increase the missile response to moving the Crosshair / Reticle, with ECM cancelling that effect.

- The second part since Missiles will track to what the player is aiming at than there may be a need to have them fire in a different pattern. So LRM 20 would fire four missiles at a time, LRM 15 and SRM 6 would fire three, LRM 10 and SRM 4 would fire two at a time and LRM 5 and SRM 2 would fire one at a time.

- Locks would only be required for Streaks and Indirect LRMs. Streak locks would simply be as an ammo saving measure.

- Indirect Fire from LRMs, I'd explore fire and forget functionality and an limit LRM Locks to TAG and NARC when the shooter does not have line of sight.


Varied Team Sizes on different Maps, Solo opt-in for Group Queue, and Elo score by variant and game type

- Allow different match set ups, decided by the Matchmaker to allow 4 v 4 on the smallest maps, 8 v 8 on medium sized maps and 12 v 12 on the larger maps.

- Part of the idea is to allow for other sets of release valves for matching teams and in the process ideally improving the new player experience. In exchange, I'd see no problem in taking away the options of toggling Assault, Skirmish, Conquest as needed, for example.

- And with the greater team permutations such as a three man on a 4 v 4 map, allow solos to drop into the Group Queue.

- Allow each mech variant to carry a separate Elo score and consider a second set so that there is one set of scores for Solo drops and one for Group drops. If that seems like too much at least allow the separation of Solo and Group Elo scores for the existing tracking.


Modules and Mech Tree changes

- Convert all Mech Tree efficiencies into Modules and adjust values.

- Increase the number of Modules (while decreasing prices) to have another method to dynamically customize our mechs.

- Allow Equipment to increase the available slots to mount Modules

This way we can keep what has been worked on (Grinded) in the current 'Skills' Tab, but we would need to choose between them to see what will be improved on the mech. By having to make such choices on what will be used in a match, the devs can still add more quirks and continue adding to that particular system.

Spoiler



Cockpit Monitors, HUD and In-game Prompts and Chat separation

- At least provide different static placeholders on the Monitors over the current No Signal ones.

- With working on the HUD, I think it would be nice to move info over to the corner when Targeting a Mech and only show the letter designation and square over targets

Spoiler

I'm happy to see the color coding we have now and I'd like to see it go one step further, by allowing the info to occupy different parts of the HUD. Example in spoiler

Spoiler





I hope to be adding to this in the future!

Edited by Praetor Knight, 05 June 2015 - 08:19 PM.


#92 Fractis Zero

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • The Vicious
  • 102 posts
  • LocationNorth Vancouver, Canada

Posted 05 June 2015 - 08:36 PM

New game modes for CW.

PVE missions

PVE last stand

Planetary conquest with zones using existing maps

Attack/defend game mode for public matches

Lose the choke points in CW. Most matches are sit at the choke points and trade.

#93 Serpentbane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 485 posts
  • LocationVanvikan, Norway

Posted 06 June 2015 - 11:52 AM

http://mwomercs.com/...88#entry4366588
I see people posting links to changes they'd like, so I'll do the same.

However, posting suggestions when nobody from PGI ever post any kind of replies is discouraging at best. It’s not like they have to write if things will be implemented or not. They could write stuff like “I like the idea, let’s see what we can do”, “I like the idea, but this will be far down the line”, “I like the idea, but this will probably not happen”, “I don’t think this would work” or “I don’t think we’ll do this”. Feel free to borrow any of these, or make up your own.

Writing what you think about certain ideas is not the same as saying if they will be implemented or not. However, getting some kind of feedback from the devs would encourage the community to help pulling the development of the game fourth.

Edited by Serpentbane, 06 June 2015 - 11:52 AM.


#94 Wild_Alaskan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 159 posts
  • LocationJuneau, Alaska

Posted 06 June 2015 - 06:24 PM

I want a warhorn that plays this:

Also, a Tina Benoit hula girl.

#95 TheArisen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 6,040 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 06 June 2015 - 08:15 PM

I made a thread about some pve ideas I have. I'm too lazy to rewrite everything here so here's the link. http://mwomercs.com/...campaign-ideas/

#96 Carchemish

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 29 posts

Posted 06 June 2015 - 09:12 PM

Flesh out Community Warfare:

Community Warfare can be much more than a simple back and forth fight over choke points, which is the bulk of the current setup. Lets ask...what can be done (or is done) in a real war?

- Capture/Destroy industrial cities
- Capture/Destroy fuel depots
- Capture/Destroy food sources
- Capture/Destroy communication thingies
- Cap...blah blah blah blah

You get the idea...lots of capturing and destroying. Now look at that short and incomplete list. See anything familiar? It just so happens that the various MWO maps are already based on just those things! River City and Crimson Strait...totally industrial/tech cities. Caustic Valley...fuel tanks everywhere. Tourmaline Desert...tons of tourmaline for the taking, whatever that is. And of course HPG generators ARE communication thingies.

So my proposal. Open up CW to include all of the things that we should be doing. You could maintain the current system for planetary capture, and add smaller scale matches that use the old maps. These matches could be used to capture vital resources for the larger war effort, and doing so could in some way affect the tides of the war.

/bow

#97 Andi Nagasia

    Volunteer Moderator

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 5,982 posts

Posted 07 June 2015 - 06:02 AM

look at any Feature Suggestion with me "Andi Nagasia" as the Topic Poster,
please Ignore topics of mine with (-) before the topic as those are what PGI has already added, :)

=My Ideas & Solutions=
Story And New Push Mechanic For New Collisions!
Omni Invasion, New Clan Omni Mech Variants / Pods!
Weapon Invasion, New Intershere Weapon Options!
Mechanic For Implementing True Duel Fire Lbx, And How To Balance Them!
Rewards That Really Need To Be Added!
Solaris Arena / Mentor Arena! 1V1 With Out Premium Time!
Mech Custom Cosmetics, Upgradable Options!
Intigrated Ejection & Self-Destruct!
The Dynamic Implement Of Merc-Groups And Loyalist-Factions In Cw!

=My Hobbie Topic(PLEASE!?)=
Clan Kit Fox Mirrored Arm Omni-Pod / Upgrade Option!

Thoughts Comments Concerns,
Thanks,
Edit-

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 07 June 2015 - 06:13 AM.


#98 Rebas Kradd

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,969 posts

Posted 07 June 2015 - 01:20 PM

UPDATED 6/15

So after lumping everything into broad categories by likes, here's where the community's priorities seem to stand:

New ways to play (gamemodes/missions/PvE/Solaris)60
More UI work52
Economy/logistics/salvage 40
More/larger maps 38
In-game options (HUD/cockpit/menu)37
Weapons, omnipods, and balance 33
Environmental (destructible terrain/physical effects/damage models/invisible walls) 24
Mech customization (camo patterns, skins, decals) 23
New Player experience (AI tutorials/economy) 21
Collision/melee/knockdown 21
HUD/cockpit eye candy 20
Performance/hit registration 17
Mech scaling adjustments16
Skill tree revisitation 16
Heat system rework 14
Combined arms (infantry/elementals/tanks/aircraft) 13
ECM/targeting rework 13
Better mech texture resolution and damage/weapon models 12
Forum features 11
Match/play playback feature 10
New starter packs 8
New sound/music effects/options 8
In-game lore and fluff 7
Matchmaker suggestions 6
Faction suggestions 7
Convergence rework (cone of fire) 5
Clan Heroes 5
Toggle chain fire for weapon groups5
Critical System 4
Instanced planets4
Glowing atlas eyes3
Mech package ideas 3
Oculus Rift Support/joystick control 11

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 15 June 2015 - 01:18 PM.


#99 Gremlich Johns

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,855 posts
  • LocationMaryland, USA

Posted 07 June 2015 - 01:25 PM

Ummm, reasonable knockdown, like a 45pt or higher alpha knocks over a light at a distance out to 100m.

#100 MoonUnitBeta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,560 posts
  • LocationCanada ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ

Posted 07 June 2015 - 04:07 PM

I'd really like to see the lobby system dropped from CW, and planets be treated as servers that host 32 or 64 players. Much larger maps.
Tanks, and planes implemented.
Resource collectors gathering resources which are refined in bases and turned into useable material to build tanks/planes.
2-3 capital bases per map. A capital base allows repairing and rearming of mechs.
Drop zones dotted around the map that are capturable and turret defended.
Capturing anything advances territorial control, and allows for faster resource collecting, refinement, and building.
Clicking a planet/server and dropping down into it will happen if there is enough room on your teams side.

I'd like to see these planets/servers spin up according to population demands, and close down (acting as a ceasefire for that planet) as population declines.

I made many posts about this that go into greater detail, but I wanted to keep it brief for this just to pitch the idea out there.
It's crucial that we abandon the 12v12 man match maker system for CW, in favor of more dynamic and intriguing battles that anybody can play instantly without having to wait for a team to get assembled.

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 07 June 2015 - 04:11 PM.






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users