359 replies to this topic

[Varhait]

It's been two months since last town hall... and no change.

So... i'm gonna ask once more

Greetings PGI,
On March 17 you injected Inner Sphere Resistance faction content packs. It is great, the new skins looks very impressive, colors and hanging items are also useful, sometimes. But! Few days later you injected the Resistance collection badges and many players cannot understand why these badges


Suddenly turned into these



It looks like a case of unfair advertising. I mean it was YOUR decision to show these awesome badges on the Resistance collection page from the start of the sales. I know some people who bought Resistance collections only for the badges, this isn’t so much compared to 260$ for the gold skin. I think it is obvious that they are very disappointed by this sudden change and their confidence in MWO is shaken.

Therefore, I have decided to conduct a poll and find out if the players, who bought a Resistance collection, are satisfied with the new badges. I hope you will take the results into consideration just as you did with the Clan avatars.



BTW. On the 14 april Tina said

Tina Benoit, on 13 April 2015 - 03:14 PM, said:

Hello!

Good news, we're going to be releasing these old versions of the Resistance Badges, on top of letting you keep the new ones you currently have.

We don't have an exact ETA on this yet but we'll try to release them to eligible Resistance owners in the next patch.

And... nothing... no ETA, no news and, of course, NO CHANGES. Maybe, at least now, after few months, you can say something about it? Or you just gonna wait until everyone forget about it, to find out if you can use same trick (say one thing and make another) once more someday?

Edited by Varhait, 23 June 2015 - 12:42 PM.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

• Are you planning on replacing the demonstrably failed attempt to modulate the power of the Stormcrow and the popularity of the Timber Wolf with more reasonable alterations to the actual source of the Stormcrow's power (excessive torso twist range/speed combined with a bodyshape and hitbox set that benefits more from torso twisting than most other 'mechs) and a more reasonably sized, more general reduction to the Timberwolf (something along the lines of a 2.5-5% reduction in twist/turn speed, possibly?) Or at least trying something other than what you've already done?
  
• The Quickdraw and Orion are the only two Inner Sphere heavy 'mechs with universally Large movement profiles- the rest are at least partly Medium. Given that the Quickdraw is already saddled with an excessively large size, is there any thought towards a movement profile pass for the Inner Sphere heavies to make things a bit more sensible (for instance, the Quickdraw is intended to be a relatively agile 'mech and on top of that its lore makes mention that it has legs specifically built for better slope handling. Meanwhile, the Thunderbolt and Cataphract, for example, are not by default meant to be highly agile.)
  
• Mention was made recently of the intent to finally get around to putting an actual skill system in. Have suggestion threads from the Feature Suggestions subforum (and prior to that, other places they showed up) been considered in light of this, or have you come up with a way to handle this without looking at them? Can you tell us anything about the plan? Does this plan in some way modify or modulate the rather incredible current difference skills make of adding: +15% heat dissipation rate, +20% heat threshhold, +45% acceleration rate, +30% arm movement speed, +50% deceleration rate, +40% twist speed, +20% twist range, +20% turn speed, -33% power up/down time, +5% weapon cooldown and +10% top speed? It seems like bringing these effects down in power (especially the heat related ones), if this is matched by an equal increase in base capability of 'mechs in general, would improve the new player/new mech experience drastically, and if an equal increase in base capability of 'mechs is not used, it would extend time to kill and make the game much less of an alpha strike festival and more of a thoughtful, tactical simulation. Both of these are goals you (PGI) have stated yourselves to have previously, so.....
  
• Do you have any plans to take the incredibly powerful +40% or higher fire rate quirks to particular weapons (most notably the DRG-1N AC/5 and Huginn SRM-4) and make them more modest while applying other quirks to the chassis, so that weapons are reliably themselves and not magically mutated into completely other weapons with much higher value simply by virtue of being placed on certain variants? While it's understandable that strong enough quirks to make 'mechs viable are wanted, virtually all that these quirks have served to do is reduce variety on the battlefield. If you're not planning on altering such quirks, is it because you are satisfied with their current effect, or because you feel other things need your attention more?
  
• When trees become destructible, will they also start interfering with sensors again?
  
• Have you considered attaching the quirks on Omnimechs for certain weapons types/systems to omnipods that do not originally mount those systems, to promote build variety? For instance, the 'dead' Right Torso omni pods on the Summoner could easily have quirks that affect heat dissipation of some weapons, or the capabilities of weapons that are typically mounted in the right arm.
  
• Have you considered adding better quirks in blanket fashion to Omnimechs that lack ferro and/or endo and mount other locked but not necessarily favored equipment in order to make them more attractive and bring their viability/popularity up to par?
  
• Are there ever going to be quirks that give flamers something decent other than range? Are there any plans to work over flamers, since they're essentially not used outside of joke builds/placement?
  
• When is the BJ-2 Blackjack happening? The MASC Wolverines/Cataphract? Are there currently any 'missing variants' under plans to apply them, such as that Victor that's been in the code forever but still isn't actually available?
  
• A very forwards thought, but when you eventually have things like the FS9-0 Firestarter Omnimech or the Enforcer II and III, or the Jagermech II and III, will these 'mechs be treated as variants of one another by the skill setup, or as completely separate 'mechs due to their differing names, designations, and in some cases, tonnage?
  
• If you aren't planning on replacing the 'dead screens' in many cockpits with some sort of dynamic readouts (not really clear on why this isn't an option, I simply recall that it was stated to be not available), could we at least get some sort of replacement option so that it doesn't look like we don't know how to take care of our 'mechs?
  
• There's been a thread on colorblindness over in the Dev Outreach subforum for a while now. An easy fix for this would be to have a color-selectable HUD, with settings and a 'sample' screen somewhere in the Options. This would also be nice to have for people who aren't colorblind and just want to use different colors from the base for their HUD. Any plans to act on this and in what way?
  
• Those Quirk threads in the Dev Outreach section, by the way, have a lot of info on them. Are the developers up on those? Is anything going to be done based on them?

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 23 June 2015 - 01:06 PM.

[BladeSplint]

Russ, the recent changes to CW (specifically the O-Gen placement) have made lights almost completely obsolete for invasion mode. I'm not talking about rushes, I'm talking about individual pilots who are now unable to exploit a weakness in their opponent's defense because the O-Gens are grouped very tightly with the turrets. The god mode CT-only dropships are not helping either. The rotation time for defenders to fall back onto the O-Gens is now way too short.

Currently lights have no choice but to stay with the pack and deal damage like every other mech class, not run around and annoy enemies like we're supposed to, which has turned CW into deathmatch with some turrets at the end. The last CW patch really shafted light pilots. In a game that relies on role warfare for most of its playstyle diversity, what will you do to fix this problem?

[Candrill]

When there is some value to the taking of planets in CW, will units that switch sides lose their tag on planets that would now, effectively, belong to another faction?

(i.e. A Merc unit, flying Kurita colors, has a planet in House Kurita space and then moves to House Liao, will those planets they held in Kurita space become neutral)

[PraetorGix]

WEAPONS: Any plans to include Inferno SRMs and Arrow IV artillery missiles? If not, why were those left out of design when you were making the weapons for the game?

BALANCE: Any plans to address the unfair over-sizing of some mechs, like the Nova or Quickdraw, or particular sections of those, like the arms on the Mist Lynx?

Thanks!

Edited by Cmdr Hurrell, 23 June 2015 - 01:12 PM.

[Triordinant]

1. What's the ETA on new game modes (Escort, Strongpoint Destruction, Capture the Flag, etc.) and maps for the public non-CW queues?

2. What's the ETA on PvE?

Edited by Triordinant, 23 June 2015 - 01:09 PM.

[Manikin Fartwalker]

1. Any new Clan mechs that are coming out after clan wave 3 ?

[Fenrir W]

[color=#212121]

Hello my nickname ZenX2 I have a question you will develop new types of weapons ?

[/color]

[XX Sulla XX]

1>> Any chance of seeing a CW light for 1-4 players groups that want faster games that are less of a grind and time sink? Or maybe maybe normal games count in some way for CW?

2>> Any plans to open up game play in CW. With the maps being funnels with objectives on one side it made for a terrible repetitive gameplay grind.

[Lucur]

Pve content; when, where, how?

[Xolin]

It appears the New CryTeck engine has Linux Support. Will those updates be incorporated into MWO in any fashion ??

[Mister Fusion]

Question/Suggestion - New Chat Window

Could we see a more functional chat window in the game? A window that consolidates all the various types of chat (Friends, Group, Faction, Unit) as tabs in the same window? In addition, this new chat window should not be modal, but should instead go "transparent" or otherwise be given screen real estate, so that we can edit mechs, perform other activities, while still being able to chat.

Edited by Mister Fusion, 23 June 2015 - 01:33 PM.

[JC Daxion]

1, Any ETA on getting graphical updates to some of the very early mechs, like commando, cicada, among others to show what weapons are loaded?


2, Any thoughts to dealing with the long range meta, or high alpha? To me things like increasing recharge to long range weapons, Or using the ghost heat function, to go by amount of weapons fired+damage.. Often you see people saying i have a 60 point alpha and can do it 2-3 times before shut down.. Making people stagger shots, or making longer range weapons a liability up close, similar to how LRM's don't work up close, could really change the balance, to making Small lasers, or shorter ranged weapons more viable. Bringing back the need to pack longer range, and shorter ranged weapons, verse just loading up an alpha and having it work at any range that fits its window.. ect

3, Server lobby, Why not a place that we can log in, and chat, and find groups, or talk faction or even mech build support. Like the old battle net lobby, where you would wait to find games in starcraft. You could find people, join groups, talk about guilds, or just hang out and meet people.

Edited by JC Daxion, 23 June 2015 - 01:35 PM.

[Sable]

With the release of the EBJ specifically there have been a lot less hellbringers in the field and it's been rather nice not being completely overwhelmed by the abundance of ECM. Even some LRM use has returned to the battlefield. Any chance ECM could receive tweaks to make it NOT so overbearing, with mixed loadouts become more appealing? I don't want LRMs to rule the field but i would like to see them as a useful tool in my arsenal.

[Pz_DC]

One and main question - why doyou refuse to make a CW "stock-mode" only /and balance game around stock mech loadouts/?..

P.S. untill "stock cw" goesliv im ouf of this part of the game...

[Revengex]

Mr. Bullock:

Why can't you let general public matches have a four mech drop deck. One hot, one cold, one long range, one short range, so that AFTER we see the map, we can chose an appropriate mech?

We are tired of picking our hot running mechs and ending up in Terra Therma. OR short range mechs at Alpine Peaks. Who goes to war without knowing where the war will be? PGI? Keep it within a drop tonnage... Its a no brainer since you have drop decks in CW already.. How hard can it be to add this to public matches?

Edited by Revengex, 23 June 2015 - 01:39 PM.

[Sky Hawk]

Any thoughts about melting the Mech Tree with a part of the Quirks System and make it to multi-choice?

Something like: Instead of, for example normal speed tweek, we could choose for a Light between 3 possibility: "normal" speed tweek, X% lower weapon heat generation, or X% greater weapon range?

[HUNTERS MOON]

When are you going address the cheating? Are you really giving (some-all) the banned players back their accounts? What message does that send.

Edited by RENEGADEMOON, 23 June 2015 - 01:46 PM.

[codynyc]

Can we start get mechs say from 3058 PLEASE????? .. been dying for a uziel and bushwacker.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Are there any balance revamps down the pipeline?
More specifically, will we ever see better IS vs Clan parity so that we don't require ridiculous quirks on mechs to make them even remotely viable, so that quirks can be more oriented towards flavor and overcoming a chassis' disadvantages? I say that because it is obvious that quirks are essential for IS mechs to compete with Clan tech which means that quirks are trying to combat the bad balance between tech bases as well.

Will we ever see hardpoint adjustments (considering some already have the geometry) to the less effective mechs like the Vindicators?

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 23 June 2015 - 01:58 PM.