228 replies to this topic

[Kyp Durron]

Soulstrom, on 27 June 2015 - 06:51 AM, said:

Yes. The typical unit will be able to form a 12 man group. Out unit is 48 strong right now and we consistently have 12 pilots on at a time. However we hardly play CW because there is hardly ever anyone on.

The reason there is hardly anyone on CW is because hardly anyone does CW. If you did CW, someone else would see you doing it and also do it. Then someone would see then doing it and do it.

Then omg, there would be a CW population.

But congratulations for collecting a group of people and then pulling them out of CW. I applaud your decision to let someone else do the work.

[Celtic Warrior]

Wildstreak, on 24 July 2015 - 07:42 AM, said:

If Russ wants Factions to become more even in population, address core problems first.

Problem #1 - No Reason to be a Loyalist
Economic & Reward System favors Mercs, end result more people go Merc.
PGI changes rewards to encourage others to join low population Factions, Teams move from one Faction to another resulting in Large Population Faction Flavor of the Moment.

Beta 1 had GB as the big Clan Faction, now it is either Falcon or Wolf.

Fix the Core Issue first, see what happens then look into team breakups if needed.

Agreed, there are very little perks to being a loyalist but being in a strong MERC group sure does.

[Lily from animove]

Well, surely cutting down units will not remove their coordnation or teamplay by causing crossfaction groups and team speak.

But you need to think a step further: if CW ever gets economy and stuff the, overmight of a few really large factions owning all planets will just kill smaller and medium units. Probably even the entire balance, depending on how economics will look like.It will therefore probably be needed to cut down units to a smaller size where planetaryownership is lesslikely going to the same unit all the time. Or to make CW more appealing to medium sized units. oterwise sooner or later, every faction will end in a single mass unit or 2.

[ApolloKaras]

Kin3ticX, on 11 July 2015 - 09:36 AM, said:

Good point. I still think MS would be a thing with a 108 unit cap. Not every sub unit has enough players of its own to go off into the wild blue yonder. Of course, the key thing will be active roster rather than paper roster under those conditions. Just more work for the unit leaders of big units and they are all probably dying for something to do anyways.

I still don't understand the infatuation with the unit cap. I mean CWI, Templars, SRoT, BWC, they all have a lot of members (as outlined in your graph). I'm with the Smoke Adders and we're over 100+, this is something our clan leadership would have to contend with as well. Its just going to be one big giant mess if all these units have to break down. I'm also wondering why members of these bigger groups aren't posting about this.

Essentially people want to punish MS for having a lot of active members...

Edited by Saxie, 28 July 2015 - 06:33 AM.

[TWIAFU]

Saxie, on 28 July 2015 - 06:31 AM, said:

Essentially people want to punish MS for having a lot of active members...

Does not even have to be MS. ANY Unit that is active could be the boogeyman. There are Units with more members then MS, but they are not singled out. Only MS is and that is ONLY because they are active, they field more Unit drops.

This is an attempt to limit activity, how much people can play.

Is there a potential problem here, and NOT just with MS? Yes, there is. It will become more visible once we have planetary rewards.

Is there a solution? Yes.
Is the solution to limit activity? No.
Solution to limit Units? No. Not the first step for sure.

What is the solution? I dunno, but there are many good ideas here.

Would it be nice to be involved with PGI in this? Hell yes.

Would it be nice to know that our concerns have been heard? Again, hell yes.

Will we? I dunno, I dont use twitter.

[TWIAFU]

Lily from animove, on 27 July 2015 - 03:10 AM, said:

Well, surely cutting down units will not remove their coordnation or teamplay by causing crossfaction groups and team speak.

Won't stop activity either.

How in the nine hells does anyone believe that MS will be any less active if forced to break up? ALL this will do is change the IS Map from -MS- to -MS- and -MS1-.

Now PGI has broken up ALL Units over any cap and broken up one large-ish very active Unit into two, smaller but equally as active Units.

Mission Accomplished?

[Kin3ticX]

TWIAFU, on 28 July 2015 - 07:26 AM, said:

Won't stop activity either.

How in the nine hells does anyone believe that MS will be any less active if forced to break up? ALL this will do is change the IS Map from -MS- to -MS- and -MS1-.

Now PGI has broken up ALL Units over any cap and broken up one large-ish very active Unit into two, smaller but equally as active Units.

Mission Accomplished?

I don't know what PGI's is up to regarding the hints given in the town hall. With no PGI visibly around, we are basically in an echochamber trying to argue amongst ourselves.

At this point, I would like PGI to piecemeal us some tweaks to try, but I have no idea what they are doing besides what was said at the townhall. From that all we really learned was we have to wait.

Regarding a lower unit cap of ~180, it is not the be all end all thing but it may be worth trying. It is true some units will form regiments and still work together. However in some sense they will have to compete with each other (whether its tagging the same planet or participating in an event in the same faction). I'm not confident enough to say its a win win, it has downsides but might be worth trying. For example, an obvious downside is people getting removed for being inactive. They werent playing anyways and can always come back as players cycle. Roster management certainly becomes more important. This is all about active players and not paper rosters of people that dont play anymore.

Edited by Kin3ticX, 28 July 2015 - 07:58 AM.

[Malagant]

One other thing to consider is that this is a free to play game so people will come and go as they please. They may be active for weeks or months at a time and then suddenly go inactive for the same or longer then return later when the mood suits them. In fact this is how I rotate between the games I like. I play, get bored/frustrated, move to the next one, repeat... Always looking for another game to add to the rotation...

[50 50]

Re the active players vs inactive players.
Having an option in the member management screen to mark a player as 'In-active' or perhaps 'Reserve' might work.

Personally don't believe that a hard cap on the units is a good idea.
Much better ways to try and even out the population.

[Hades Trooper]

Just make group que for Cw and a solo que for CW and that fixs a lot of issues.

Be nice to see 12 man groups facing other 12 man groups instead of puggers

[TWIAFU]

Kin3ticX, on 28 July 2015 - 07:32 AM, said:

I don't know what PGI's is up to regarding the hints given in the town hall. With no PGI visibly around, we are basically in an echochamber trying to argue amongst ourselves.

At this point, I would like PGI to piecemeal us some tweaks to try, but I have no idea what they are doing besides what was said at the townhall. From that all we really learned was we have to wait.

Regarding a lower unit cap of ~180, it is not the be all end all thing but it may be worth trying. It is true some units will form regiments and still work together. However in some sense they will have to compete with each other (whether its tagging the same planet or participating in an event in the same faction). I'm not confident enough to say its a win win, it has downsides but might be worth trying. For example, an obvious downside is people getting removed for being inactive. They werent playing anyways and can always come back as players cycle. Roster management certainly becomes more important. This is all about active players and not paper rosters of people that dont play anymore.

Well, we have a 512 cap now, and nobody is screaming bloody murder, torches and pitchforks at them like they are with MS, yet, MS is far smaller. The difference is those small numbers are very active.

With MS having 203 ACTIVE members in last CW event, what will happen to that number if cap is 100? They make 1 unit of 100 active and 1 unit of last 100 active. Instead of fielding 16 12 man units under 200, they now drop 2 groups of 8 12mans, all under MS tag, under MS control, in MS TS, both 100 man units working as 1 200.

Everybody else fields the same or less.

The day the patch hits, only change we will see in CW is the addition of a couple familiar tags, now with a 2 on it, and an increasing amount of MS2 - because this did nothing for player activity.

[TWIAFU]

50 50, on 28 July 2015 - 07:59 PM, said:

Re the active players vs inactive players.
Having an option in the member management screen to mark a player as 'In-active' or perhaps 'Reserve' might work.

Personally don't believe that a hard cap on the units is a good idea.
Much better ways to try and even out the population.

Been asking for something like that since PGI brought up this idea.

Have an automatic time when a member goes Inactive and no longer counts as a Member on the Unit roster.

14 days? 30?

That way the roster is keeping more accurate numbers of active/inactive. This way we can stop the "your in a huge Unit off hundreds, you have to be dissolved! Ignoring only a very small portion play BS.

Nothing like letting communities and friendships form only to be told you have to break them up because someone else does not like it.

[TWIAFU]

Hades Trooper, on 02 August 2015 - 06:36 AM, said:

Just make group que for Cw and a solo que for CW and that fixs a lot of issues.

Be nice to see 12 man groups facing other 12 man groups instead of puggers

There is a group queue in CW. 12man and strike team(12 made up of smaller groups)

Units play Units first then a Strike team If no Unit then a strike team vs strike team.

The solo queue is there to fill out the rare 10-11 man Unit or strike team, as we have been told.

Units face Strike teams 1%, or less, of the time in CW - right from PGI. Rest of the time it is Strike team v Strike team, or Pug v Pug.

99% of the time your pug group is facing another pug group. So, you now have to ask yourself, how do "I" want to be nerf'd so I cannot stomp the other pug team and how they should be nerf'd so they cannot stomp you.

Pugs asked for got the tools they claimed they needed didn't they? Why aren't they using them?

No, CW does NOT need to be made more solo friendly, solo queue is for that. What CW DOES need is a gateway intro that explains and warns of the dangers in CW and what its design intent is, Unit and Group play. Would be final stage in the NPE along with a warning and confirmation box on hitting Faction tab to enter CW.

No excuses for not knowing any better after that.

[Onionbird]

heres an idea, why don't you guys get better at the game so pugs want to join your units?

[Kin3ticX]

Onionbird, on 02 August 2015 - 01:32 PM, said:

heres an idea, why don't you guys get better at the game so pugs want to join your units?

If you actually pay attention to the forums you will see how the "pugs" often come in here and complain about how CW is unfriendly to solos and how they refuse to join units.

[Onionbird]

Kin3ticX, on 02 August 2015 - 01:36 PM, said:

If you actually pay attention to the forums you will see how the "pugs" often come in here and complain about how CW is unfriendly to solos and how they refuse to join units.

not my problem, steinker *wootles away on a dirtbike while flipping u the bird*

[Kin3ticX]

Onionbird, on 02 August 2015 - 01:37 PM, said:

not my problem, steinker *wootles away on a dirtbike while flipping u the bird*

not my problem either

[Onionbird]

Kin3ticX, on 02 August 2015 - 01:39 PM, said:

not my problem either

being bad at the game is first among equals for your problems, clanner.

[Kin3ticX]

Onionbird, on 02 August 2015 - 01:41 PM, said:

being bad at the game is first among equals for your problems, clanner.

bait harder

[ApolloKaras]

Kin3ticX, on 02 August 2015 - 01:51 PM, said:

bait harder

Damn even the trolling now is second rate... sigh, what is this community coming too!