228 replies to this topic

[Gremlich Johns]

LOLZ!! Now PGI wants to limit how many teams can play their Beta game.

[Jman5]

Ductus Hase, on 28 June 2015 - 07:47 AM, said:

@Jman5
At the end of the day there could be a Spoiler on the Planet including a whole list of tags... alongside with interesting statistics like those we got from Tuk.
Just saying...


Incentives not penalties.
Semantics:
Bribe players to leave or kick others instead of punishing them for not doing so.
And to what end?

Well... let´s see what they got to offer.

Good point. Perhaps a flat reward that gets split based on % of the wins your unit secured. So if it took 10 wins to secure a planet, each win is multiplied by 12 and the reward is split by unit involvement.

Edited by Jman5, 28 June 2015 - 08:28 AM.

[Star Wolves Admin Account]

TWIAFU, on 28 June 2015 - 03:09 AM, said:

How does Star Wolves feel about the potential of having to kick out 350+ members?

Going to be able to field more groups with less members?

Those 350+ members, are they going to form 4 new Units? Not bother incase 100 to high? Not bother with another Unit? Quit?

Well, I don't think they are going to impose a cap. But another option is to simply create SWOL Cluster 1, 2, 3, etc.

It really wouldn't change how we play as a team but simply be a major inconvenience. Our guys love playing together so we will find a way to group up regardless of what the devs do. xD

[TWIAFU]

Blueduck, on 28 June 2015 - 08:28 AM, said:

Well, I don't think they are going to impose a cap. But another option is to simply create SWOL Cluster 1, 2, 3, etc.

It really wouldn't change how we play as a team but simply be a major inconvenience. Our guys love playing together so we will find a way to group up regardless of what the devs do. xD

Thank for the reply.

I do agree, it will be a major inconvenience for the large Units, and like you, we too like to play together - it is why we are in the same Unit.



This will solve nothing as large Units will still do the same thing, just under multi tags. Your guys are not going to go join another faction like they would like from this change. Neither would we. Do not think any large Unit would.

This will just create headaches and drama for the Units involved.

We just cannot be silent in our disgust of this potential change.

[Arkbird_]

Wildstreak, on 28 June 2015 - 03:24 AM, said:

I was in a LotRO clan once, they had a number of memebers several whom were shown to have not logged in for months. I asked the leader about it, he said he never got around to purging the list and did not have the time to keep up with clan duties whatever that meant.

In the LOTRO "kinship" I'm in we have a couple members that finally broke 1000 days of being inactive just this last month. The numbers don't matter and none of us officers have bothered to kick them out yet just because they are a good reminder of how old the kinship is, and also what harm is there in keeping members just in the off chance they become active again?

[Wildstreak]

Yeah, people have emotional sentiment for those in units not able to play all the time.
However, what happens if Player Adam is in Unit Jokers who have always been Davion loyalists. CW Event comes around for Clans, Jokers wants to switch to reap rewards but Adam has not been online and may not be back for some time. His account cannot afford the CB penalty for breaking a loyalist contract. What happens?
Does PGI get to sell his Mechs until the payment is made?

Adam: "Hey guys, I am back for...WHERE THE HELL IS MY ZEUS-9S?"

[Bulvar Jorgensson]

This stupid Idea of Cease Fires hard fixed and relying on Peak time play allows Large CW groups to Push their agenda in CW.

The way the planets are decided is a JOKE, who in their right mind picks some of the planets to be attacked/defended a ZX 81 with 1k o memory (look it up on the tinternet if you do not know what this is)

Allowing mercenary factions to dictate the course of the WAR effort was a failing on PGI's fault. Mercs should be told where to fight and where to Garrison (that is the same for LOYALIST/CLAN factions, to a lesser degree).

Forcing player numbers in Factions/clans would never work as people have said previously (we as players always find work rounds, just look at the amount o players in this game that need to cheat to play this game (and where banned, with more to follow it seems).

CW needs to be more fluid, Certain planets taking longer to conquest other less time, SNAP FIRE opportunities where the Signs, wind or hell even the Cards all allow a combat window to open a planet for say 2 hours only (once in a blue moon, or even dependant on a CLAN/Faction sinking in 2 billion C-bills)

This constant Predictable Cease-fire windows seem to only serve the teams able to put in that last PUSH, heck I personally would prefer hidden (only known by PGI's Special computer) Cease-fire windows.

Planet A is open for attack, lets get in their......7 days later jesus its still open.....20 minutes later, oh hell its closed, we lost.

Planet B is open for attack lets get that.....OH wait that's now closed (was that only open for attack for 5 hours) WTF.

More work for PGI (possibly, but heck if the computer cannot handle that, get a better PC guys).

[Damocles]

hip fire idea: give legitimate bonuses to planetary ownership and then divide those by number of players in the unit.

idk

[Mordin Ashe]

I fail to see any analysis of why this state happened on side of PGI. Without it there is little chance of any measures doing what PGI wants them to.

People need big communities. Many people to play with, good environment, always there is someone to have fun with. Big is good and that is true for every game.

The thing is, smaller units can work well (and arguably even the biggest units, MS for example, have some inner structure as well simply because noone can lead 400 disorganised people) but there are prerequisities. They must have something that unites them. A group of friends, that can work. Group from one country/close countries so that everyone plays at the same time, that can work too. A group of role play enthusiasts can work together as well. Here smaller units are better because they can coordinate better, focus more on what interests them and ignore the rest.

But for general game? When you only play casually and want someone to be online, when you want to try some 12mans or organised form of CW, when you want to be competitive - for any of these reasons bigger unit is a better choice. For all these things you need numbers, simple as that. You can't form up a 12man regularly with 100 people, that is unrealistic. 200 people is the first number that comes to mind for that to achieve.

Want to split the big boys? guess what, it won't work. They will still group up, they will still roll over less coordinated people. There will be MS1-4, SRT1-4 and so on.

The core of the problem I see is different. If Russ wants more active and cooperating smaller units then there must be a reason for that. Some positiev reason. For example:
1) Bonuses for being in a unit. Lets say, -10% on consumables costs.
2) Bonuses for playing in a group of your unit/faction members. Lets say 2% for every participating member. Playing solo in a unit nets you 2% bonus, group of 5 would get 10%. Those are interesting numbers.
3) Meaningful units! We have coffers we can't send money from. Why can't richer players donate smaller ammounts (lets say up to 10m c-bills in 1 week)? How about donating weapons? Sending extra weapons to coffers might help. Implement limits if you must but this would do wonders.
4) There will be an observers mode some time soon, right? How about making it that unit members can observe matches of unit members?
5) CW planetary bonuses. A unit can get a planet, it is possible. with a little bit of coordination any unit of 30+ players can. But what then? Give planets some rewards and, as suggested above, split it among its members. Make it so that being an active group of 100 pays better than gorup of 400.
6) Whatever crosses anyone's mind.

[Anjian]

This is certainly going to encourage units developing more "branches". Instead of an entire unit hopping faction to faction, they open branches with different factions, and members circulate among these branches.

[TWIAFU]

Anjian, on 29 June 2015 - 01:04 AM, said:

This is certainly going to encourage units developing more "branches". Instead of an entire unit hopping faction to faction, they open branches with different factions, and members circulate among these branches.

Do you honestly think that splitting up Unit and friendships is going to do anything other then drive people away? Do you honestly think people are going to stop playing with friends in a Unit to move to another Unit branch without his/her friends?

You going to leave your friends behind and faction hop without them? They going to leave you?

All this will do if further segregate the community and instead of dropping against one Unit with one tag, you will drop against multiple Unit with variations on the same tag. This will not achieve the intended goal of getting people to quit current Unit to make another. Why would they knowing that they are capped on the number of friends they can have. Logistical nightmare of managing multiple Unit instead of just one.

Good idea of they started like this, bad idea to cap now.

[C E Dwyer]

Yes they will still be able to form 12 mans and largish groups.

What you'll get are the top 100-150 whatever the max size ends up being, if it happens at all, taking the perceived best, so it will have Zero Effect on what they can do now in CW and 12 mans, though I suspect many regiments and clan groups will make minimum requirements to join and those that drop bellow that level will be asked to leave/kicked out, if they still don't play at the minimum standard.

What will happen is that the not so goods and the tag along's, that were given unit rewards as part of the big boy leagues, won't be in them to get that flag or toy that they did bugger all to deserve.

Yes I know its a very harsh way of saying it, but its modern human society in miniature

[kesmai]

One of the silliest things is: My contract is done. I last fought for davion on wazan. I take a new contract for clan ghostbear to fight 500 light-years away from the planet i was on. Within 5 minutes. LOL.

not to Forget merc contracts for clans. Rofl.


and yes this is completly on topic.

Edited by kesmai, 29 June 2015 - 04:06 AM.

[CyclonerM]

kesmai, on 29 June 2015 - 04:03 AM, said:

One of the silliest things is: My contract is done. I last fought for davion on wazan. I take a new contract for clan ghostbear to fight 500 light-years away from the planet i was on. Within 5 minutes. LOL.

And then, you come back in the Inner Sphere as nothing happened.. Even if you just fought for the invaders.. Back on topic..

Anjian, on 29 June 2015 - 01:04 AM, said:

This is certainly going to encourage units developing more "branches". Instead of an entire unit hopping faction to faction, they open branches with different factions, and members circulate among these branches.

Even if there were not big bonds of friendships within the unit, a loyalist unit wants to fight for the same faction. Besides, I see something potentially abusable and weird in being able to fight your "own" guys on the other side

[Tom Sawyer]

Anything that does something to lower the already nearly dead CW population count would be counter productive.

If large groups are keeping CW from dying then do not screw the pooch.

FIX CW, make it more interesting and offer greater awards first.

[PappySmurf]

Im sorry OP but Russ is out there on his own CLOUD and the game will continue to die from over control bad CORE and UI game design and many other more important issues that Russ and PGI totally ignore.


P.S and no matter what is posted on these forums -TWITTARD or any other media they ignore everyone with any good ideas to help MWO survive and only listen to there inner circle of cronies they play CW with.

So basically become there butttt buddy and they might listen to your suggestions before they throw them away in the trash can.

Edited by PappySmurf, 29 June 2015 - 07:15 AM.

[DaFrog]

No units. Just factions and pugs.

[McHoshi]

Appreciate this

[Felix7007]

I'm in support of not doing this because of the obvious ridiculousness it would bring to the game. -MS- is annoying enough. MS1 MS2 MS3 MS Super cool MS awesome Sauce MS Oblivion Squad is not needed.

[sdsnowbum]

Mordin Ashe, on 29 June 2015 - 12:45 AM, said:

I fail to see any analysis of why this state happened on side of PGI. Without it there is little chance of any measures doing what PGI wants them to.

People need big communities. Many people to play with, good environment, always there is someone to have fun with. Big is good and that is true for every game.

The thing is, smaller units can work well (and arguably even the biggest units, MS for example, have some inner structure as well simply because noone can lead 400 disorganised people) but there are prerequisities. They must have something that unites them. A group of friends, that can work. Group from one country/close countries so that everyone plays at the same time, that can work too. A group of role play enthusiasts can work together as well. Here smaller units are better because they can coordinate better, focus more on what interests them and ignore the rest.

But for general game? When you only play casually and want someone to be online, when you want to try some 12mans or organised form of CW, when you want to be competitive - for any of these reasons bigger unit is a better choice. For all these things you need numbers, simple as that. You can't form up a 12man regularly with 100 people, that is unrealistic. 200 people is the first number that comes to mind for that to achieve.

Want to split the big boys? guess what, it won't work. They will still group up, they will still roll over less coordinated people. There will be MS1-4, SRT1-4 and so on.

The core of the problem I see is different. If Russ wants more active and cooperating smaller units then there must be a reason for that. Some positiev reason. For example:
1) Bonuses for being in a unit. Lets say, -10% on consumables costs.
2) Bonuses for playing in a group of your unit/faction members. Lets say 2% for every participating member. Playing solo in a unit nets you 2% bonus, group of 5 would get 10%. Those are interesting numbers.
3) Meaningful units! We have coffers we can't send money from. Why can't richer players donate smaller ammounts (lets say up to 10m c-bills in 1 week)? How about donating weapons? Sending extra weapons to coffers might help. Implement limits if you must but this would do wonders.
4) There will be an observers mode some time soon, right? How about making it that unit members can observe matches of unit members?
5) CW planetary bonuses. A unit can get a planet, it is possible. with a little bit of coordination any unit of 30+ players can. But what then? Give planets some rewards and, as suggested above, split it among its members. Make it so that being an active group of 100 pays better than gorup of 400.
6) Whatever crosses anyone's mind.

Nicely put.

I think you are really onto something that the answer is to give positive reasons for doing something. It's called incentives, and business teaches it's the very best way to get people to do what you want them to. As does the entire history of human behavior since the beginning of time.

If the goal is to break up bigger units into smaller units, the units really need to be given some incentives.

Maybe a reward for recruiting new members that is scaled so that small units get a bigger reward when they recruit a new member. Units that are already large get much smaller reward. So very quickly there are diminishing returns to adding more people to the same unit, while you can get far more by forming a new unit and getting people to join up.

Another important thing is to look at why big units are a problem. The one and only problem I see with big units is that it means the entire membership of the unit has to accept contracts together. As many others have said breaking up units won't prevent this.

What's really needed is incentive to make the different units go to different factions. Or (my personal favorite) give an incentive for people/other units to go to the factions the big units are fighting against.