31 replies to this topic

[Alistair Winter]

I'll give you 3 options and you pick the thing that you would fix first to make CW more enjoyable. You only get to pick one thing. If you reply to say "All of the above" like some smart-a**, God will make your children mildly allergic to peanuts.

So... if you only could fix one thing, which would you fix?

• Wait time and/or queue system - This is basically whatever it takes to let people find matches faster. Whether it means recruiting more players, creating a galaxy-wide pool for House Loyalists, or whatever. Pick this one if you think the long waiting time to find a match is the biggest problem in CW.
  
• Maps and game modes. Pretty self-explanatory. Pick this one if you think the map design and the Invasion and Counter-Invasion game modes (with the O-gens and the gates and the Omega cannon) is the biggest problem in CW.
  
• Content and depth outside the matches. I'm talking about stuff like logistics, special bonuses and rewards for capturing certain planets, managing jumpships for your unit, jump points, faction rewards, mercenary leaderboards or whatever else you can think of. Pick this if you want a more complex framework around the matches themselves, to give the matches more meaning.

[IIIuminaughty]

None. Besides logistics and contents outside the matches, but the real problem is getting people to play cw.

[MaxFool]

None of the above. The real problem is that in this queue system big premades focus on attacking and solo PUGs on defending. Big groups should face each other more often, rather than avoid each other.

[Alistair Winter]

IIIuminaughty, on 20 July 2015 - 07:21 PM, said:

None. Besides logistics and contents outside the matches, but the real problem is getting people to play cw.

So why do you think people aren't playing?

MaxFool, on 20 July 2015 - 07:30 PM, said:

None of the above. The real problem is that in this queue system big premades focus on attacking and solo PUGs on defending. Big groups should face each other more often, rather than avoid each other.

How would you stop that from happening?

[Trev Firestorm]

IIIuminaughty, on 20 July 2015 - 07:21 PM, said:

None. Besides logistics and contents outside the matches, but the real problem is getting people to play cw.

Yeah but the content outside of matches will encourage people and units especially to actually care about what goes on in CW/have a reason to fight. The lack of players has alot to do with the shallow nature of the current CW, why risk waiting 10 minutes for a ghost drop when it has no meaning. Give meaning to the mode and the queues will get better, as they get better the players that still don't care won't have a rough a time finding matches and might play it for variety and thus queues improve some more.

[xX PUG Xx]

IMO, if you improve or just simply give the map some meaning it will encourage more people (mainly from groups and larger units) to play. If you encourage more people to play, it will improve queue/wait times. If you improve queue/wait times, it will encourayge even MORE people to play..... yup snowball effect that really starts with giving the gamemode some "meaning".

The other thing that will happen is, if more people are playing CW, PGI will then dedicate more resources to improving it quicker. Therefore making it more appealing, encouraging more people to play it and so on. (Or perhaps i'm being too optimistic )

[Joker Two]

I think having queues for individual planets splits up players far too much. The emphasis should be on matching up teams and getting games going, not sticking your flag in the mud of some specific planet. Maybe in the match pre-game the players can vote on what planet the battle counts towards of those that are contested.

I think the map design is problematic too, though. They're beautiful, but two-thirds of the space is nothing more than a time delay for reinforcements. The gates are basically meaningless, especially since there's no real way to defend them. There aren't really defensive positions, and it feels like the attacker has the terrain in their favor even inside the defender's base. For example, there are often positions with good cover just inside the gate that also have a commanding view over the gun complex (and sometimes the approaches from the defending spawn, which basically amount to killzones), but any defender positions are compromised by terrain the attacker can easily reach.

[Imperius]

Alistair Winter, on 20 July 2015 - 07:18 PM, said:

I'll give you 3 options and you pick the thing that you would fix first to make CW more enjoyable. You only get to pick one thing. If you reply to say "All of the above" like some smart-a**, God will make your children mildly allergic to peanuts.

So... if you only could fix one thing, which would you fix?

• Wait time and/or queue system - This is basically whatever it takes to let people find matches faster. Whether it means recruiting more players, creating a galaxy-wide pool for House Loyalists, or whatever. Pick this one if you think the long waiting time to find a match is the biggest problem in CW.
  
• Maps and game modes. Pretty self-explanatory. Pick this one if you think the map design and the Invasion and Counter-Invasion game modes (with the O-gens and the gates and the Omega cannon) is the biggest problem in CW.
  
• Content and depth outside the matches. I'm talking about stuff like logistics, special bonuses and rewards for capturing certain planets, managing jumpships for your unit, jump points, faction rewards, mercenary leaderboards or whatever else you can think of. Pick this if you want a more complex framework around the matches themselves, to give the matches more meaning.

I wanted to see PVE should be the focus so I voted NONE

[Dirk Le Daring]

It seems to me, having NOT played CW yet, that the most complained about issue is wait times.

I cannot vote, but would input something you, Alistair have read before, but some may not have.....

Click the link in my sig. And add to the ideas.

So I do not know where to vote, wait times, or none of the above.

[kesmai]

How dare you to forget bacon? The most important thing in cw...

[Koshirou]

I can't say there's a biggest priority because there are many things wrong with CW. They all need to be fixed in order for the game mode to become viable for a large number of players.

"Content and depth outside the matches" most closely matches what I think is the most basic need:
Campaigns with actual goals, start points and end points.
Basically, every faction or group of factions need a specific goal they can work to achieve. These goals need to be balanced as to be equally achievable for all factions (i.e. victory depending only on player actions with as little predetermination by the setup as possible.) At the end of the CW campaign, there will be a winner - and then, a new campaign will begin.
I do not believe in the viability of a "persistent" map.

[IIIuminaughty]

Alistair Winter, on 20 July 2015 - 07:37 PM, said:

So why do you think people aren't playing?

most pugs get demolished if they are not with another premade group. Losing constantly, you can only take an asswhoopin for so much. But I also said lack of content as well. It goes hand to hand, but if people won't play because of lack of skill then, what can you truly do about that?

Trev Firestorm, on 20 July 2015 - 07:48 PM, said:

Yeah but the content outside of matches will encourage people and units especially to actually care about what goes on in CW/have a reason to fight. The lack of players has alot to do with the shallow nature of the current CW, why risk waiting 10 minutes for a ghost drop when it has no meaning. Give meaning to the mode and the queues will get better, as they get better the players that still don't care won't have a rough a time finding matches and might play it for variety and thus queues improve some more.

As I said in quote above. I know its the content but the pugs are a big chunk of players as well, if they don't feel like they are up to the competitors lvl, they won't come.

Edited by IIIuminaughty, 21 July 2015 - 05:43 PM.

[Kin3ticX]

A lot of the problems with CW revolve around stubborn and non-adaptive players. There is a downright refusal to deal with the CW learning curve. I dont like the notion that players just suck, but rather prefer to believe either people are self imposed to hate CW or they are just ignorant. We really do have a situation where we have a unit centric game mode and many unorganized solos which refuse to accept joining a unit as an option.

However, I don't claim that joining a unit is the be all end all. Some units are nearly as bad as the average pug, but even then, they should have a much better experience.

There are so many benefits to playing in a unit I am surprised pugs are not clamoring to form them. (player cohesion, force multipliers, player synergy, standardized dropdecks, drop commanders, leadership, group learning, new player training etc etc etc etc)

The more i hear, "I dont have time to be in a unit" but in the same breath "tired of losing to -MS- 4 times in a row", I am not sure whether to cry or laugh.

Edited by Kin3ticX, 21 July 2015 - 06:45 PM.

[White Panther]

2 and 3.

It's just sad there is nothing else to CW than acquiring a planet. You get the planet, that's it.. There is no economy or infrastructure. Not enough "meat" in CW to bring in players. Blame that one on Bryan and PGI, who only after Transverse failed miserably shat out this empty husk of planetary mode.

[Alistair Winter]

White Panther, on 21 July 2015 - 06:36 PM, said:

2 and 3.
It's just sad there is nothing else to CW than acquiring a planet. You get the planet, that's it.. There is no economy or infrastructure. Not enough "meat" in CW to bring in players. Blame that one on Bryan and PGI, who only after Transverse failed miserably shat out this empty husk of planetary mode.

Why Bryan specifically? Because Transverse drained PGI of the resources that should have gone into CW?

kesmai, on 20 July 2015 - 11:13 PM, said:

How dare you to forget bacon? The most important thing in cw...

I'm a vegetarian. I could add a salad option, if you want

IIIuminaughty, on 21 July 2015 - 05:43 PM, said:

most pugs get demolished if they are not with another premade group. Losing constantly, you can only take an asswhoopin for so much. But I also said lack of content as well. It goes hand to hand, but if people won't play because of lack of skill then, what can you truly do about that?

This doesn't quite explain why the big units aren't playing more CW though. There seems to be a general drop in activity that is hard to explain by wait time, because wait time for big groups during prime hours seems pretty good. At least it used to be.

Kin3ticX, on 21 July 2015 - 05:51 PM, said:

A lot of the problems with CW revolve around stubborn and non-adaptive players. There is a downright refusal to deal with the CW learning curve. I dont like the notion that players just suck, but rather prefer to believe either people are self imposed to hate CW or they are just ignorant. We really do have a situation where we have a unit centric game mode and many unorganized solos which refuse to accept joining a unit as an option.

That would be very surprising to me, if this was a major part of the explanation. There were so many players looking forward to CW who knew that it would revolve around teamwork, and the MWO is a pretty unique game to begin with, with a fairly steep learning curve. Players who are innately stubborn and non-adaptive wouldn't have a good time with this game.

Kin3ticX, on 21 July 2015 - 05:51 PM, said:

However, I don't claim that joining a unit is the be all end all. Some units are nearly as bad as the average pug, but even then, they should have a much better experience.
There are so many benefits to playing in a unit I am surprised pugs are not clamoring to form them. (player cohesion, force multipliers, player synergy, standardized dropdecks, drop commanders, leadership, group learning, new player training etc etc etc etc)
The more i hear, "I dont have time to be in a unit" but in the same breath "tired of losing to -MS- 4 times in a row", I am not sure whether to cry or laugh.

Yeah, I put that down to people who are bored with the simple game modes of public matches, yet don't have time to get into a unit with standardized dropdecks, teamspeak servers and the whole deal that adds precious minutes to limited game time. They're upset because MWO doesn't have a good alternative for people who want the depth of MW2, MW3 or MW4-style missions, with convoy escorts, sabotage missions or recon missions. And frankly, even if you do have time for CW, it's still a fairly simplistic game mode with fairly shallow levels of tactics and strategy, I think.

I totally get what you're saying, but I also emphathize with people who love Mechwarrior games, yet fall between two stools because they want a quick match with deep gameplay.

Hopefully, those complaints should be reduced a little bit when we get 4v4 and PVE.

[sycocys]

For me the total lack of interesting gameplay has been the killer of my desire to play CW even when my unit had full teams online. Its just standard assault mode on uninspired maps, there's no real reason for lances or even the simple sub-objectives they have.

Haven't been home to play since before the spawn camping change, but it sounded like that only reinforced the assault mode aspect of CW.

The one big thing it missed to me was the Warfare half of things, it just doesn't feel like its trying to do anything to engage players into a deeper tactical play which would make the Community part much more involved.

[Thumper3]

MaxFool, on 20 July 2015 - 07:30 PM, said:

None of the above. The real problem is that in this queue system big premades focus on attacking and solo PUGs on defending. Big groups should face each other more often, rather than avoid each other.

Trouble is, without players they CAN NOT separate the ques. You notice that wait times are already an issue as evidenced not only the myraid of threads about them but also their position on this poll?

What do you think will happen when they segment the population so a 12 man is sitting in the que with no match because there are no other 12 mans running (or the few that are are already fighting each other)? You'll even end up with solo's sitting in que waiting because there's not 12 solo's to face them.

In the early days prior to the Launch they had separate ques for 8 mans and then 12 mans, and then the community started leaving, player population dropped and there would be many nights where a CW wait now looks GOOD compared to the wait's in 12 man que. The community then screamed about wait times and PGI did the only thing they could do......open the flood gates and mix everyone up.

Bottomline, wait times are a dead end to scream about..........because it is out of the hands of the developers. If someone quits this game because of wait times............they are part of the problem, not the solution. Same thing for those just avoiding CW right now because it's not done. Of course it's not done, they told us the CW side was going to be rolled out in phases.....so how can we be all POd that they are doing just what they said they were doing? LOL

if anything, what CW needs is MORE people playing, more groups, more full teams of 12. Fill the ques, don't stop playing. Yes it's not fully fleshed out, yes it can be tedious at times, but if everyone just concentrates on CW and plays, get some friends and form a new unit.....don't just fall into a mega unit. We need to recruit friends, acquaintances, family, all of it.

About the only blame I can lay at PGI is the utter lack of any advertising. I'm not saying a superbowl ad, but web page splash ads, youtube ads, Pandora, etc....... something, get players in the game. If they won't then we need to.

I don't know about the rest of you, but if this game dies I doubt highly another developer will snap it up and instantly make it the way we want it. If this game dies, MechWarrior dies. I didn't wait years and years for a MW game just to have it wither and die and go back to nothing.

We can complain, we can scream, we can throw bottles at the cages of the developers until they get it right......but what we can't do is turn our backs and walk away.

[sycocys]

I guess I would disagree on just a couple points - CW is tedious the entire time because it simply isn't different in any real meaningful way from dropping in the standard modes.

The other thing I wonder about is if someone else would pick it up or not if PGI just threw in the towel and gave up the rights. We did raise a pretty ridiculous amount of money in the founders stage, and continue to buy in enough to keep the game afloat despite the disaster that was IGP and incredibly slow development. Knowing that much only I wouldn't doubt that another company would want to pick up the IP and give it another go, with a better plan that didn't involve ditching 50%+ of the people that funded the game or even that some crazy guys from in the community would start the next project up. All speculation, but it has indeed shown itself to still be a marketable franchise so I guess I'd not worry too much about another company coming along if the license came back up.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I chose option 1 because I'm just the kind of guy that doesn't wait for more than 5 minutes to get a match, or I'll find something else to do with my time. Points 2 and 3 would mean more to me if I actually played CW matches, but wait times are the primary entry barrier for me.

[Thumper3]

sycocys, on 23 July 2015 - 07:20 AM, said:

I guess I would disagree on just a couple points - CW is tedious the entire time because it simply isn't different in any real meaningful way from dropping in the standard modes.

Agreed, but what the point was is that if we give up on it now, then it may just go away.

It's like foreplay, you don't do it cause you love it, you do it cause there's the reward at the end. LOL

sycocys, on 23 July 2015 - 07:20 AM, said:

The other thing I wonder about is if someone else would pick it up or not if PGI just threw in the towel and gave up the rights. We did raise a pretty ridiculous amount of money in the founders stage, and continue to buy in enough to keep the game afloat despite the disaster that was IGP and incredibly slow development. Knowing that much only I wouldn't doubt that another company would want to pick up the IP and give it another go, with a better plan that didn't involve ditching 50%+ of the people that funded the game or even that some crazy guys from in the community would start the next project up. All speculation, but it has indeed shown itself to still be a marketable franchise so I guess I'd not worry too much about another company coming along if the license came back up.

A) Microsoft owns the rights, so if PGI drops them not only would you need to find someone willing to pick them up and deal with this fickle and explosive community, but Microsoft would have to want to re-option them. Granted, Microsoft would have little to lose technically, but you never know.

Still, having another developer pick it up seems slim. Yes, Founders generated a lot of money................but I can not COUNT the number of threads and posts that state "Not another dime until X happens...." and X is basically the fully done and complete game. Every attempt to generate revenue now is met with disdain and called "money grabs", the community comes off as bitter and fed up. Any new developer would have to ASSUME they will make no new money to speak of until they complete development. And then, if you think this franchise is some sort of "cash cow" you are sadly mistaken. It's a niche game in a niche market.

About the only hope we have of a "new" developer is going to be if I win the Powerball this week. LOL