21 replies to this topic

[Gumon Choji]

My continuing advice to PGI is simple. Keep the game fun.

Previously I have advised to keep quirks positive. This way people feel good about playing. Make mechs feel nicer in unique ways somehow. Also do not diminish things as people pay for them with money and life. Players invest days to save up for mechs. Change a mech into garbage and they will leave.

I also advise the game is to be fun. That is why we play.

Being a fun mech is being special by being better somehow. Not worse but better. Look how people like positive stuff. negative takes away fun. Positive adds fun.

Keep the game fun.

Avoid making mechs "too" role specific as this games appeal is making your own. Some want range some want to brawl. Forcing a role takes away what is unique in the B tech world. Giving a benefit in a role is less offensive and draws people like honey not vinegar.

The game must be fun and not too serious because we are in giant walking robots. Which everyone knows is unrealistic in war. But it is cook in a child like way. Because.... Robots. Do not forget this is a silly premise we all like because it is fun like when we were children.

Keep it really fun. Again we should like what you do. Fixing it to fix it is a bad idea. Fixing it to make it more fun. Great idea. Thus always ask if a quirk is more fun. Making this game into an E sport is not fun. Do not market for the 100 who may want this. Market for the thousands who want to feel like they are 12 in a giant dream robot with LAZERS, missiles and a shot gun. Come on this is so amazingly silly and amazing. which is why we play.

Add to this post to encourage fun. over competitive.

[Cion]

The problem good sir is that PGI is literally flooded and made deaf by all the screams of try hards that play the game. The huge majority that play for fun don't make even a fraction of the noise.

Game should be fun, with one competitive option (Solaris).

[KraftySOT]

"fun" is subjective.

"balanced" is scientific.

The game should be balanced. Whether or not its fun to a particular person, is irrelevant, as long as its fun enough, to enough people, to pay the bills.

The mantra should be "Keep the game fun enough, make the game balanced".

[Elizander]

Chess is balanced. It's not very fun. Just saying.

[Chuck Jager]

Elizander, on 12 September 2015 - 09:06 PM, said:

Chess is balanced. It's not very fun. Just saying.

Chess is beautiful. I like making people who can only think about their own perspective dance, then squirm and then die. It is legal in this manner and fun and then add chess at the end.

Do you get the subjective nature of fun now.

[LennStar]

Elizander, on 12 September 2015 - 09:06 PM, said:

Chess is balanced. It's not very fun. Just saying.

If you think chess is balanced you were never good in it.

[TWIAFU]

LennStar, on 12 September 2015 - 11:04 PM, said:

If you think chess is balanced you were never good in it.

Having 142 ranked Chess games, 94 wins, I'm pretty good.

Chess is pure balance.

The only thing that has an effect on the outcome is the level of intelligence of the players - very similar to MWO.

[Krivvan]

Cion, on 12 September 2015 - 07:36 PM, said:

Add to this post to encourage fun. over competitive.

You make it sound like tryhards who play competitive don't do it because it's fun for them...

It's like trying hard to win a sports game. And joining a sports league. It's fun.

It's like you're trying to win a game of chess, and having someone come up and tell you that you're not playing to have fun if you think about moves in advance and try to win, and that it's only fun if you let dice determine which pieces you move.

Edited by Krivvan, 13 September 2015 - 04:26 AM.

[Mogney]

Cion, on 12 September 2015 - 07:36 PM, said:

The problem good sir is that PGI is literally flooded and made deaf by all the screams of try hards that play the game. The huge majority that play for fun don't make even a fraction of the noise.

Game should be fun, with one competitive option (Solaris).

You know, I have always wondered why this game wasnt any fun, maybe if I just embraced the suck and stopped trying to be good at this game it would be more fun. This could solve all my problems! Thanks Cion, you have just completely changed my world, actually trying to do well at a game = not fun, getting stomped all the time = fun! Ill try it!

[Gumon Choji]

Chess players. You sort of missed the point. We are in giant robots. Giant robots. This is not a thinking mans appeal. Repeated. Giant walking robots. Robots where a 100 ton war machine is larger than a shopping mall.
-12' by 8' by 24' is the dimension on the Abrams. and it is 68 tons.
We are in the land of imaginary stompy robots. Thus the land of child like wonder.

My premise is not that balance is bad but balance should be additive. The goal to make mechs feel cooler/ better at a task. Not lacking. I have invested over 1k in PGI for unique playing experiences. I invested 3k in a system and spend 600 a year for internet to play (50/month). I do not want my mechs feeling like hot garbage. I do not want any of them to feel like hot garbage. I own 156 mechs waiting for 28 to be delivered and will soon have every chassis in the game. My goal is not to have super meta mechs. I like balance. I rarely play my best mechs. I like the feel of each chassis and seeing how they are different. I do not want my mechs to be junk. I do not want any of them to be junk.

My point is make balance additive to a base concept. make mechs play differently with fun being the metric. For this chess divergent group think of it this way. Most chess players are drawn to a novelty chess board they love. Cool pieces. Shaped like characters or made of exotic materials. That is what you play with. Even the clocks get nicer. If you only like balance and not the fun of it I dare you go go into a competition with graph paper and little paper with a letter representing each piece. See who will play you. You can be the best an your que will be low. Take in a star wars chess set and your que will be huge. One is fun first. the other is challenge first.

To PGI. The reason for fun on a mech is simple. You want attachment. One a player makes attachment to a mech they play more. This begins the collecting phase. Fun is the worm. Mechanics are the hook. You are about to open on steam. You are competing in who has the best worm not who has the best hook. Think of it like fishermen. They talk of lures, and line strength. Rarely of weights and hooks. Weights get to your depth or market. Likes are your ability to handle your catch. Lines are your network. Hook is balance. Worm is fun. If the worm looks good the game is fun the fish bite hard on any hook.





To PGI Chess is not a good business model. The margins are low. The turn over huge. The complains over rules endless. The puffery and intellectual grandstanding a turn off to the masses. It is a bad business to follow. The game can be sound and balanced but you want fish. Fish are money not customers. You want money. Money is payed for fun. Chess has to pay people to play tournaments. Your business PGI wants money. You business is free to play you want good will to have the purse open. So I reiterate the worm is fun. Make people bite hard. Do not give them buyers remorse. Make them happy to give you money. Reward them for giving you money. Make them sure that giving you money is a good life choice. We trust you with our money. Prove our trust is well founded and balance to fun first balance to keep it fun. Do not balance to balance. Balance to keep it fun. This is not some sheet of grid paper made to look fancy. YOU ARE SELLIN THE CHILDHOOD DREAM LAND OF GIANT ROBOTS.

[Gumon Choji]

For new players: This game as a steep learning curve. Very steep. When you consistently get kills you are awesome. The fun of a giant robot holds you on the month plus of getting good. Then you will spend money.

[Krivvan]

Gumon Choji, on 13 September 2015 - 06:27 AM, said:

Chess players. You sort of missed the point. We are in giant robots. Giant robots. This is not a thinking mans appeal. Repeated. Giant walking robots. Robots where a 100 ton war machine is larger than a shopping mall.
-12' by 8' by 24' is the dimension on the Abrams. and it is 68 tons.
We are in the land of imaginary stompy robots. Thus the land of child like wonder.

And Starcraft, a completely crazy universe that by Starcraft 2 does not take itself seriously anymore, is a fun game to play seriously.

League of Legends is also ridiculous., yet millions of people play that in a tryhard way for fun.

You don't seem to understand that the fun is in the challenge for many, many people.

Edited by Krivvan, 13 September 2015 - 12:04 PM.

[Cion]

Krivvan, on 13 September 2015 - 04:24 AM, said:

You make it sound like tryhards who play competitive don't do it because it's fun for them...

It's like trying hard to win a sports game. And joining a sports league. It's fun.

It's like you're trying to win a game of chess, and having someone come up and tell you that you're not playing to have fun if you think about moves in advance and try to win, and that it's only fun if you let dice determine which pieces you move.

and

Dr Tachyon, on 13 September 2015 - 06:27 AM, said:

You know, I have always wondered why this game wasnt any fun, maybe if I just embraced the suck and stopped trying to be good at this game it would be more fun. This could solve all my problems! Thanks Cion, you have just completely changed my world, actually trying to do well at a game = not fun, getting stomped all the time = fun! Ill try it!

wow. Ok i see my language may have not been the most polished. Let me clarify.

No problem in competitiveness. It should be there. No one is saying "lose and have fun" (not me at least). The point I tried to make (and apparently failed) is that the competitive crowd and try hard crowd (to me not the same) usually have a bigger impact on the game design than what I consider is the majority of players because they make so much more noise.

I find it difficult to say the least to try to balance thousands of combinations of mechs and loadouts, with multiple game modes. People tend to complicate things and tend to add more factors to balance (ghost heat anyone?, quirks?, new system?). In my opinion, you'll do a better job doing a tight balance on one game mode (solaris) with some decent unbalances on the other game modes, rather than trying to tight balance everything at once.

I love the concept of ultra competitive Solaris. I'm ok with CW and Play now being slightly unbalanced if Solaris exists.

[Livewyr]

KraftySOT, on 12 September 2015 - 08:02 PM, said:

"balanced" is mostly scientific.

FTFY.

Balance is mostly scientific, however there are variables that are still subjective.

Example: ECM is constant, but it can be hard countered by TAG indefinitely. On paper that seems like 50/50 balance.

It's only once you consider that TAG must be constantly pointed at the ECM mech exposing the TAG'ing mech's CT constantly and occupying player attention, whereas the ECM requires no effort. This is the sticking point that has some players saying that they are balanced, and others saying that they are not. It depends on whether you notice that effect, and whether you care about it. (Some people really like straight up shooting it out, and others do not.)


This also applies to LRMs, SSRMs, and lasers...

[Vellron2005]

Gumon Choji, on 12 September 2015 - 06:31 PM, said:

My continuing advice to PGI is simple. Keep the game fun.

Previously I have advised to keep quirks positive. This way people feel good about playing. Make mechs feel nicer in unique ways somehow. Also do not diminish things as people pay for them with money and life. Players invest days to save up for mechs. Change a mech into garbage and they will leave.

I also advise the game is to be fun. That is why we play.

Being a fun mech is being special by being better somehow. Not worse but better. Look how people like positive stuff. negative takes away fun. Positive adds fun.

Keep the game fun.

Avoid making mechs "too" role specific as this games appeal is making your own. Some want range some want to brawl. Forcing a role takes away what is unique in the B tech world. Giving a benefit in a role is less offensive and draws people like honey not vinegar.

The game must be fun and not too serious because we are in giant walking robots. Which everyone knows is unrealistic in war. But it is cook in a child like way. Because.... Robots. Do not forget this is a silly premise we all like because it is fun like when we were children.

Keep it really fun. Again we should like what you do. Fixing it to fix it is a bad idea. Fixing it to make it more fun. Great idea. Thus always ask if a quirk is more fun. Making this game into an E sport is not fun. Do not market for the 100 who may want this. Market for the thousands who want to feel like they are 12 in a giant dream robot with LAZERS, missiles and a shot gun. Come on this is so amazingly silly and amazing. which is why we play.

Add to this post to encourage fun. over competitive.

This is one of THE BEST posts I have read on these forums..

A great advice for ANY GAME DEVELOPER, especially for PGI who have a tendancy to work with their playerbase..

Congratulations good sir.. You NAILED it!

Thoughts on BALANCE:

I think that people keep forgetting two things: realism and terrain.

Terrain influences EVERYTHING and you cannot balance two mechs if terrain is in the mix.

This leads me to the point of Realism...

A realistic battlefield is NOT BALANCED. PGI and the playerbase have to make a choice.. do you want MWO to be an arcade e-sporty shoot'em up GAME, or do you want MWO to be a 3050 Robot battles SIMULATOR?

Becouse if you want the SIM, then no, it will not be balanced.. some mechs will always be better, some will always suck, and some will always be average... the way you balance that is up to the pilot.. with Terrain!

Pilot skill and terrain is what wins REALISTIC battles. I'm talking about 300 Spartans holding of thousands of Persians. I'm talking about one guy with a machine gun in a bunker killing hundreads trying to rush him.

That cannot be balanced. And its realistic as hell..

So try not to give mechs quirks and essentially make them all like chess peicess... instead, give the player bonuses that let him specialise a certain mech for a certain role..

Maybe let us EARN that -12% laser duration by beeing good at shooting lasers.. hmmm.. how about that?

Edited by Vellron2005, 14 September 2015 - 01:55 AM.

[Gumon Choji]

I thank everyone for exploring this topic. I hope PGI will see the point in balancing being done through additive features. So others do not miss the point of the post we are talking about balance. Not that balance is bad but how we want balance done. My point is "Balance should be additive because that is fun".

This post exists because: 1. The quirk pass currently is looking at removing sensor range.
2. Removing weapon quirks that make mechs viable.
3. Slowing turn rates.
4. Limiting by reducing traits of mechs.

The current pass is akin to if women got equal pay by every man making .76 cents on the dollar. This is "balance by removing features". The pay is the same but it is a loss to all men and not a gain for women. I am advocating women make the same for the same work. Thus every one makes a dollar. One does not hurt but gives a benefit. Again PGI be additive in balancing. Make role warfare fun and a bonus not a detriment.

Make roles get bonuses to tangible things. Like added draw distance in heat/night vision. Let locks from some mechs speed up others locks. Have mechs gather info faster when targeting together. Have some mechs lose lock but keep target info longer . let some scouts see 10 m "around corners" in lock. Do not take away. ECM as it is used now is overwhelming because with the range debuff changed play. more mechs bring ECM. the mechanic makes Narc covered by 3 ECM sometimes. I like using sensors on my mechs but the quantity of ECM mechs is silly. The debuff made the game more about ECM mechs. Not less. Adding mechs without ecm get locks faster and gather info faster could go a long way. Or ECM makes the 360 way-point indicator create an arrow to you would have players using the "j" switch a lot. Make this a sensor feature on some scout mechs. Then can locate pings like subs. The ping is ECM. This is additive and role specific.

If the terrible locust and spider had these additive abilities they would make great scouts. They find enemies. Additive.

Assaults have 500m sensor range is a lame fix and breaks my toys. Yes it is balancing but it breaks my toys. if you buy the bundles the atlases are 45$ USD for 3. The hero full price is 30$. Mechs of the hero variety are 30 cents per ton. Making it so they stink at using lock is a bad solution. Mech bays are 1.50 $. Giving other mechs additive reasons to keep them will get players to drop coin for bays. Piss off a customer over 30$ and you got an issue. The goals should be additive because you are making bad mechs desirable. Not diminishing satisfaction to you big money makers. But the key is they play differently. Not poorly.

Again make the roles an added cool thing that makes us go "robots WOW!". I want them all. Exactly like Pokemon. Give titles for the number of mechs you own and have mastered. Make it your Comstar rank with titles. You are Comstar PGI and Comstar likes money. Make us want every mech. Each mech is cool. Perhaps even add a level above master called "Die Hard" that gives Vellron2005's pick a generic skill and the mech gets it. Let players change it whenever but at an exp cost. Perhaps only on the bad mechs first to test it. See what people like. See additive. positive. Money making. more competitive but with fun as your co pilot not balance.






Giant robots. Fun. Add in quirks with new features to the game. Make roles a cool new thing mechs do. Make us want to give you money. This is how to balance, fun first.

[Gumon Choji]

Ps. let me punch and kick.

[Goombah]

I can't have fun if the game is imbalanced.

[Astrocanis]

Krivvan, on 13 September 2015 - 12:03 PM, said:

And Starcraft, a completely crazy universe that by Starcraft 2 does not take itself seriously anymore, is a fun game to play seriously.

League of Legends is also ridiculous., yet millions of people play that in a tryhard way for fun.

You don't seem to understand that the fun is in the challenge for many, many people.

I don't understand how balancing the game makes it less of a challenge? I guess I also don't understand how fun can be defined other than "challenge means blowing things away with unbalanced metas". Because if you want a challenge, play a Trebuchet or Kintaro or KitFox. You want a challenge? Play AWAY from the meta.

In the meantime, I'm with the OP. I would like to have fun in the game. Where I differ is in the belief that "balance" is a holy grail - because I think the biggest problem in the game has to do with the environment that mechs screw around in. Payouts, map design, skill trees, modules, objectives, to me, are the biggest problems in the game.

But if they simply do what they've done to the test realm, the game will absolutely not be fun - unless you run a Whale, Timberwolf, Stormcrow or Arctic Cheetah (for most of us, anyway).

[Skarlock]

Cion, on 13 September 2015 - 12:10 PM, said:

No one is saying "lose and have fun" (not me at least). The point I tried to make (and apparently failed) is that the competitive crowd and try hard crowd (to me not the same) usually have a bigger impact on the game design than what I consider is the majority of players because they make so much more noise.

Competitive players crave competition. They want to struggle with hard choices and achieve mastery of the game. They don't want ezmode where you just pick x mech with y weapons and smash everything because it's boring. Their desire for a more balanced game where choices matter more and are harder to make has no impact on your fun, in fact many of the things PGI has done such as nerfing jump sniping have gone directly against many competitive player wishes. I would say many decisions PGI makes are NOT balanced around the competitive community, but what lower skill players complain about. Your perspective is very alien to me to be honest, I can't see your reasoning at all. Can you provide some actual examples of issues or changes that have been suggested by the competitive players that have taken away from your fun?