45 replies to this topic

[Amsro]

I would test it, but I'm not interested in another 7 gig download.

Instead of using the PTS, the changes should be patched into the live server for 1 week for live testing.

[Yellonet]

Logged in right now, can't even select a region

[Mister Blastman]

They need to bribe players with MC and c-bills or accessories to play on the PTS server.

[Aetes Nakatomi]

Yellonet, on 18 October 2015 - 06:10 AM, said:

Logged in right now, can't even select a region

Same problem here

[Weeny Machine]

It is Sunday and I have finally time to do some testing. So I went to the test server. Lo and behold! All regions were disabled at a weekend were working folks actually has some time to test THEIR stuff.
Mr. Bullock being sarcastic about people not wanting to test new mechanics is one thing. Then doing this is quite an other. Sorry, but it reeks of hypocrisy

[Coolant]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 16 October 2015 - 06:24 PM, said:

After joining multiple PTS games over the last few days it appears that the PTS crowd has dried up. It is a shame because the PTS gameplay exceeded the Prod servers.

In what way?

[DAYLEET]

Mister Blastman, on 18 October 2015 - 06:22 AM, said:

They need to bribe players with MC and c-bills or accessories to play on the PTS server.

I wish they would just go live with the present simple change in the PTS instead of waiting to go full balance. These changes arent dramatic in any ways. The loss of the quirks werent a "loss" per se(didnt make your IS mech bad) and the change to ecm and lasers did not break anything but the feeble mind of a few who probably didnt even test it. The crossair change are visual and just need getting used to. If we knew what else is comming on the pts it would help too.

I admit it, i was only able to find the strength to wait/test one full night, but the game just felt better in every way.

I can't find one good reason for not giving people the cbills earned on pts. Except of course technical difficulties but they should be looked at because the changes wil laffect everyone and you do want as much people trying it as possible.

Edited by DAYLEET, 18 October 2015 - 07:36 AM.

[Weeny Machine]

DAYLEET, on 18 October 2015 - 07:34 AM, said:

I wish they would just go live with the present simple change in the PTS instead of waiting to go full balance. These changes arent dramatic in any ways. The loss of the quirks werent a "loss" per se(didnt make your IS mech bad) and the change to ecm and lasers did not break anything but the feeble mind of a few who probably didnt even test it. The crossair change are visual and just need getting used to. If we knew what else is comming on the pts it would help too.

I admit it, i was only able to find the strength to wait/test one full night, but the game just felt better in every way.

I can't find one good reason for not giving people the cbills earned on pts. Except of course technical difficulties but they should be looked at because the changes wil laffect everyone and you do want as much people trying it as possible.

If you remove quirks completely, there will be so many garbage mechs which are literally only playable by masochists.

[oldradagast]

DAYLEET, on 18 October 2015 - 07:34 AM, said:

I wish they would just go live with the present simple change in the PTS instead of waiting to go full balance. These changes arent dramatic in any ways. The loss of the quirks werent a "loss" per se(didnt make your IS mech bad) and the change to ecm and lasers did not break anything but the feeble mind of a few who probably didnt even test it. The crossair change are visual and just need getting used to. If we knew what else is comming on the pts it would help too.

Um, removing IS weapon rate of fire quirks that ranged from 20% to 50% didn't make IS mechs bad and "is not a loss persay" - really? So, what you would consider such a huge penalty if not a loss? And without those quirks, most IS mechs are total trash.

Requiring a lock to get full laser damage "didn't break anything" - really? So, aside from it making no sense and punishing lights and mobile play styles, it's just fine, I guess...

The crosshairs issue is just "visual" and "we have to get used to it" - why? Why do we have to "get used to" a bad idea, unless you're admitting in a round-about way that PGI isn't going to listen to our feedback anyway? And if that's true - which it most certainly is most of the time - why bother with the PTS anyway?

We've got no shortage of people who are fine with the changes because they don't understand them or proper game design and a company that has problems listening. So, why bother?

Edited by oldradagast, 18 October 2015 - 07:42 AM.

[Mordin Ashe]

I played some matches on PTS. To be honest though, horrendous and undeserved nerfs of Clan tech surely reduced my eagerness to play more matches.

Next time we need to know not only what changes are in, but why are they in as well. What am I supposed to think? That PGI will deliver another serious nerf to Clan tech next patch? I surely don't want to help you in that, meaning that the rational decision is to boycot the PTS... Just saying.

[Water Bear]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 October 2015 - 09:17 PM, said:

Player verbal feedback is usually overrated anyhow. Most players are bad at it, if they bother at all. More players means more data and telemetry, and THAT is the real goal of PTS and such. Player trends, and such, mean more than players opinions.

I totally agree. However I am not convinced the PGI uses the information they have intelligently.

There are a bevy of statistical tests and machine learning algorithms that could be used in an attempt to objectively balance this game (and many, many others) and I see no reason to believe that this game's developers use any sort of scientific or mathematical tools.

I have always had this complain about competitive video games; It's more of an industry wide idiocy than one specific to MWO, it seems.

Edit: Let me add to that that there are many, many places on the internet to hire freelance computer science specialists in fields like machine learning, data mining, and statistics. It would be completely affordable to hire one such person for like $90/hr for a few weeks and have them set up the data collection back-end.

I guess I'm saying that, in my ignorance, it shouldn't be that difficult a task to overcome from a financial aspect.

Edited by Water Bear, 18 October 2015 - 08:08 AM.

[Sjorpha]

I think the PTS probably did it's job by now, it's natural that it's initally active and quickly dries out once people have tested it a few games and said their piece. Most of what can be said for and against is probably said already, I honestly think more that 2 days is overkill, escpecially for a test as focused on a few changes like this.

My guess is PGI will close it soon, review the data and feedback and come back with a new iteration later. And that's what they should do IMO.

[DAYLEET]

oldradagast, on 18 October 2015 - 07:39 AM, said:

1) Um, removing IS weapon rate of fire quirks that ranged from 20% to 50% didn't make IS mechs bad and "is not a loss persay" - really? So, what you would consider such a huge penalty if not a loss? And without those quirks, most IS mechs are total trash.

2) Requiring a lock to get full laser damage "didn't break anything" - really? So, aside from it making no sense and punishing lights and mobile play styles, it's just fine, I guess...

3)The crosshairs issue is just "visual" and "we have to get used to it" - why? Why do we have to "get used to" a bad idea, unless you're admitting in a round-about way that PGI isn't going to listen to our feedback anyway? And if that's true - which it most certainly is most of the time - why bother with the PTS anyway?

4)We've got no shortage of people who are fine with the changes because they don't understand them or proper game design and a company that has problems listening. So, why bother?

1) That was my experience yes. Do you just look at numbers on paper and make hardlocked decisions or do you try things out?

2) It's a game play decision that differ from what you like, that does not qualify for "game breaking change". And it DOES make sense, it's been discussed ad nauseum already. It WILL change the way we play, that's the whole point.

3) I certainly got used to the red crossair and i will need to adjust. Im glad it's gone, it added nothing but noobiness to the game. The other visual change to the crossair where it blink with a X is cool imo. Again, change can be scary and annoying because need to get used to but that's all there is to it.

4) Arent you precious and unique snowflake.

Look, here's my take on it. We got comfortable on game mechanics that degraded the game experience over time. Almost everyone agrees on that. We need to change that and/BUT we are not offered a lot by pgi. I know that, we don't just want to take anything/everything but what i saw was and felt a lot better than what we have on live right now. It's not gona be perfect but definitely not worse.

Edited by DAYLEET, 18 October 2015 - 08:42 AM.

[KHETTI]

With my internet connection it would take a significant time investment to download the client for a second time, that Legacy Executioner would definitely encourage me to do it.
Currently tho, i spent that time downloading AW, no regrets so far.

[SgtMagor]

tried the DW-S on test map, seemed very manageable for a stock mech, since it puts out gobs of heat with lgpulse, and 6 med pulse. had my eye on this mech for a while it was fun test driving it. still cant figure out why the PTS is not updating with my current warehouse of mechs.

[SkyHammyr]

The PTS is available. If we can't find a match, find a friend and do Private Matches (they give you a crapton of MC for that).

The Polls are up (Thank You, SirNotlag!). Cast a vote, say your peace if you have to and let PGI do their thing.

Us chasing each other's tails raging and throwing PGI under the bus for trying to give us what we asked for (maybe not the way we asked for it) is counterproductive.

Edited by SkyHammr, 18 October 2015 - 08:56 AM.

[Summon3r]

sycocys, on 16 October 2015 - 06:27 PM, said:

Unfortunate side effect of non-testing rage clowns to some degree I suspect.

(should be needless to say,but this isn't directed towards you.)

or an unfortunate side effect of an extremely small player base

[Thorqemada]

An ~hour ago i toyed a little arouind on the PTS with my Atlasses and Q was Zero - no Server Ping and no Server Choice also...all Servers dark.

[rolly]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 October 2015 - 06:33 PM, said:

multi tiered problem.

1) Non testing rage clowns
2) General community apathy
3) No tangible incentive to test. "Altruism" seldom works on the Intrawebz.
4) Extreme hassle. As outlined in my Topics. Since a huge part of the test is specific to clan lasers, was incumbent to test Clan mechs. Since I don't own any, had to buy a set. No biggy, it's free, tons of MC, Cbills, XP, etc. The you get to unlock all your skill trees in PGIs slow as mud UI. Same with Modules. Etc. Why? Because if you don't play them like you would in a live match, the info is useless. After an hour prepping Executioners, spent the next hour getting no match. Add into that things like people having to download it, and patch it, on limited bandwidths, etc, and you get limited participation.
5) Because those people using Premium time do not get reimbursed for time spent on PTS that could have been played live.
6) Because PGI is too thick to incentivize it by making it an event where players get to keep cbills, xp, rewards etc, which WOULD have drawn large crowds.....and literally cost PGI nothing.

So, yeah, like you, I tried it early in the week, and aside from having to relearn unquirked mechs, liked it.

But that is just a few WHYS that it is failing.

THIS. Hear hear.

Once the I read the initial change reviews of others and the general sentiment, I really don't feel any agency to participate in the PTS.
It is a waste of download time, won't get me anywhere and whatever I may think, the folks of PGI won't give a lick on my review, and will in all likelihood do whatever Russ or Paul fits with their personal image of how umpteenth reiteration of MW:O will be. If there was actual return and a sense of agency, (Ie. My contribution matters to the wellbeing, viability and growth of of this game, rather than what I'm willing to part from my wallet...) then perhaps I would have.

It wouldn't have hurt them to transfer over GXP earned, or say do another silly counting contest where if I did 100 play tests I get 100 MC or a free set of Clan ER lasers.

[Foxfire kadrpg]

The backwoods I live in can only provide me 256 KILObytes per second download. Just no time to set aside for a PTS.