10 replies to this topic

[RussianWolf]

So I logged in last night to see what the fuss was about.

I didn't mind the voting screen, but it seemed to be over pretty quick. Not sure if there is a timer of if it simply stops at the 24 votes. Might be nice to see how many votes have come in.

But I had to apologize in one match.

I'm running stock urbies and they picked Conquest. Needless to say, I wasn't sprinting around with the battles. I normally have conquest turned off when I'm running mechs that can't do at least 60kph (better 80+, but I'm a glutton for punishment)

And then, the next match they chose........ Alpine (chatted that I hated everyone). Well, I made it in time to be the last mech on my team.

3 matches. 1 Conquest, 2 Skirmish
3 matches. 1 Alpine, 2 Canyon

I really miss the ability to select a game mode based on the mech. As I told my team in that conquest match, I would never select conquest while running a Stock Urbie as I was.

I don't mind the map selection so much, but it does mean that you will likely not see some of the less popular maps very much any longer. Random was likely a better option for that.

Edited by RussianWolf, 06 November 2015 - 07:39 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

I would love to go back to totally random, slam it all together and go.

That said, voting is not horrible, if it speeds up matches, but I want to see random incentives placed on maps, so that one might have a reason to choose a hot map over a col one, a crowded one over a flat one, etc.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

I for one wont be playing this game as long as theyve removed our choices as players.

punishing us because they dont have more players is not how to GET more players

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 06 November 2015 - 07:37 AM.

[RussianWolf]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 November 2015 - 07:36 AM, said:

I would love to go back to totally random, slam it all together and go.

That said, voting is not horrible, if it speeds up matches, but I want to see random incentives placed on maps, so that one might have a reason to choose a hot map over a col one, a crowded one over a flat one, etc.

That brings up a nice idea there Bishop

Instead of "voting" make it "bidding on a contract"

Have each map have a cbill value attached to it that is variable based on the 1)heat, 2)visibility 3)current popularity (low heat, high visibility, high popularity would be worth the least)

And ditto on the match type based on popularity only there.

The "contract" cbills should be a guarantee payout win or loss.

[Tyler Valentine]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 06 November 2015 - 07:37 AM, said:

I for one wont be playing this game as long as theyve removed our choices as players.

punishing us because they dont have more players is not how to GET more players

I don't think they are punishing us, just limiting options so they can add more game modes.

New game modes coming Soon™!!!

[Tordin]

I liked it when it was Random. The the meta heads, try hards, evernoobs (newbies that never learn or wont) and codder (those that only play if they need a different but similar FPS like kick) HAD to play those "less" pupular maps. They could always quit the match, but well.. free kill for those that stayed.

This democrazy voting thingy sounds good on paper. But I rather would adapt to the maps and force myself to be good on the not so optimal maps.

[cSand]

Agree with Tordin.


This voting system is sh*te

[Felbombling]

The big thing is the game mode select. The map selection is a form of appeasement to curb what happened last time when they took away game mode selection... which was everyone having a hissy fit. This is not a massive player base, and when you have the players split between 10 factions playing community warfare, group players in the group queue and PuG players doing the solo thing, I can imagine the match maker has a hard time filling all those buckets in a timely fashion.

So, accept shorter queue times with more evenly distributed teams, or go back to longer wait times with more mismatched teams but with control over game mode.

[WarHippy]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 November 2015 - 07:36 AM, said:

I would love to go back to totally random, slam it all together and go.

That said, voting is not horrible, if it speeds up matches, but I want to see random incentives placed on maps, so that one might have a reason to choose a hot map over a col one, a crowded one over a flat one, etc.

All random would be better than this, but still not something I would want.

As for speeding up matches I'm not seeing it. I'm getting in matches just as fast as I did when I was selecting only assault and conquest. I'm also not sure how much incentives are going to help when some just don't care about the rewards, and some will realize they can still get more rewards on colder maps since they can fire more instead of a hotter map that is getting a paltry bonus.

[DAYLEET]

RussianWolf, on 06 November 2015 - 07:31 AM, said:

So I logged in last night to see what the fuss was about.

I didn't mind the voting screen, but it seemed to be over pretty quick. Not sure if there is a timer of if it simply stops at the 24 votes. Might be nice to see how many votes have come in.

But I had to apologize in one match.

I'm running stock urbies and they picked Conquest. Needless to say, I wasn't sprinting around with the battles. I normally have conquest turned off when I'm running mechs that can't do at least 60kph (better 80+, but I'm a glutton for punishment)

And then, the next match they chose........ Alpine (chatted that I hated everyone). Well, I made it in time to be the last mech on my team.

3 matches. 1 Conquest, 2 Skirmish
3 matches. 1 Alpine, 2 Canyon

I really miss the ability to select a game mode based on the mech. As I told my team in that conquest match, I would never select conquest while running a Stock Urbie as I was.

I don't mind the map selection so much, but it does mean that you will likely not see some of the less popular maps very much any longer. Random was likely a better option for that.

I felt like gamemode was mostly fine without being able to chose it, as opposed to map that i can't stand to see over and over, but you made me realise otherwise.

[WarHippy]

StaggerCheck, on 06 November 2015 - 09:26 AM, said:

The big thing is the game mode select. The map selection is a form of appeasement to curb what happened last time when they took away game mode selection... which was everyone having a hissy fit. This is not a massive player base, and when you have the players split between 10 factions playing community warfare, group players in the group queue and PuG players doing the solo thing, I can imagine the match maker has a hard time filling all those buckets in a timely fashion.

How is map voting an appeasement? I want nothing to do with map voting or game mode voting. You want people to play all of the modes? Make them worthwhile and enjoyable to play so that people actually want to play them instead of forcing them to play them.

StaggerCheck, on 06 November 2015 - 09:26 AM, said:

So, accept shorter queue times with more evenly distributed teams, or go back to longer wait times with more mismatched teams but with control over game mode.

Queues don't seem any different to me, nor do the quality of teams. Even if the vote system improved those things in a way that is actually noticeable I would gladly forgo shorter wait times and marginally better balanced teams in order to play the modes I want on all of the maps. A very minor improvement to MM and queue times is simply not worth the loss of enjoyment.