198 replies to this topic

[Surn]

1 mech 1 vote

Why do you hate democracy?

[White Bear 84]

SilentScreamer, on 17 November 2015 - 12:33 PM, said:

Jalibo has a good point. But not too long ago, MWO did not have either the checkboxes to guarantee specific game modes or voting.

How many players would rather go back to letting the computer decide? No voting, but no checkboxes either?

I look forward to voting #1 Troldor conquest just for those having a good ol whine!

[Dahkoht]

I fully plan on stuffing the ballot box for myself , as in if I see my map/type choice winning handily already , I'll vote for the lowest of both map/type and continue to do so until it's too close to attempt. Abstaining if my stuffed ballot box will sway it away from what I want.

Then when I need my 12 votes , BAM call in all the political favors and get my way single handedly. MUHAHAHHA.

[EAP10]

I think we should have 4v4 or 8v8 teams. Would help avoid the 'fun' times we all had deathballing. I played a round of conquest once where both teams had about four mechs left, and it was quite fun.

[Freo19]

New patch - new problems
Fix it!

[Phoenix Wolf]

After this patch voting became slightly better, but still s*cks. Majority of battles happened on the usual 4-5 maps, skirmishes mostly with the exception of some assaults. I have already forget, how to play conquests...This new system with the bonus points is easily exploitable, and that already resulted some interresting votes...

PGI, better ditch this map/gamemode voting. Replace it with a mech selection before the battle: choosing a mech from the same tonnage bracket for a randomly selected map - instead of voting on a map or mode. If you are too attached to your voting idea (I know, it's hard to facing the fact that ppl hate it (read your forum)), just create a "skip this map" like voting or at least don't give that many choices. Create more game modes to fill the game with content. That would be a more productive approach - not this rebalancing and constant tweeking of the system.

[metallio]

Honestly, I "really" like strategic game modes. Conquest is as close as we get so I'd like to see anything related bumped, but more objective maps with scenarios would be nice even if they end up being "blow up this thing" most of the time. I mean, we're walking tanks, we blow things up.

Skirmish is essentially all tactics. I like random maps there because you have to approach the game differently if you dropped in a mech that's a poor fit but w/e.

I wonder how many people figure out that what I'm doing in my Atlas is getting people's attention and drawing them away from an objective in Conquest. It's decisions like that that I find interesting in the game, not just which component should be shot. If I can sacrifice my mech to win the round I'm all for it, I like the opportunity for it to matter that I did something other than pull the trigger in just the right spot. So I like conquest. Would love to see it expanded and maybe have a progressive "story mode" style cap of worlds in CW with matches involving specific objectives leading up to a world capture. As worlds are captured you get C-bills or repairs or tonnage for drops allocated based on your faction's resources i.e. each world gives some base resource amount which is adjusted based on whether it was blown to hell in the capture or not, whether it's an occupied world or not, whether they're desperate or not (Clans cap more worlds, remaining IS gets more interested in defense etc) and supply lines etc. You could do all that without knowing the impact and it'd be fun playing just to see what happened. Maybe make it so you can't buy certain mechs unless you own a particular world where they're produced.

Look, there's bad ways to implement all of this, but I like the thinking part of battletech and much of that's lost in MWO because of the speed of the game. I'm not just ok with that, I like it. I've bought mechs and MC and played the crap out of the game. I'd just like it to show some life beyond what it is right now and I don't see that happening as nothing more than a shooter (skirmish mode). The alternative may not be great yet but it has to grow to become something else so killing it (conquest) just seems like a bad idea.

[Luscious Dan]

One of the solutions to map voting is coming up with a less random mix of maps. This stands out in my mind, because I remember a "more random" playlist option in iTunes at one point, where it specified it would actively avoid anything that looks like a pattern. For example, you might have 200 songs by U2 in your 1000 song playlist, so it's not unreasonable to hear a few U2 songs back to back. With "more random" checked, it would reduce the odds of playing songs from the same album/artist back to back, even though pure random chance says it should indeed happen regularly.

Anyway, back to the map rotation. If you had half the map combinations up for vote be truly random, and half of the map combinations be screened, then it will force more variation into the results. My suggestion would be to track which maps are most popular, and then group them together (popular vs. popular, unpopular vs. unpopular). Or group them together by theme (a bundle of re-done maps, a bundle of cold maps, a bundle of hot maps).

I think everyone can guess which one will win when it's HPG vs. Terra Therma. Voting between similar maps gives players a meaningful choice more often.

Edited by Luscious Dan, 17 November 2015 - 02:18 PM.

[wicm]

I want to see this game succeed . I enjoy it, and its the only one I play. That being said I would like to see some feedback from the devs..something that says to me that they even have a voice in the forums.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

To speak up for the rest of us, who just want good fights ...
... I will play any game mode ... I make C-Bills in all of them.
... I will play on any map ... you can do well on any of them except in the most specialized of builds.

If someone wants to play a specific game mode on a specific map, you have two choices ... wait your turn, or private lobby.

I want everyone who wants to play the game to be in the queues, because that helps the match maker do it's job, but if you're going to cry like entitled whiny children about playing conquest (or skirmish, or assault) on any particular map, maybe you should take a break.

We'll still be here waiting for you and playing the game.

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 17 November 2015 - 02:40 PM.

[-Ramrod-]

Sounds like a good patch. Only thing I have to say is King Crab Hero please! And maybe a Panther hero!!

[mad kat]

I'm gonna have to sit down.......no lie down to say this. Bear with me this is hard to say.......

......good ******* job on the c-bill buff. Bout bloody time. Well done PGI! My light mechs are revelling in glory even more.

On a side note the hit box thing doesn't seem to of made much difference but too early to tell.

[xXx_Bazooka_xXx]

Nice Work

[Kotev]

Very nice. Keep up the good work PGI.
GG!

[On1m]

Please go back to showing the team stats first. I literally do not care about my individual stats break down. I want to know how my team did and how I did compared to them. You could also give us a choice if you wanted to but please, for the love of the game, go back to showing team stats first.

[ph0tiC fENG]

CW unplayable; can't select mechs. so frustrating that... its better just to not play at all.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Nova's new hitboxes are a hard nerf! The side torsos are stalker sized now and with the Nova's armor they will come right off as soon as you show your opponent your side!

[troop1415]

Vote weighting is a neat idea, but leader voting in group is just bad. Please remove this stupid feature and allow each player to decide what he is voting for. Otherwise game is playing well right now. Please dont "fix" that in the next patch.

[Aedwynn]

Domenoth, on 17 November 2015 - 01:07 PM, said:

You keep saying this isn't a real life issue. How many basketball games can you play alone? It doesn't matter how many courts you have if each court only has 1 person on it and everyone refuses to lose "home court advantage". Without compromise no one gets to play anything. This definitely became a real world issue when the words "Online" and "multiplayer" got added to the name and description of MWO.

You're free to go if you want. But don't expect us to watch you leave and think "There goes the kind of person I want to be when I grow up."

Wrong. Everyone was ok with waiting longer to play their fav mode. Now that minority is forced to play majority's mode to shorten majority's wait times.
Old system prevented adding new modes? Blatant lie. There is a ton of successful games that allow player to choose game mode, not force it on player. Why? Because instead of "dropping what's not working" as you suggested, they fixed it. Instead of forcing everyone to play what they don't like they fixed those game modes so people like them. That's why this voting crap is not a step forward - it's another step backward - making even more players leave game when they could've brought more in.
If you group everyone on same court half of players will leave - and you'll be left with half empty court unable to play even that.

[Aedwynn]

If you really want to get rid of "buckets" and more even map/mode rotation just make it totally random instead of pretence democracy. Equal chance for each mode. Equal chance for each map. Weighted votes are just unneeded overcomplication of a simple system.

Edited by Aedwynn, 17 November 2015 - 08:48 PM.