21 replies to this topic

[Kdogg788]

A long time ago there was a dream that was CW. I would see pictures of MPBT 3025, a game that I would never be able to try after MPBT Solaris, and hope that we would have something similar. The presentation was hopeful and optimistic, yet when the day came, the game map and its singular mode were a huge letdown. Now we are hopefully getting Phase 3 at some point in the near future. Here is a short list of things I would like to see.

1. Reduction of attack/defend lanes.

There are WAY too many attack/defend planets available for a given faction spreading the thing CW population out among some 20+ planets. Most of them always have zeroes beside their names. Consolidate the lanes for more focused action.

2. Reduce the number of factions at war with at a given time.

At the moment every faction is conceivably at war with every other. At no point in the Battletech timeline was this ever true. Even if they need to appoint people from PGI to oversee this, let's have each faction at war with two or three enemies at most, therefore focusing their efforts on a singular front.

3. Introduce matchmaker in CW.

CW should have a matchmaker option for quickest match and also a solo queue whereby the solo players, especially those unaffiliated will have super quick drop times.

4. Introduce rewards for planet capture/remove unit tags.

The current system whereby units can tag planets is nonsensical, especially given the fact the multiple units contribute to almost every singular victory. Reward the participating players of a victorious planetary campaign with a small bonus (maybe even timed) to reward their efforts.

5. Introduce two to three more game modes.

Introduce more game modes to give them planet capture more meaning. The orbital gun, a factory, a spaceport, a capital city, etc. should be the eventual goal of the campaign and not a feature that appears in every skirmish.

6. Give planets hot/temperate/cool aesthetics.

Planets should be given a designation according to type with map weighting accordingly. On top of this short descriptions should be given in the planet load screen with lore on that planet. Planets can also be given differing weight limit restrictions to increase strategic thinking and options.

7. Increase rewards for perma loyal units.

House units should see higher rewards for their loyalty to their cause. At this time, no incentive is given for them to stay with their house with units loyal to a house for many years, including mine considering IS tours to gather low hanging CW fruits.

8 Increase number of maps (*noiRaven) *EDIT

We need more maps and more variety of maps of course. If a base is not involved, there should be no need for "lane" play. Multiple maps with like map assets should also be prioritized. They promised this years ago and it has yet to happen.

9. Modify rewards by contract length: EDIT 11/10/15

Apply a modifier dependent on contract length with rewards being successively higher with longer and longer contracts to rewards units for their loyalty. This is a VERY easy change they can do right now.

That is all. Thank you for reading, and hopefully we see a better CW and a better game.

-k

Edited by Kdogg788, 10 November 2015 - 12:34 PM.

[noiRaven]

Increasing the number of maps and their dependence on the planet, it seems worthwhile to also include =)

[Kdogg788]

Added for you as the 8th item. Thank you. Hoping someone sees this.

-k

[Necromantion]

Can I be realistic and say youre going to be one sad boy on christmas day. Until PGI finds some developers who can see more than a few feet down the road in front of them and the ramifications of their decisions were going to keep up this three steps forward and then two back thing that keeps happening wasting consumer dollars on quick fixes

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Adding map variety and flagging planets to certain subsets of map selection is a fine idea.

4v4 will be key to increasing CW participation and making MWO far friendlier to small-group play.

Giving each faction a single attack lane is the most effective way of leveraging player populations.

Rewarding each player/unit that participated in a successful planet flip would not be amiss, though tagging a planet as "held by" a unit, with consequent long-term rewards that accrue for so long as that unit holds that planet does seem like a great way to keep units invested in the game, though I'd be tempted to revert any existing tags if the unit switches factions (they abandon their garrisons after the contract ends, so they shouldn't benefit from them as if they were still holding them).

Give Loyalist players significant advantages, potentially including vastly accelerated LP gains and possible even doing something like doubling all non-title awards earned through rank progression (double the mech bays, double the c-bills, etc.). They miss out on all the faction-hopping for low-tier reward farming that the big, fickle units take full advantage of. Give them something meaningful in return.

Make Instant Action 8v8 again, pushing 12-mans into CW, while making solo- and group-queue gameplay much more forgiving.

There are a lot of things besides these that PGI can do to help this game, from unit logistics to faction politics to who knows what else, but for Phase 3 I think the above would be a great start.

[Kdogg788]

I'm really hoping someone from PGI sees this. Another thing which may help is making certain "ticks" on the planetary capture, perhaps half of them use the CW drop ship mode and count for a greater percentage of the planet, while also having secondary 12v12 matches in the other game modes on standard maps which count as CW matches but do not have the same weight or rewards. Players could choose which type they want. Part of the reason CW stagnates is the shear length of the wait and game type. If there were recourse to faster match types and lower wait times, CW would be utilized much more.

-k

Edited by Kdogg788, 10 November 2015 - 05:46 AM.

[B 0 0 M E R]

When I see posts like this I hear music...

[Kdogg788]

If we're still around, then aren't we all? I've added a couple more things to the end and ultimately, the majority of these changes require a minimum of effort to have a great positive result. Some like added maps take much more time, obviously, but to implement the small changes would help right away.

-k

[Davegt27]

Nice to hear someone say what they would like to see


A lot of us have put down ideas/suggestions
Once I realized it takes months and months of hard programing work to make ideas reality
I backed off on the suggestions

I am pretty sure phase 3 plan of attack has already been decided


So let's start on phase 4

[theCheek]

Domo Arigato Kdogg. Good to see ideas over criticism in these forums.

I would add something which I have wanted for a long long time, and I am probably not the only one.

At present CW and Pugging/Group que are completely different entities. Understandable. But what if activity in CW would affect the financials of the players? For example, specific planets should be the hosts of specific factories/depot which hold the supply of a specific battlemech Ie: Planet David holds a factory for the Kuritan mech Jagermech.

If a house/clan captures david, then the C-Bill (or even MC) price for all Jagermechs shoud be discounted for members of that house. To reduce exploits, perhaps a unit/player must have a minimum time served with said house/clan before discount is available to them.

Can you image how much more relevant CW would become if we knew that each planet that we fight for/move towards would be affecting our wallets, virtual or otherwise?

[RustyBolts]

My only true hope for phase 3 is that there is a phase 3. Lets face it, at this point they could add an additional turret at the gates and call it phase 3 given PGI's track record.

[Djinnhammer]

100% with you OP except for the solo Q. We already have a solo Q in a multiplayer team game....maybe limit team sizes to lance level or 6 maybe but absolutely NOT solo Q for CW.
We should be encouraging teamplay not trying to kill it:)

[Kdogg788]

Cameron Kane, on 11 November 2015 - 05:10 AM, said:

100% with you OP except for the solo Q. We already have a solo Q in a multiplayer team game....maybe limit team sizes to lance level or 6 maybe but absolutely NOT solo Q for CW.
We should be encouraging teamplay not trying to kill it:)

@Cameron Kane: I have to respectfully agree and disagree. While it has been debated that solos should not be in CW, perhaps we need a separate solo queue. The gate check would be that the matchmaker only allow like numbers of players with same unit tags on the same side to discourage sync dropping and move these players more to the group queue. If a large group wants to sync, they may be in for a long wait. Solo and group queues would still be separated as they are now in public drops.

@TheCheek:I agree that there should be some bonuses, but only for participating players to prevent those not doing CW from gaining for nothing. At the same time, these bonuses should not be large, and should be capped at some point to prevent mass units such as MS from building up ridiculous bonus factors.

@DaveGT27: I understand that some things such as making new maps require a great deal of time and company assets, but many of the changes listed above can be done relatively easily and within the framework of the CW improvements that are supposed to be going on now.

-k

[Kdogg788]

After reading the wish lists of others and select topics in the GenDisc forum, I'd like to double down on the prediction that we really need a solo queue of some kind with check valves in place against unit syncs to make CW Phase 3 work. Without engaging the community, you will never have a community in CW. An allocation of planetary ticks should be reserved for solo players to queue up and drop immediately. This is even more important given an imminent Steam release where these players will want to jump in right away, which all games should give you the option to do so.

-k

[Black Ivan]

CW won't get a match maker Russ said. Not enough population to warrant the expenses.

[Kuritaclan]

noiRaven, on 09 November 2015 - 06:03 AM, said:

Increasing the number of maps and their dependence on the planet, it seems worthwhile to also include =)

Not as the latest Maps created are a mess for a competetiv view. Forest Colony looks pretty but plays sucky, since you don't see a ****. Don't need and wanna see such Maps in CW. As it stands there is enough MAP diffrence for not getting bored.

[Kyrie]

Has PGI described what CW phase 3 is about yet?

[ZenFool]

Black Ivan, on 17 November 2015 - 03:30 AM, said:

CW won't get a match maker Russ said. Not enough population to warrant the expenses.

This is only the case because of really poor management.

[iLLcapitan]

ZenFool, on 18 November 2015 - 05:54 PM, said:

This is only the case because of really poor management.

So your agenda is to pollute as many threads with your tears as you can?
Get a life.
Or.
Get better.

[Scanz]

i hope we can build drop ships using unit coffer and gain profit from planet assault