92 replies to this topic

[Sarlic]

It aint that hard to come up with cool and fun gamemodes.

Conquest is the most fun one. But then again: its still running from point to point without any immersion.

Assault and Skirmish are incredible shallow.

If they would for example expand the Assault gamemode with real worth mentioning bases and add A.I. controlled infanteries, tanks and air then we would have different view on the word Assaulting. (Think C.W. away for a moment, because that one is even more shallow)

I dont like having two bases as well but that's a different topic.

Simple gamemodes have been terrible from the start. Adding and removing turrets was something which started up as a nice idea but the excecution was more of annoyance and bad.

Edited by Sarlic, 25 November 2015 - 08:19 AM.

[l33tworks]

Depends where you play, what time and what PSR you are I guess, since I'm waiting around 5-15 minutes on Oceanic now but it was less before the whole PSR thing.

The whole "Get matches in seconds" doesn't happen for me. But I am certainly worst possible case scenario. For 80% of people Im sure the wait times and balance have been much better.

I feel they increased the time it takes the flood gates to open. Personally I don't care too much about "balanced matches as long as I get to play. The current system is ok I guess as long as there are enough players but it takes a bit too long sometimes on oceanic. Maybe they need to reduce the flood gate time by 20%.

[Mystere]

oldradagast, on 25 November 2015 - 07:22 AM, said:

Nobody is blasting teamwork.

What we have blasted in CW over and over again is the idiocy of pitting full-size teams against randoms, PUG's, and small casual groups. That's just stupid. Imagine if professional sports worked like that, with a professional team vs. a few random guys from the audience and a few people chosen at random from other teams. People would be right to complain, but it's not about "evil teamwork," but the idiocy of creating a format with zero matchmaking that encourages seal-clubbing and pointless stomps.

As someone who only drops solo, I disagree with you. CW is supposed to be a quasi-simulation of war, not a sport. As such, if your ragtag militia suddenly finds itself facing crack troops from Clan "I climbed out of Hell just to eat you alive", better toughen up and bring out your A game, including taking command if need be.

Also note that MWO, and especially Community Warfare, is nowhere near close to professional sports, so that analogy does not fly with me.

Having said that, there are options to soften the blow, like more imaginative game modes, carefully designed bases, as well as game play depth. In short, both sides of a CW battle do not necessarily have to be the same.

And finally, do not bring eSports into Community Warfare. Restrict that to a Solaris mode.

What we have now is not even a skeleton of what can be.

Edited by Mystere, 25 November 2015 - 08:42 AM.

[Mystere]

Dodger79, on 25 November 2015 - 08:05 AM, said:

I won't disagree with you at this point. But the way it is now it is PGIs fault that slightly more complex game modes are just played like another variant of skirmish because they made it more appealing to just stomp and shoot around then to use diverse tactics to achieve an objective the one way or another. They dumbed it down.

They indirectly dumbed it down by lowering rewards due to the crying zombies.

I bet you if capping rewarded 1,000,000 c-bills and being capped removed all rewards with the exception of a lump of coal, the game play dynamics would be entirely different.

[Jon Gotham]

oldradagast, on 25 November 2015 - 07:22 AM, said:

Nobody is blasting teamwork.

What we have blasted in CW over and over again is the idiocy of pitting full-size teams against randoms, PUG's, and small casual groups. That's just stupid. Imagine if professional sports worked like that, with a professional team vs. a few random guys from the audience and a few people chosen at random from other teams. People would be right to complain, but it's not about "evil teamwork," but the idiocy of creating a format with zero matchmaking that encourages seal-clubbing and pointless stomps.

Not everyone has the time, reflexes, meta-mechs, or number of real-world friends who are into MWO (and online at the same time) to form a good team, and many people have zero interest in jointing a huge group of total unknowns in an effort to "prove themselves worthy." Sure, we can say "to heck with them - they should stay out of CW!" but leaves very few players left playing that format in a game that is already starved for players. Not a smart business decision, IMHO.

Sadly your post proved me very much right:( You are EXACTLY stating why so many have issues in CW. Maybe the 4v4 mode will help players such as yourself, but I fear it'll be even worse for you. When it's just FOUR on each "team" teamwork is EVEN MORE VITAL.
Personally I agree- PGI's decision making towards their playerbase is severely flawed. You need to retain the players that spend the money-not the ones that flit in and out and might spend the odd $10. Wether the spenders consist of pro solo anti groupers, or those short on time or the rest of us. But as the CW is currently designed around teamwork-it's 100% down the players wether they suffer or enjoy the mode. The responsibility for that is on you not PGI. Use voip, Ts whatever-talk make friends and adjust your attitude towards "unknowns" and groups.
Anyway this was of topic-but once again I saw the pugs/groups spat and had to bite, I'm sick of it.


Mystere is a solo with the right stuff-many could learn from him and his thinking.

Edited by kamiko kross, 25 November 2015 - 10:34 AM.

[WarHippy]

Mystere, on 25 November 2015 - 08:28 AM, said:

They indirectly dumbed it down by lowering rewards due to the crying zombies.

I bet you if capping rewarded 1,000,000 c-bills and being capped removed all rewards with the exception of a lump of coal, the game play dynamics would be entirely different.

That is pretty much what I have said for a long time about Assault. Give people real reasons to go for the cap while also making it a significant risk to not be ready for the enemy capping you. Honestly, they could have done all sorts of number tweaks that would have required little effort on their part to try and improve player distribution before resorting to hostage taking in the form of a vote.

[adamts01]

Tarogato, on 25 November 2015 - 07:44 AM, said:

Conclusion:
Switching to gamemode voting hasn't really helped. Time spent between matches is still the same. Any time saved by finding faster matches is now spent sitting in a voting screen waiting for it to countdown.

You're wait times weren't effected. Ok, there are other people on this planet who might have different results. Mine dropped from an average of 12 minutes to 5. Your results clearly don't speak for everyone.

Dodger79, on 25 November 2015 - 05:11 AM, said:

Why are people so pi**ed off when a Light wins an assault match by capping? Because it was a waste of time waiting for a match, voting, readying up and running around for 3 minutes without a real fight just to earn 30k CB for a cap win.

I can't comprehend why PGI hasn't done this. They punish you for completing the objective.

KahnWongFuChung, on 25 November 2015 - 08:09 AM, said:

OP The whole problem is the vote system and the report system were not needed features in MWO.

The report feature is pretty nice. I've used it 3 times so far. One guy went Yolo in his cheetah, came back all beat up, yelling at us for not backing him up then overheated. The other two were just punks walking around randomly shooting teammates. I've emailed support 2 times over the past 3 years about team killing and figured nothing would happen with it so never bothered again. This had to be a more reliable system for them. It had exact match and zero room for error as far as player recognition. I don't hear people talking about it at all, you'd think you'd hear something if it were being widely abused.

[Dodger79]

Mystere, on 25 November 2015 - 08:22 AM, said:

As someone who only drops solo, I disagree with you. CW is supposed to be a quasi-simulation of war, not a sport. As such, if your ragtag militia suddenly finds itself facing crack troops from Clan "I climbed out of Hell just to eat you alive", better toughen up and bring out your A game, including taking command if need be.

Also note that MWO, and especially Community Warfare, is nowhere near close to professional sports, so that analogy does not fly with me.

Having said that, there are options to soften the blow, like more imaginative game modes, carefully designed bases, as well as game play depth. In short, both sides of a CW battle do not necessarily have to be the same.

And finally, do not bring eSports into Community Warfare. Restrict that to a Solaris mode.

What we have now is not even a skeleton of what can be.

I think you are forgetting a very, very important fact: this might be a game about war and has slightest ambitions towards being a simulation, but after all it is a game. And as a game it should be fun to play. Getting stomped constantly because of matching full groups of competetive players agains pugs isn't fun. Therefore the low population in CW. You simply cannot get someone into it with these kinds of experiences...

[Mystere]

Dodger79, on 25 November 2015 - 11:13 AM, said:

I think you are forgetting a very, very important fact: this might be a game about war and has slightest ambitions towards being a simulation, but after all it is a game. And as a game it should be fun to play. Getting stomped constantly because of matching full groups of competetive players agains pugs isn't fun. Therefore the low population in CW. You simply cannot get someone into it with these kinds of experiences...

Hence this:

Mystere, on 25 November 2015 - 08:22 AM, said:

Having said that, there are options to soften the blow, like more imaginative game modes, carefully designed bases, as well as game play depth. In short, both sides of a CW battle do not necessarily have to be the same.

So, no, I did not forget the fun aspect.

[fogsworth]

As a new player I'm usually in a game in less than 30 seconds when I play during prime time Pacific. This is solo queue quick match.

Edited by fogsworth, 25 November 2015 - 12:42 PM.

[Ted Wayz]

adamts01, on 23 November 2015 - 06:45 PM, said:

My priority is getting better matched teams, which is currently better than ever from what I've experienced. Not to mention drastically lowered wait times. I don't mind conquest and assault when I have a competent team, which I've been getting more frequently now. I think map and mode should be completely random but as it is there's a good diversity.

I spent 2 years playing the game probably 12 hours a week till I logged on to the forum. Thinking those forum polls represent the player base is ridiculous.

The voting system was terrible, the weighted voting system give people who like conquest a chance. And if there happens to be no one who wants conquest, then it won't be played. Seems pretty fair to me.

MM didn't change. You shouldn't draw conclusions that map voting has in any way improved MM. Wait times can change but the quality of the matches are still based on the old MM system.

Yes, I do think player polls with more than 200 votes represent the player base. How many players do you think there are and do you know about sampling?

And what about a system where you choose the game mode you want. Then your chance of getting what you want is 100% and I don't have to subsidize your wait times for playing a minority game mode. You know, like how it was just a over a month ago.

Edited by Ted Wayz, 25 November 2015 - 01:15 PM.

[adamts01]

Ted Wayz, on 25 November 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

MM didn't change.

mm didn't change but the fact that it has more players to choose from means it has more to work with. I've consistently seen wait times more than halved since voting. From 15 minutes down to 5. I'd personally want a little more time to be taken to find better matches but at least the wait times are less. My normally pissy attitude has improved as it's much easier to shrug off the 12-0 stomps now that there's more than 2 matches an hour. It's been a whole day since I've started a MM rage post! This is big news guys!

[Naduk]

It does depend greatly at what time of day your playing
But for me and my unit mates the story is the sane
We would spend anywhere up-to 45mins in que for a single match
Usually end up fighting a team of god's like house of lords vs me and my legit t5 nublets
Needless to say we often ended up back in que 2mins later
Only to face the same team 45mins of waiting later
We always ran all modes and all servers selected

Now we often get insta drops and Max wait is about 5mins
The new system is fantastic
I'm more than happy to sacrifice mode selection to A: actually get matches and B: get matches where my team have a good time