41 replies to this topic

[TTDeadsayer]

I still don't understand how "vote farming" is a problem.

[AngelusDD]

Votes should be locked, but only after you had 2 vote chances (incase any one clicked wrong)

[Kaeb Odellas]

I like vote farming. The only maps I hate are Alpine and Terra Therma, so farming votes lets me avoid those maps entirely.

[Mechteric]

I think the only change that should be made is to not be able to see other peoples' votes in real time. That would make it a more pleasant experience.

Maybe they can just show a number with how many total have voted in real time instead (without giving away what they voted for)?

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 05 January 2016 - 08:14 AM.

[BlackHeroe]

I already suggested a Pre-drop voting, not only that this silly vote farm game ends, it also would help us all save time!

http://mwomercs.com/...17#entry4812417

[spartync]

Invisible votes would make life A LOT easier for us all. The vote manipulation game, or the bouncing 5x voter that just creates chaos would simply go away. Also ... shorten the time to vote. If you abstain from voting, you lose your multiplier. Those would be some of my changes.

Nice poll and topic.

[TTDeadsayer]

I think the voting system is fine except that it should only be for the map. Players should be able to select which game mode(s) they want to play like before the voting was implemented. In order to reduce this "vote farming" (which I still don't think is a problem) maybe the multiplier could be reset every 12 hours or something. I've noticed that that might already be the case but I'm not sure. Or maybe if you haven't logged in in a couple of days your multiplier is reset. This might also be the case already.

As for the vote farming itself, it's almost like a mini game for me, as I don't often really care which map or game mode I play, I just see how high I can get my multiplier for something to do while I wait. Once my multiplier gets high enough then I might decide to choose which map and game mode I want to play. As I mentioned before, In order to intentionally get your multiplier high enough to make a real difference you need to play a whole lot of matches that aren't the ones you voted for. Would someone please explain to me why "vote farming" is a problem?

[White Bear 84]

The voting mini game is ridiculous. While not necessarily for hiding vote %, they should be a one-shot consumable that is used once and once only so people cannot farm the system to either

1. trick players into selection a different map.

2. Get high votes to get what they want.

[RoboGerbil]

Try playing tier 5. Nothing but alpine, frozen city and river city nonstop. Hope you like snow, cuz thats all we got.

[Farix]

I do not see a problem with vote "farming". It allows all players to eventually get the maps and modes that they want. I love conquest, but most players tend to vote for another mode. When the choices is between Assault or Skirmish, I will go with whichever mode will increase my multiplier so I will have a better chance at Conquest later. As for maps, I love trolling other people with Terra Therma. It's actually not a bad map even if I believe the volcano should be reworked to allow better routes to flank the enemy without completely withdrawing from the center. And since I tend to build my mechs to have heat efficiency rating of 1.3 or better and stagger my weapons groups, I don't have the problems with overheating on the hot maps that most experience.

Edited by Farix, 09 January 2016 - 10:16 AM.

[Generic Internetter]

Think about map and mode in the context of the game universe, IE: The lore.
Since when do warriors get to choose where a battle will be fought, or what kind of battle it will be?!

Voting should be removed entirely. Let it be entirely 100% random map and mode.
That's more relistic, and more true to the lore and game universe.

All this chat about voting, multipliers, etc... Just nonsense. PGI pls remove voting.
"MechWarrior, you should be ready to face the enemy anytime, anywhere!"

If this sounds too far-fetched for you, then think about CW. You get very little choice or voice to attack/defend/counter-attack (only what is available and with good numbers), and you have NO input or vote for which map you will land on.

Edited by Generic Internetter, 09 January 2016 - 06:10 PM.

[VixNix]

Generic Internetter, on 09 January 2016 - 06:09 PM, said:

Think about map and mode in the context of the game universe, IE: The lore.
Since when do warriors get to choose where a battle will be fought, or what kind of battle it will be?!

Voting should be removed entirely. Let it be entirely 100% random map and mode.
That's more relistic, and more true to the lore and game universe.

All this chat about voting, multipliers, etc... Just nonsense. PGI pls remove voting.
"MechWarrior, you should be ready to face the enemy anytime, anywhere!"

If this sounds too far-fetched for you, then think about CW. You get very little choice or voice to attack/defend/counter-attack (only what is available and with good numbers), and you have NO input or vote for which map you will land on.

I think this is backward, you as a soldier don't get to choose where you battle but the commanders do and the required gear and training is supplied for that.

Especially if you are there as defenders.

I think the game type should go back to being a choice.

I don't mind voting for MAP, but, I think it would be great if you could save some (2 or 3) load out variations, that way when the vote is settled you can then select the load out you want for that map.

IF you were standing guard in the arctic you would not be doing it in shorts and a t-shirt!

[TTDeadsayer]

White Bear 84, on 06 January 2016 - 03:26 PM, said:

The voting mini game is ridiculous. While not necessarily for hiding vote %, they should be a one-shot consumable that is used once and once only so people cannot farm the system to either

1. trick players into selection a different map.

2. Get high votes to get what they want.

1. Trick players into selecting a different map? That doesn't even make sense. People will select what they want to play.

2. I takes a lot of playing maps that you "don't want" to get your multiplier high enough to dictate which map/game mode you end up playing. Eventually getting what you want is the whole purpose of the vote multiplier in the first place.

I agree that game mode should be a choice with the check boxes as it used to be.

Edited by TTDeadsayer, 12 January 2016 - 12:51 PM.

[VixNix]

TTDeadsayer, on 12 January 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

1. Trick players into selecting a different map? That doesn't even make sense. People will select what they want to play.

2. I takes a lot of playing maps that you "don't want" to get your multiplier high enough to dictate which map/game mode you end up playing. Eventually getting what you want is the whole purpose of the vote multiplier in the first place.

I agree that game mode should be a choice with the check boxes as it used to be.

To your first point, most people select the map type that will get them one more notch on their vote multiplier.

Your second point is accurate.

if votes were invisible and locked then eventually people would get to play the map they wanted to, maybe some day...

[White Bear 84]

TTDeadsayer, on 12 January 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

1. Trick players into selecting a different map? That doesn't even make sense. People will select what they want to play. 2. I takes a lot of playing maps that you "don't want" to get your multiplier high enough to dictate which map/game mode you end up playing. Eventually getting what you want is the whole purpose of the vote multiplier in the first place. I agree that game mode should be a choice with the check boxes as it used to be.

Firstly people switch votes at the last minute to do just that. Heavy weighing towards TT? Players might follow highest number of votes on a particular colder map to avoid TT, then at last minute said player drops vote from TT to a lower vote map - players get the colder map option and said farmer gets another multiplier..

Yes but half the time you can still vote for a map you do not want, because enough people are likely to have voted for your map or a map you are happy to play anyway.. ..so you put your vote on another map, build up the multiplier and save it for the instances where you don't get what you want. You don't get every map you 'want' but you can potentially create a better situation for yourself in playing your preferred maps.

At the end of the day its all just manipulating the voting to get higher multipliers..

Edited by White Bear 84, 12 January 2016 - 03:33 PM.

[TTDeadsayer]

VixNix, on 12 January 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

To your first point, most people select the map type that will get them one more notch on their vote multiplier.

Clearly that's not the case since most people vote for the map that gets played, because that's how voting works, and then their multiplier is reset to 1x.

White Bear 84, on 12 January 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

Firstly people switch votes at the last minute to do just that. Heavy weighing towards TT? Players might follow highest number of votes on a particular colder map to avoid TT, then at last minute said player drops vote from TT to a lower vote map - players get the colder map option and said farmer gets another multiplier..

I still don't understand the problem with that. Either the colder map will be played even if the farmer doesn't switch votes anyway because more people voted for it and the farmer will get another multiplier regardless, or said farmer is switching votes and giving people who don't want to play TT what they want and getting a multiplier. The only way the farmer's vote would make enough of a difference to cause the situation you describe is if he already had a significantly high multiplier and was voting for TT originally.The only problem there is everyone wants to avoid TT, which goes deeper than vote farming and says more about the people playing the game or Terra Therma itself.

White Bear 84, on 12 January 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

Yes but half the time you can still vote for a map you do not want, because enough people are likely to have voted for your map or a map you are happy to play anyway.. ..so you put your vote on another map, build up the multiplier and save it for the instances where you don't get what you want. You don't get every map you 'want' but you can potentially create a better situation for yourself in playing your preferred maps.

Again: so? voting on a map that won't get played is still giving the majority of voters what they voted for whether you're happy with that selection or not. So you're raising your multiplier so you can decide which map you want to play once in a while. Big deal. The number of maps/game modes you get to dictate is still proportionally pretty damn small compared to the number of matches you have to play where you don't decide which map/game mode gets chosen.

All I see is a whole lot of qq over nothing.

Edited by TTDeadsayer, 13 January 2016 - 01:02 PM.

[VixNix]

TTDeadsayer, on 13 January 2016 - 12:24 PM, said:

<SNIP>
All I see is a whole lot of qq over nothing.

Really?

[Azurhoden]

Remove the detestable voting system altogether.

It's horrible, just remove it please.

[Azurhoden]

LoL. I love it when people want to compare the game to "real" soldiers.

Generic Internetter, on 09 January 2016 - 06:09 PM, said:

Think about map and mode in the context of the game universe, IE: The lore.
Since when do warriors get to choose where a battle will be fought, or what kind of battle it will be?!

Voting should be removed entirely. Let it be entirely 100% random map and mode.

Now the removing part I agree with, but the 100% random part I do not agree with at all.

Generic Internetter, on 09 January 2016 - 06:09 PM, said:

That's more relistic, and more true to the lore and game universe.

All this chat about voting, multipliers, etc... Just nonsense. PGI pls remove voting.
"MechWarrior, you should be ready to face the enemy anytime, anywhere!"

Yes, but only if they are going to get to pick what equipment they are using for that battlefield. But if that happened you'd never see another laser vomit in Terra Therma ever again.

And while commanders do decide what battle fields are a soldiers target, um, typically, commanders don't just send troops into combat zones where the odds are evenly stacked. That's kind of the point about looking for a weakness, either by superior numbers, or by surprise attacks, neither of which means anything to this game. So most times you'll not see 12 v 12 anything (skirmish, conquest, assault) in anything resembling an actual battle. What commander is so stupid at to attack a solid front, when the enemy knows you are coming? Or when you have a better angle of attack that limits your exposure? Or when you can feint with a scout lance and move the heavies in from another direction. But NONE of that has any meaning to a game where 24 idiots line up on either side of a field and basically play Cyber-Ball without the good graces of actually having a ball. So lets get this idiotic notion that this game is in any way, shape, or form, based on a "realistic" military experience out of your heads right now. Nothing about this as a military experience makes any sense, so barking about where/how soldiers get to fight is kinda... well lets just say there are better arguments to be made and leave it at that.

Another interesting inconsistency, for example, where the lore is concerned, is that it was common for bidding out combat, by weight, as a means of honorable clan interactions before a battle. This was due to a heavy belief in an honor system amoung the clans. But of course the Inner Sphere was less honoable. Because of this, there was a huge distinction between mechs when it came to capabilities, thus leading to numerical differences when mechs were fielded in a clan versus inner sphere battle.

It was not uncommon to see several more IS mechs on the field than Clan mechs, but then it was also common to see clan mechs mow down IS mechs like a hot knife through butter, thus leading to the inner shere basically trying to zerg rush clan mechs when ever they encountered them. But that, even though a solid part of the lore, will never be reflected in this game.

And even if we ignore the lore, there are still some basic things about combat that make these mechs idioticly obsolete. When I can sit in a naval vessel 5 miles of the coast, push one button that launches a missile, which then travels 25 miles inland and comes out of the sky right on top of your lance (with enough non-nuclear explosive power to make your 100+ CT armor look like paper mache) and I can fire one of those a second for 30 seconds before having to reload the magazine to do it again, yeah, your stand up pop toy is about meaningless. But then those kinds of machines don't exist in this game, even if the lore says certain factions would do that sort of thing... from space, where a grounded battlemech is pretty much useless. So any argument about intelligent stragtegies like that are out the window, because every match is 12 vs 12. So, yeah, the lore... not really a thing here (not unless PGI can expoit it for cash, like making the unseen mechs part of the game).

And people may be correct when they say soldiers don't get to choose where they want to be deployed, but they do get issued equipment geared toward the combat environment they are being deployed in. PGI cannot allow that kind of versatility in their game because it will be "giving away the farm" to use an old metaphor. Free things don't make money, and PGI doens't have Blizzard's resources or we would all have the game we wanted and then some.

The voting system is just more of the same bad decisions. Bad because it is aimed, not at making a better, funner, more interesing game, but squarely at pulling in that almighty dollar. And the sad part is that the game playing community is made up of far to many who just want an easy, quick fix, rather than an involved experience. The Call-of-Duty kiddys rule the gaming world now: they are easily impressed, and fixated, they don't demand too terribly much, and they have a great deal of disposable income... or what PGI calls the "perfect customer".

Live and Learn or You don't Live long

[VinJade]

The problem is the very fact you can 'vote' on something.
I have gotten Terra therma a few times and it is one of my most hated maps.
To be honest they should just have a system that allows players to opt out of matches and or maps.. oh wait they did have that(well the opt out of mission) and it allowed players to not go into a mission they didn't like.

Hell as it is we have players killing themselves or just flat out disconnecting from the match because they hate the map and mission that they was forced in to joining.

so instead of something like this we need to have a system that allows you to rank maps and missions with like & dislikes to check to make some maps & missions rare.

That would solve so problems by weeding out those that don't want to be in that map/mode.