522 replies to this topic

[StalaggtIKE]

Jenovah, on 05 January 2016 - 02:36 PM, said:

Yeah, no.... It makes sense that I get charged to play if you do as well. As in the houses are taxed from their loyalist pockets in order to pay for their "military/mech's" repair and pay for merc contracts. Or do you think you should run free drops as well as have PGI code for cbill drops into your factions "bank" to pay mercs?

First off, I'll be getting nothing free as I'm in a merc unit.

Quote

I'd love for R&R as a merc as long as all loyalists are being taxed in order to pay for their factions "business" dealings. But it requires an economy system.

Secondly - Sure, if it matters so much to you. House is taxed. Mercs have R&R. I just want incentives for the house units.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 05 January 2016 - 05:10 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Khereg, on 05 January 2016 - 03:34 PM, said:

I'm really half-kidding about the 10 unit loyalist thing, but it's really interesting to see the reaction.

I've got to say, something heavyhanded like this would tick off a LOT of people - not just us evil meanies in -MS-...

Any system will have an avenue for abuse and whatever framework is put in place, I suspect there will be both unintended consequences and some way of circumventing the intent.

I'm not saying we're over here cackling and rubbing our hands together at the prospect, just that we're not a pile of idiots and we like dropping together and earning c-bills. Whatever happens, we'll find a way to do those things and I think a significant number of people aren't going to like that.

Let me ask you this...what if, horror of horrors, being a merc unit becomes so onerous a burden that even -MS- doesn't want to do it any more? What if we join a faction as a loyalist unit (or set of units) and proceed to sweep over the entire map?

That would be awesome because then other groups can coordinate to beat you. The problem is that since mercs, which is most players, are utterly transient you can't make lasting goals or strats. Imagine if you had no way of knowing until you dropped if it was a group queue drop or a CW drop and teams ranged from 4v4 to 12v12 with respawn or even what world. If it was a group queue drop it took 1 mech at random from your drop deck.

End result? Everyone just brings GPS mechs because there is no way to make a real strategy.

If MS was a loyalist unit and we had something like I recommended to drive other units to fight against them it would be ideal. It would be a faction v faction war.

[N0MAD]

How can a Faction vs Faction war ever be taken seriously when anyone can change factions at any time during a season?.
Also how can it be taken seriously when people run multiple accounts in that same competition when those Alt accounts can be used to troll or hinder other factions if they so desire?, Alt accounts can easily be used to bolster main accounts stats.
There are to many reasons CW isnt either competitive or a Faction vs Faction war/competition, just a random drop generator that heavily favours a few active groups been fed seals.

[Ranger Dave]

Coming across a 8-12 man from the "Big" units has come to be expected, but doesn't happen very often and I think is good for the game. It shows what coordination and skill can achieve and gives a point for the smaller units to strive for.
As a herder of PUGs, strategy is:
*Start the game explaining that we will probably get slaughtered. Get all the complaining out of the way early.
*Get pugs to try and learn from their mech builds and tactics.
*Try and play as well as possible regardless.
*If they keep coming across them repeatedly and are sick of it, tell them to try another planet.

The best way to make the mode more fun for all is to be some kind of basic training before entering CW.
Is tiring trying to herd clueless pugs who can't grasp the basic concepts like "Regroup at coordinate X", "Push now, all of you, no don't 3 of you decide to hide behind the gate." Also having to repeatedly explain game mode objectives, what generators look like etc is not something that should have to explained mid game.
Still, better to herd than do nothing and complain later.

[sdsnowbum]

Czarr, on 01 January 2016 - 09:19 AM, said:

...in fact only wolf's dragoons has worked with every faction and they did cause they were secretly a clan unit sent to recon the IS

Dude spoiler warning?

[JaxRiot]

Tesunie, on 05 January 2016 - 02:51 PM, said:

I don't believe unit size caps where mentioned in Phase 3 for CW changes... Did I miss something?

Last I knew, unit caps was being discussed, and then was tossed out the window. It was never implemented into the game, and never even got close to being developed.

He mentioned that it would be easy to add in Phase 3 at the last Townhall (1:30ish I believe), plus I think there was a Tweet about it afterwards, but I cant remember.

He talked about placing a cap of maybe 60 members on units and also limiting the number of Merc units that a faction can hire based on population.

That way a big Merc unit would have a hard time forming alliances (still being effectively one big unit) and still function as one unit with the ability to faction hop effectively after the cap

So if a Merc unit with say 300 members had to divide up, they would have to Make 5 separate Units, and also find a faction that had room for and would be able to hire 5 Merc Units so they could still stick together. More than likely a Faction with a small population.

He didnt say it was a for sure thing though. In fact, I think he said that is was not planned for CW3, but it could be easily added in if they wanted

[Val_Z]

Khobai, on 05 January 2016 - 02:46 PM, said:

Would you murder people if it wasnt against the law?

Yes, yes i would.




Now, back on topic,
some great ideas here, especially in the first few pages.

People are friends, and friends have friends, and they all want to play together. Limiting unit size is so far past stupid i dont know what else to say.

People talk everyday via IRC, facebook, twitter etc. They log on to the same TS every night at the same time, to play the same game, the same way the all like. You think having a different unit tag is going to change anything?

How about fixing the system instead of placing arbitary restrictions on players.

[Khereg]

MischiefSC, on 05 January 2016 - 05:27 PM, said:

That would be awesome because then other groups can coordinate to beat you.

I doubt we ever go loyalist in the first place - after all, we do like to play all the mechs. And as for the "everyone gang up on -MS-" theory, that could be happening now but isn't. Every match is still 12v12 (or 4v4) after all.

Everyone could overwhelm us with numbers and ghost drop their way to tagging planets I suppose, but I doubt many people have the motivation to do that particular grind.

Khobai, on 05 January 2016 - 02:46 PM, said:

Would you murder people if it wasnt against the law?

Oh God yes. Give me 5 minutes and I'll have a list ready.

[Widowmaker1981]

Armando, I'm a Merc. I want to be able to move between Clan and IS because i have 170 mechs and like using lots of them, both Clan and IS, and i like the dropdeck system more than the single drop system. I can entirely see this from your perspective, but can you not see that while huge, influential units like MercStar are free to swap from any faction to any other faction at the drop of a hat it makes a complete mockery of any sort of persistent galaxy wide war? (which is what CW is SUPPOSED to be).. it would be like America swapping sides in WW2 between Allies and Axis every 2 weeks, makes no sense does it?

I simply cannot see a system where units of any size are free to swap sides at any time having any persistent meaning, so i think they need to change it somehow. YES it will cut down on my choice and freedom, but its needed for a CW that actually means something.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 06 January 2016 - 06:46 AM.

[sycocys]

Widowmaker1981, on 06 January 2016 - 06:45 AM, said:

I simply cannot see a system where units of any size are free to swap sides at any time having any persistent meaning, so i think they need to change it somehow. YES it will cut down on my choice and freedom, but its needed for a CW that actually means something.

At least some of the population can grasp the concept that something needs to be done for the betterment of the game as a whole.

[Greyhart]

sycocys, on 06 January 2016 - 07:27 AM, said:

At least some of the population can grasp the concept that something needs to be done for the betterment of the game as a whole.

Yes there has to be a cost benefit to being a loyalist and being a merc.

Loyalist groups should be larger but can't move.

Merc free to move but economics forces choices. I am not in favour of a hard member cap because it is actually about the number of drops not the number of members.

perhaps Merc companies should have reputation points with each faction rather than loyalty points.

Edited by Greyhart, 06 January 2016 - 07:52 AM.

[Tesunie]

JaxRiot, on 05 January 2016 - 10:13 PM, said:

He mentioned that it would be easy to add in Phase 3 at the last Townhall (1:30ish I believe), plus I think there was a Tweet about it afterwards, but I cant remember.

He talked about placing a cap of maybe 60 members on units and also limiting the number of Merc units that a faction can hire based on population.

That way a big Merc unit would have a hard time forming alliances (still being effectively one big unit) and still function as one unit with the ability to faction hop effectively after the cap

So if a Merc unit with say 300 members had to divide up, they would have to Make 5 separate Units, and also find a faction that had room for and would be able to hire 5 Merc Units so they could still stick together. More than likely a Faction with a small population.

He didnt say it was a for sure thing though. In fact, I think he said that is was not planned for CW3, but it could be easily added in if they wanted

It's good to know this.

I still don't think it's a good idea, and I really hope they don't implement it... ever. (And this is spoken as a Loyalist.)

[Armando]

JaxRiot, on 05 January 2016 - 10:13 PM, said:

He mentioned that it would be easy to add in Phase 3 at the last Townhall (1:30ish I believe), plus I think there was a Tweet about it afterwards, but I cant remember.

He talked about placing a cap of maybe 60 members on units and also limiting the number of Merc units that a faction can hire based on population.

That way a big Merc unit would have a hard time forming alliances (still being effectively one big unit) and still function as one unit with the ability to faction hop effectively after the cap

So if a Merc unit with say 300 members had to divide up, they would have to Make 5 separate Units, and also find a faction that had room for and would be able to hire 5 Merc Units so they could still stick together. More than likely a Faction with a small population.

He didnt say it was a for sure thing though. In fact, I think he said that is was not planned for CW3, but it could be easily added in if they wanted

This happens and I have to choose which friends I get to drop with, and which friends I DON'T get to drop with....the game will get uninstalled. TBH the fact that PGI would even think about limiting teams in a team based game is a serious 'red flag'.

[sycocys]

Nothing's stopping you from dropping with whoever on your 400+ friend list in group queue, and if you can't function with only having 50-60 players in your unit for CW and creating a more balanced game for everyone else that plays - well you should probably just go ahead an uninstall the game.

[Hotthedd]

Greyhart, on 06 January 2016 - 07:51 AM, said:

Yes there has to be a cost benefit to being a loyalist and being a merc.

Loyalist groups should be larger but can't move.

Loyalist (house or Clan) groups should be able to move, but at a penalty. Possibly something along the lines of loyalists ONLY being able to be mercenaries for a set time if they move, and losing reputation with the House they left.

Greyhart, on 06 January 2016 - 07:51 AM, said:

Merc free to move but economics forces choices. I am not in favour of a hard member cap because it is actually about the number of drops not the number of members.

Truth

Greyhart, on 06 January 2016 - 07:51 AM, said:

perhaps Merc companies should have reputation points with each faction rather than loyalty points.

Why not BOTH?
The MRBC could give each unit a reputation rank (Lore-friendly), based on how effective the unit is.
Loyalty points are earned by accepting contracts for Houses.

Each one would have an effect on contract pay-outs.

[JaxRiot]

Tesunie, on 06 January 2016 - 08:07 AM, said:

It's good to know this.

I still don't think it's a good idea, and I really hope they don't implement it... ever. (And this is spoken as a Loyalist.)

Personally I dont really care how big a unit is. But I can see where the problems come in.

One of the biggest problems is that some of the Units actually avoid fighting each other and try to Pug farm instead.

So if there are 2 big units with say 300 members each, that avoid Unit vs Unit fighting... thats 600 people avoiding each other and only trying to farm pugs.

But its all good I think. In Phase 3 there will be far less planets available to attack/defend. So instead of seeing 10 planets, there will only be maybe 3 or 4.

So the avenues will be more limited and people will be 'funneled' more. Which should bring more Unit vs Unit fighting and less Pug farming opportunities....maybe

Edit- Although if he actually does put a cap on Unit members, and also puts a limit on Merc Units available to factions, Plus with the new attack/defend avenues... those big merc units just might have to split waaay up. Those once very large Merc Unit may end up fighting themselves

Edited by JaxRiot, 06 January 2016 - 08:47 AM.

[Armando]

Widowmaker1981, on 06 January 2016 - 06:45 AM, said:

Armando, I'm a Merc. I want to be able to move between Clan and IS because i have 170 mechs and like using lots of them, both Clan and IS, and i like the dropdeck system more than the single drop system. I can entirely see this from your perspective, but can you not see that while huge, influential units like MercStar are free to swap from any faction to any other faction at the drop of a hat it makes a complete mockery of any sort of persistent galaxy wide war? (which is what CW is SUPPOSED to be).. it would be like America swapping sides in WW2 between Allies and Axis every 2 weeks, makes no sense does it?

I simply cannot see a system where units of any size are free to swap sides at any time having any persistent meaning, so i think they need to change it somehow. YES it will cut down on my choice and freedom, but its needed for a CW that actually means something.

"it would be like America swapping sides in WW2 between Allies and Axis every 2 weeks"

America is the MWO equivalent Faction...so no they would not be swapping sides every two weeks. Mercenaries hired by America (or GB, or Germany, or Russia, or Japan) very well could (and if there money is there likely WOULD) swap sides DAILY (again, provided the money is there).

[Greyhart]

JaxRiot, on 06 January 2016 - 08:37 AM, said:

Personally I dont really care how big a unit is. But I can see where the problems come in.

One of the biggest problems is that some of the Units actually avoid fighting each other and try to Pug farm instead.

So if there are 2 big units with say 300 members each, that avoid Unit vs Unit fighting... thats 600 people avoiding each other and only trying to farm pugs.

But its all good I think. In Phase 3 there will be far less planets available to attack/defend. So instead of seeing 10 planets, there will only be maybe 3 or 4.

So the avenues will be more limited and people will be 'funneled' more. Which should bring more Unit vs Unit fighting and less Pug farming opportunities....maybe

Also if mercs were to take specific contract. like do 3 12 man drop on this planet within 24 hours they would be forced to fight each other.

At the moment it appears the faction have a contract that reads:

"fight when you want where you want against who you want for us for a week and we will pay you the same as we pay ourselves."

I don't think there has ever been such a generous mercenary contract in the history of warfare.

[Greyhart]

Armando, on 06 January 2016 - 08:43 AM, said:

"it would be like America swapping sides in WW2 between Allies and Axis every 2 weeks"

America is the MWO equivalent Faction...so no they would not be swapping sides every two weeks. Mercenaries hired by America (or GB, or Germany, or Russia, or Japan) very well could (and if there money is there likely WOULD) swap sides DAILY (again, provided the money is there).

Yes but if a merc company was employed by the allies and then swapped to the Axis powers it is highly unlikely that the Allies would ever employ them again. not to mention the Axis powers would be a bit put out at hiring them in the first place.

Further I am sure the contract between the State and the merc company would dictate when, who and where the merc company would fight. The merc company wouldn't be able to go "we are not fighting in France because our mates are on the other side" or " we'll fight but only to defend this."

as they saying goes "he who pays the piper picks the tune."

[Widowmaker1981]

Armando, on 06 January 2016 - 08:43 AM, said:

"it would be like America swapping sides in WW2 between Allies and Axis every 2 weeks"

America is the MWO equivalent Faction...so no they would not be swapping sides every two weeks. Mercenaries hired by America (or GB, or Germany, or Russia, or Japan) very well could (and if there money is there likely WOULD) swap sides DAILY (again, provided the money is there).

You think, for example, that France would have hired mercs that were working for Germany the week before, killing their soldiers? And if they DID, you think Germany would take them back the next week?