102 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

Quote

You see no problem with letting people change sides?
Every single problem you've talked about is a result of letting players switch sides lol

not really. clearly you didnt read anything I said.

the entire reason people are switching sides is because they get better rewards from switching sides than they get from staying in one faction. If you restructure the loyalty rewards to reward loyalists more and remove the rewards incentive to switching sides then players have no incentive to switch sides other than simply not wanting to play that faction anymore... and forcing someone to play a faction they dont want to is wrong. if someone truly doesnt want to play a faction anymore, and is willing to forfeit the rewards, they should be allowed to switch.

Edited by Khobai, 31 December 2015 - 05:02 PM.

[Sandpit]

Khobai, on 31 December 2015 - 05:00 PM, said:

not really. clearly you didnt read anything I said.

the entire reason people are switching sides is because they get better rewards from switching sides than they get from staying in one faction. If you restructure the loyalty rewards to reward loyalists more and remove the rewards incentive to switching sides then players have no incentive to switch sides other than simply not wanting to play that faction anymore... and forcing someone to play a faction they dont want to is wrong. if someone truly doesnt want to play clan, and is willing to forfeit the rewards, they should be allowed to switch back to IS and vice versa.

clearly I did, but dismiss what I said if you want, doesn't change it from being factual

The entire reason people are switching sides is because they're allowed to switch sides
period

[Agent 0 Fortune]

If only there was a CW dedicated forum to discuss CW relevant issues, then all the Devs that care about CW could read them, rather than being lost in a sea of subjects that are far more interesting but not CW related.

[Khobai]

Quote

The entire reason people are switching sides is because they're allowed to switch sides
period

100% completely false.

people are not just switching factions "because they can". theyre doing it because theyre ranking up in different factions to at least get the 500 MC for rank 10. Thats 5000 MC you can EASILY get for free.

again the whole problem is the structure of the rewards. you get rewarded more for switching factions than you get for staying in one faction.


Im not interested in forcing players to play factions they dont want to play. What I am interested in is players getting rewarded for playing the factions they want to play. I support faction switching so players that absolutely dont want to play a certain faction can switch to a faction they DO want to play. But I also support loyalty rewards that reward players who stick it out in the same faction much more than players that constantly abandon their factions.

Edited by Khobai, 31 December 2015 - 05:21 PM.

[Sandpit]

Khobai, on 31 December 2015 - 05:05 PM, said:

100% completely false.

100% accurate you mean
Players can't switch sides, problem solved 100%

You personally may not like that option but it doesn't change the FACT that it solves all those issues

[Khobai]

Quote

100% accurate you mean
Players can't switch sides, problem solved 100%

You personally may not like that option but it doesn't change the FACT that it solves all those issues

Again thats stupid because if you have both IS and clan mechs you should be able to use both. You shouldnt be stuck as one faction or the other or forced to have multiple accounts. Thats asinine.

[ZenFool]

One of these days I'd like to see long term contracts mean something OTHER than the penalty for breaking it... I want more carrot for being "loyal" to a side. PGI has incentivized hopping and I'm kind of glad some of the large groups of players out there made why that's a bad thing so glaringly obvious. CW(the game I was promised from the beginning of MW) is still in "beta" and has such massive issues that players need to lead an organized revolt? wow

[Naelbis]

Put a hard cap on unit size and make it so only people/units with contracts longer than 30 days get loyalty rewards. Let the mercs faction hop all they want...for cbills only. Put an upper limit on how many ranks non-loyalists can accrue with a faction to keep them out of the most lucrative rewards and give long term contracts/loyalists better rewards past that point. Break a contract early=loss of all accrued rewards+massive cbill cost. That would fix the huge population swings as the giant merc units move around to farm rewards.

[5LeafClover]

To fix:

Massage the ego of the large clans. Issue token clan buffs. Humour their "I told you so" for a little.

Then release CW3 so people can care a little more. Things will return to something like normal and we go back to complaining about who has the edge over whom in the forums.

[Khobai]

Quote

Put a hard cap on unit size and make it so only people/units with contracts longer than 30 days get loyalty rewards. Let the mercs faction hop all they want...for cbills only.

I could support something like that. You shouldnt get loyalty for not being loyal afterall.

[Xakthos]

Sandpit, on 31 December 2015 - 05:07 PM, said:

100% accurate you mean
Players can't switch sides, problem solved 100%

You personally may not like that option but it doesn't change the FACT that it solves all those issues

So how does it solve a person using two accounts? One clan, one IS and the problem is bypassed entirely. Pick a side any time just by switching accounts. Not everyone is tied to a single name so fundamentally. Only means of blocking that is to do away with free to play.

[Sandpit]

Khobai, on 31 December 2015 - 05:13 PM, said:

Again thats stupid

that's your opinion
not fact
let's keep this straight now
YOU don't like it
That doesn't mean it wouldn't work (which it would), nor does it mean any kind of majority agree with you so again that whole "100% false" goes out the door

[Idealsuspect]

sycocys, on 31 December 2015 - 03:54 PM, said:

Mercs moving is the only reason.

The rest of your argument relies on the importance of SWOL, which really isn't that much beyond the fact they have a lot of members that moved. The 1-2 solid groups your unit can field really isn't nearly the game changer you want to believe it is.

Hehe yea everybody know this ( even him i guess ) but we have to admit that his post is funny when you think he is serious about " SWOL change the battle " LOL plz all ducks back to wolf and show us ...

[Aresye]

The hypocrisy:
- When large units are playing Clan, it's because, "Clan is OP, and therefore all large units will play Clan because they want to win."
- When large units switch to playing IS, suddenly it's, "They're just switching to get the loyalty rewards."

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either large units swap sides because they follow the side with the best mechs (in this case, that would mean IS), or they swap sides for the sake of switching sides. You can't claim these units swapped to Clan for Tukayyid 2 because Clan mechs are OP, and then suddenly say that their switch to IS was for different reasons. There has been ZERO balance changes since Tukayyid 2, so if they did indeed switch to Clan for Tukayyid 2 because Clans still hold the edge, there's no reason why they would switch back to IS.

Edited by Aresye Kerensky, 31 December 2015 - 05:42 PM.

[MechaBattler]

We should just do away with this notion of taking planets. It's basically a public queue with no matchmaker and getting your unit tag on a map. They should just lose the pretense of the map. And find a way to make it interesting.

[Sandpit]

Xakthos, on 31 December 2015 - 05:27 PM, said:

So how does it solve a person using two accounts? One clan, one IS and the problem is bypassed entirely. Pick a side any time just by switching accounts. Not everyone is tied to a single name so fundamentally. Only means of blocking that is to do away with free to play.

the same way every other game that has this issue solves it

it doesn't

if someone wants to go to all the trouble to spend the money, time, energy, etc. into making another account and getting it up to par to compete in CW? GO for it.
Also, has no relevance. That account would still be locked into one side or the other for that season of CW which means PGI has a MUCH more accurate number to deal with when figuring out drop deck tonnages, new player distribution, unit distribution, where to open and close map, etc.

So again, problem solved

[C E Dwyer]

Should never have halved the contract time

but the usual its not fair crowd cried, and P.G.I stupidly listened

[Kraftwerkedup]

I dont think we should "clamp down" on big units though. When you do that you drive alot of people out of the game. Maybe we're better off without them, but meh, I just dont believe thats the case.

More carrot, less stick.

You need to make it advantageous to them to play the way you want them to play.

Maybe create "slots" for 100+ member units per faction, so it spreads them out. More slots open only after every faction has a huge unit like that for more huge units. Then incentive this play with rewards, so no one feels limited.

Some people will still scream "faction lock!" but thats not a terribly bad idea either. Simply picking a faction for that "round" of CW and thats it youre stuck for that round, but, that still allows big units to basically move the map all on their own. I dont really know how you fix that. No game has.

Of course PGI doesnt even know what it wants CW to be, and didnt when they started it either. They flip flopped between persistent and "rounds" a dozen times then went with "lets see what happens"

They have no idea what theyre doing with CW, so I dont expect it to be fixed anytime soon.

What theyll do is just throw some nerfs at big units and hope that solves the problem. By slapping them on the wrist and saying "bad boy" it will just go to show that they have no idea what the actual problem is.

Its not people abusing the system, its the system. If you want lots of little unorganized groups to compete with big organized groups you dont nerf the big groups, you buff the little guys.

But the entire system is set up to promote large groups. Everyone wants coordination and skill to win...but no one likes it when all the skilled players actually get together into one big unit and then use coordination to win.

Theyre doing exactly what theyre supposed to. You cant have it both ways. You cant have a system that promotes recognition to the big units that move the map, and then not have big units move the map.

Its working as intended. That PGI has "changes coming" again shows they have no clue what theyre doing.

I have a feeling like theyre just going to throw hard caps at large groups, then try and "logistics" them to death with cbill sinks for launching alot of missions concurrently.

[Deathlike]

Aresye Kerensky, on 31 December 2015 - 05:41 PM, said:

The hypocrisy:
- When large units are playing Clan, it's because, "Clan is OP, and therefore all large units will play Clan because they want to win."
- When large units switch to playing IS, suddenly it's, "They're just switching to get the loyalty rewards."

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either large units swap sides because they follow the side with the best mechs (in this case, that would mean IS), or they swap sides for the sake of switching sides. You can't claim these units swapped to Clan for Tukayyid 2 because Clan mechs are OP, and then suddenly say that their switch to IS was for different reasons. There has been ZERO balance changes since Tukayyid 2, so if they did indeed switch to Clan for Tukayyid 2 because Clans still hold the edge, there's no reason why they would switch back to IS.

Believe it or not, Paul's mega-change happened before Tukayyid 2.

http://mwomercs.com/...38-01-dec-2015/

Tukayyid 2 was Dec 4-7.

http://mwomercs.com/...nts?t=201512tuk

There wasn't enough time to evaluate the changes, but people played through said "nerfed Clan mechs".

[Sandpit]

MechaBattler, on 31 December 2015 - 05:42 PM, said:

We should just do away with this notion of taking planets. It's basically a public queue with no matchmaker and getting your unit tag on a map. They should just lose the pretense of the map. And find a way to make it interesting.

like controlling the map's attack/defend avenues, sharing borders through alliances and such, and having PGI prevent big units from jumping midway through by locking sides and making sure smaller units and solo players can have a significant role in it other than being rolled up into corners limiting attack options and such?

I agree!