296 replies to this topic

[krash27]

JaxRiot, on 13 January 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

Why have a Lone Wolf classification in a mode that is supposed to be fore Organized Group play?

CW is in a funky spot right now where it says that it is meant for Group Play, but yet allows Pugs.

Its trying to be both hard mode and casual at the same time.

I say pick a side. Either be Hard Mode, or be Casual.

Mixing the two leads to these kinds of threads and these kinds of arguments.

Sounds good in theory, but in practice, if you remove the casual players (pugs) then CW would be desolate again.

There are so many factors that need to be looked at. First and foremost would be this game trying to be a simulation (CW) and also trying to be a FPS. The devs need to decide the direction they want the game to go.
Simulation such as WWIIOL with a massive persistent world and as close to real world physics as possible or FPS such as the Battlefield line which to my knowledge do not have a CW style play.

If MWO is to be a FPS striving for esports then I think PGI needs to get with the times and have some sort of ranked lobby system. It is darn near impossible for them to blend the two styles of games together. At the very least you would need the funds to work on basically both game modes and the time as you would be developing two distinct styles of game. I can't see this happening as people would lose their minds if physics and mechanics were added to simulate the real world and also the lore of the game.

There are a host of other problems with CW such as units being able to jump to whichever side will yield them the most cbills/XP whenever they like.
Of course there is the skill gap between casuals and the competitive crowd and how to create decent games consistently.

Bottom line is people scream that they want CW to be better but damn near anything that's suggested to try such as having "Campaigns" and being hard locked to your house/faction until that "campaign" has been won by a house/faction or smaller group sizes is met with rage and people screaming they don't want that.

The direction the community has led the game is towards FPS, community wanted this over a simulation and now we have it.
I just can not see how CW can be fixed without serious time and money at the expense of a lot of other fixes and content which wont sit well with the solo/group folks who want more maps, mechs and game modes.

It is a slippery slope to be sure and not one that can easily be dealt with at this point in MWO development.

[Davegt27]

Quote

Posted Today, 07:45 AM
As much as I was against it at the start and even well into Phase 2, with steam and a small influx of new players (or at least vets that are newly returned) that want to participate in CW that are slowly learning to adapt to group play - I think it is probably in the best interest of player retention to implement a split queue system.

Units and teams don't need to be rolling pugs, there actually seems to be enough interest in coordinated play (and could continue to/be more if rewarded better than pug play) that we really don't need the single queue.

If the majority is still adamant against split queues then the only other viable option to get the population up/keep new pug players is to eliminate the planet map and stick everyone into the 3 bucket system - IS v IS, Clan v Clan, Clan v IS to load up the drop counts and minimize how often pugs will land against larger groups.

Groups often claim to want CW to be a harder/end game mode, but constantly fight against the things that would make it so - so at some point something needs to be done to either force that to happen or to make the inclusion of solos a more welcoming environment.

-----
A solo only training planet queue would also be a welcome addition. Limited amount of drops, lower rewards and some audio/visual instruction. I'm sure there's also drop commanders that would willingly sign up to do a training/recruiting session a couple days a week.

Well you can’t have any seal clubbing without any seals, what would be the fun in that

next thing you know you’re going to want 12 man teams based on the leader board to fight other 12 man teams based on a leader board (for example the top 20 units fight each other, then the next 20 and so on down the line)

Then once a month have an event call the leader board challenge

Splitting up CW ques is just silly talk

In fact info from the last town hall meeting will make it easier to funnel seals in to the clubbing arena

Quote

2) Free Lance Call to arms for unaffiliated players, this contract for a specific drop (or battle)
Time stamp 55:50

Let’s just put to bed this idea to get rid of seals

Edited by Davegt27, 13 January 2016 - 12:42 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Khobai, on 13 January 2016 - 12:32 PM, said:

thats fine.

but initially it should try to match pug vs pug and premade vs premade if it cant then a release valve should open allowing a pug vs premade match

but pugs should not always have to play premades if the game can otherwise prevent it.



90% of players arnt in units. favoring organized play is stupid. that absurd mentality is exactly why we have these problems in the first place.



so dont allow more than X players from the same unit to be on the same team in the solo queue.

again simple fix. god you people act like syncdropping is impossible to prevent, its not.

Each front needs 1 queue. Winner is attacker next phase on a new defender world. This means that if you're on the Davion/Kurita border you're playing with everyone on the Dav/Kur border.

That's would enable the system to take anyone waiting and match units to units first. That's cool. That would do all sorts of good things.

[Amsro]

Sandpit, on 13 January 2016 - 12:19 PM, said:

most people in the solo queue fail to grasp the differences in CW and PUB queue honestly. That's why they have a "bad time" and most of them are simply too hardheaded to listen to anyone trying to help them. Those players? Good luck to them. CW just really isn't the mode for them and wasn't designed for them.

Yeah those hard headed players with 4 trial mechs.

I don't have the answer, but this new player could be of great use to a group, but may not even be aware of such things.

Show me the in game function to apply to units. Browse through to see how many players that unit has, how many active in the last 30 days/ 90 days.

CW is not kind to new players that much we can all agree on.

[wanderer]

Quote

but pugs should not always have to play premades if the game can otherwise prevent it.

I don't think you understand.

You won't stop premades. We'll simply not form a group and drop anyway, seeing as queues are generally small enough that you'll end up with near-perfect drops anyway. The queues are small enough that it doesn't even have to be a true sync drop, as there's only generally one game queued up for all participants to end up in. Maybe two.

And the seal clubbing will resume. Restrict it by unit tag? They'll form multiple smaller "units" instead and they'll still be on a factional/common TS, beating PUGs with a stick.

48v48 is going to be dominated by organized play no matter how you harp about it. Most CW factions with significant PUG populations have factional TS servers to play on because of this, and if it's a PUG that won't unit up or use those?

Frankly, they fail at understanding the entire concept of a mode designed around organized play. It's why 4v4 is so badly needed to channel these folks into something where they won't be kicked square in the sack.

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 13 January 2016 - 12:32 PM, said:

90% of players arnt in units. favoring organized play is stupid. that absurd mentality is exactly why we have these problems in the first place.

If we're talking about the entire game, I'd agree with you. But we are only talking about the part of the game "primarily intended" (those are PGI's words) for units. So no, it is not stupid. Solos unable to accept the harsh conditions of CW should either group up, practice more, or stay in the solo queue.

Not all areas of the game should cater to solo players.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Amsro, on 13 January 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

Yeah those hard headed players with 4 trial mechs.

I don't have the answer, but this new player could be of great use to a group, but may not even be aware of such things.

Show me the in game function to apply to units. Browse through to see how many players that unit has, how many active in the last 30 days/ 90 days.

CW is not kind to new players that much we can all agree on.

We really need an in-game recruitment system and the ability to search for units.

[Mystere]

krash27, on 13 January 2016 - 12:39 PM, said:

Sounds good in theory, but in practice, if you remove the casual players (pugs) then CW would be desolate again.

There are so many factors that need to be looked at. First and foremost would be this game trying to be a simulation (CW) and also trying to be a FPS. The devs need to decide the direction they want the game to go.

The solution has already been mentioned in countless posts:

• Community Warfare
  
  • for the simulation inclined
    
  • no matchmaking, no ranking, no mercy
• Solaris
  
  • for the eSports inclined
    
  • matchmaker, ranking, player separation

PGI did say Solaris is in consideration.

[WANTED]

It is kinda crappy for these pugs to queue up thinking this will be great! Then they see a 12 man unit opposite side with the usual high comp tags and feel like the Christians entering a Roman arena with lions. " hang on i didn't see this coming!" Part of me wishes you could see where units are fighting in real time. Might encourage others more unit vs unit FaceTime cause it's about the same as a ghost drop for them when they fight easy news pugs

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 13 January 2016 - 12:32 PM, said:

thats fine.

but initially it should try to match pug vs pug and premade vs premade if it cant then a release valve should open allowing a pug vs premade match

but pugs should not always have to play premades if the game can otherwise prevent it.

90% of players arnt in units. favoring organized play is stupid. that absurd mentality is exactly why we have these problems in the first place.

I'd rather have a campaign system that somehow resembles this. Then factions can strategically decide where to put their best/worst units available at the current time.

Khobai, on 13 January 2016 - 12:32 PM, said:

so dont allow more than X players from the same unit to be on the same team in the solo queue.

again simple fix. god you people act like syncdropping is impossible to prevent, its not.

And if they're the only ones around for the faction? What then? Allow the enemy to ghost drop instead?

And so by popular demand ():

Mystere, on 09 January 2016 - 03:34 PM, said:

Roman Civilian:

Help! Help! Barbarians are at the gates!

Roman General:

We can't help you mam! We only have legions of the elite Praetorian Guards available.

Do you still not see how silly that is?

[MischiefSC]

The answer is simple. It is found by asking this question -

"Why not just add the maps/modes to pug queue? Why split the CW queue?"

The answer to that clarifies exactly why we do NOT split the CW queue.

[RussianWolf]

Mystere, on 13 January 2016 - 12:59 PM, said:

And so by popular demand ():



Do you still not see how silly that is?

But if the barbarians knew who was defending, would they even have attacked?

eww... that brings up an interesting idea.

What if they locked any "killed" mechs in CW for a specific amount of time? You bring your 4 mechs and two are killed. Those 2 are now locked in your garage for the next 4 hours. You have to use other mechs to fill out your drop deck.

So a defending force of elite players could in fact be pushed out if a large enough number of attackers hit them over and over.

(to prevent abuse, all versions of that specific variant are locked. So you can't just buy multiples of your favorite variant to subvert the system)

[Sandpit]

sycocys, on 13 January 2016 - 12:21 PM, said:

If 12 people from the same unit/sub unit hit launch on the same planet within 5-10 seconds or less of each other and do it repeatedly you can pretty well gather they are attempting to exploit the system and sync drop.

This one here really isn't rocket appliances to understand.

You still can't prove it enough to warrant banning players over it plain and simple.

Khobai, on 13 January 2016 - 12:29 PM, said:

because theres a huge difference between a bunch of solo players that have never played together and a merc corp thats played dozens or hundreds of game together

so the solution of splitting queues i supposed to improve it for new players?

how so?
By segregating them from one of the more organized portions in the community who are doing their damndest to help them?
By throwing them into the deep end by themselves with no help?
By tossing them into the wolf den so that the only others they CAN be teamed with are seal clubbers?

We already know queue split doesn't work. It didn't work for the PUB queue, it's not magically going to work for the CW queue.

I'm sorry, it has NOTHING to do with me being an "elitist" or "seal clubber" or any other negative connotation anyone else wants to try and slander me with.

it has to do with a "solution" that solves nothing except pissing off a section of the player base because they aren't the ones causing the issue for the most part to begin with.

There are several other viable solutions that have been mentioned that WOULD solve the issues though

[Mystere]

RussianWolf, on 13 January 2016 - 01:17 PM, said:

But if the barbarians knew who was defending, would they even have attacked?

eww... that brings up an interesting idea.

What if they locked any "killed" mechs in CW for a specific amount of time? You bring your 4 mechs and two are killed. Those 2 are now locked in your garage for the next 4 hours. You have to use other mechs to fill out your drop deck.

So a defending force of elite players could in fact be pushed out if a large enough number of attackers hit them over and over.

Interesting indeed. But, with too many wussies apparently around, only a few might actually bite.

Alternatively, have rearm and repair back.

RussianWolf, on 13 January 2016 - 01:17 PM, said:

(to prevent abuse, all versions of that specific variant are locked. So you can't just buy multiples of your favorite variant to subvert the system)

I disagree. If someone wants to have multiples of their favorite Mech, well that is good for business for PGI and I will not get in the way of that.

[Sandpit]

Amsro, on 13 January 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

Yeah those hard headed players with 4 trial mechs.

More like the hard headed players that think playing alongside that new player in trial mechs is a "detriment" instead of opportunity.

I've given specific examples over the past week where we literally had players in the first MWO match ever dropping with us in CW. They did just fine. We won as a team. We played other PUGs AND 12mans. Guess what didn't happen?
Seal clubbing and new players leaving CW in frustration.

WANTED, on 13 January 2016 - 12:55 PM, said:

It is kinda crappy for these pugs to queue up thinking this will be great! Then they see a 12 man unit opposite side with the usual high comp tags and feel like the Christians entering a Roman arena with lions. " hang on i didn't see this coming!" Part of me wishes you could see where units are fighting in real time. Might encourage others more unit vs unit FaceTime cause it's about the same as a ghost drop for them when they fight easy news pugs

see above
use faction chat

[krash27]

Mystere, on 13 January 2016 - 12:52 PM, said:

The solution has already been mentioned in countless posts:

• Community Warfare
  
  • for the simulation inclined
    
  • no matchmaking, no ranking, no mercy
• Solaris
  
  • for the eSports inclined
    
  • matchmaker, ranking, player separation

PGI did say Solaris is in consideration.

They did, but I don't think it is so simple. The esports crowd would not like the shift in mechanics towards a simulation.
People have suggested lore based physics and mechanics and the esports crowd fought against them.
How do you get the one side of the fence to accept that MWO is swinging to a simulation with a solaris mode?
A lot of simulation mechanics such as a cone of fire when moving would be raged against.
Before anyone uses "But these mechs are from the 31st century so they should be able to compensate for movement with advanced technology" I would like to point out that in the lore, the hundreds of years of warring have basically bombed humanity back to the stone age.
The lore could be ignored, but then it wouldn't be Mechwarrior.

I am all for more of a simulation, that's what I was hoping for before they changed the game description to "A thinking mans shooter" from "Mech combat simulator".

I would invest way more time and money if that were to happen, this would be my main game again if that were to happen but in my opinion it seems that the big issues arise from the problems associated with the devs trying to somehow add CW, make it simulation like but maintain the esports aspects.

Personally I like the idea of a simulation style MWO. I see it very similar to WWIIOL with supply lines, Areas of Operation, various Units ranging from air assets to infantry, combined arms essentially. All organized by "High Commands".
It may only be feasible to put clan against IS but that would allow proper command structures if there were only two sides with the various factions/clans housed inside. All this controlled by dedicated players in a proper command structure.
WWIIOL does it, and it works remarkably well. I could discuss the in's and out's of a MW simulation and how it could be structured for hours!

Hopefully there is a solution that everyone accepts and MWO can continue moving forward.
I think the key here will be for the FPS crowd and the simulation crowd to realize they need to compromise if there is going to be a little of both styles of game play.

[Mystere]

Sandpit, on 13 January 2016 - 01:21 PM, said:

There are several other viable solutions that have been mentioned that WOULD solve the issues though

Well, it seems some doubt PGI's abilities and as such would rather that PGI not even try at all. ...

Hold a second! That sounds familiar. Where did I see that before? ...

Got it! It's the same flavor of excuse being offered about solo players not wanting to get better and therefore they should have their own queue.

[Ultimax]

Tyler Valentine, on 13 January 2016 - 10:28 AM, said:

You could say the exact same thing about groups.

No, you can not.

Because groups can not join in the solo queue.

Because groups get penalized in the team queue as they get bigger.

Because CW as a mode was designed and advertised for UNITS and big GROUPS.

[Mech Jager]

SO if the groups do not want to split the Q ino solo and group, why not role all group play into CW and reduce the number of lanes.

This would force groups into playing groups more often.

Solo puggers are needed to make CW work ATM, but it is way too easy for moderately decent groups to run unopposed 50-75% of the time (maybe more or less).

[Mystere]

krash27, on 13 January 2016 - 01:25 PM, said:

They did, but I don't think it is so simple. The esports crowd would not like the shift in mechanics towards a simulation.
People have suggested lore based physics and mechanics and the esports crowd fought against them.
How do you get the one side of the fence to accept that MWO is swinging to a simulation with a solaris mode?
A lot of simulation mechanics such as a cone of fire when moving would be raged against.
Before anyone uses "But these mechs are from the 31st century so they should be able to compensate for movement with advanced technology" I would like to point out that in the lore, the hundreds of years of warring have basically bombed humanity back to the stone age.
The lore could be ignored, but then it wouldn't be Mechwarrior.

I am all for more of a simulation, that's what I was hoping for before they changed the game description to "A thinking mans shooter" from "Mech combat simulator".

I would invest way more time and money if that were to happen, this would be my main game again if that were to happen but in my opinion it seems that the big issues arise from the problems associated with the devs trying to somehow add CW, make it simulation like but maintain the esports aspects.

Personally I like the idea of a simulation style MWO. I see it very similar to WWIIOL with supply lines, Areas of Operation, various Units ranging from air assets to infantry, combined arms essentially. All organized by "High Commands".
It may only be feasible to put clan against IS but that would allow proper command structures if there were only two sides with the various factions/clans housed inside. All this controlled by dedicated players in a proper command structure.
WWIIOL does it, and it works remarkably well. I could discuss the in's and out's of a MW simulation and how it could be structured for hours!

Hopefully there is a solution that everyone accepts and MWO can continue moving forward.
I think the key here will be for the FPS crowd and the simulation crowd to realize they need to compromise if there is going to be a little of both styles of game play.

Actually, this is one area where I think player separation is definitely warranted. There are just too many conflicts to resolve in trying to merge "simulation" and "eSports".