778 replies to this topic

[Hotthedd]

Bonger Bob, on 16 January 2016 - 09:30 PM, said:

now is this a realistic possibility ?? yes, though i don't believe it will be as rampant as people are suggesting, or as easy to achieve no matter how good your timing. There is no server regional division, there is no PSR factoring match maker. There is a real possibility the sync drop group gets fractured into to different games, there is the possibility that the other side has done the same and is comprised of a stealth unit in equal measure.

All it takes is the ability to do basic math. As long as the unit is able to divide a number by 12, they can sync-drop with 100% certainty.
All of them will be on the same team, unlike in Quick Play.

[Bonger Bob]

Hotthedd, on 16 January 2016 - 11:13 PM, said:

All it takes is the ability to do basic math. As long as the unit is able to divide a number by 12, they can sync-drop with 100% certainty.
All of them will be on the same team, unlike in Quick Play.

still a huge amount of effort to go through for enabling exploitative behavior, and hinging on the solo que receiving the same rewards as the groups que, which we all agree is just wrong and shouldn't occur.

so in the perfect world of split que, less rewards for solo que, and group que is the only side that has CW campaign map influence, it would make it a non extent problem.

The only reason to engage in that manner of play would be outright griefing.

Its the lack of rewards favoring Unit / Group play, the ease of solo's to access those same rewards, and the exploitative bad behavior of players who will game a system for their own benefit. Its not split ques.

Edited by Bonger Bob, 16 January 2016 - 11:21 PM.

[Hotthedd]

Bonger Bob, on 16 January 2016 - 11:18 PM, said:

still a huge amount of effort to go through for enabling exploitative behavior, and hinging on the solo que receiving the same rewards as the groups que, which we all agree is just wrong and shouldn't occur.

so in the perfect world of split que, less rewards for solo que, and group que is the only side that has CW campaign map influence, it would make it a non extent problem.

The only reason to engage in that manner of play would be outright griefing.

Its the lack of rewards favoring Unit / Group play, the ease of solo's to access those same rewards, and the exploitative bad behavior of players who will game a system for their own benefit. Its not split ques.

Basic math is not a lot of effort.

Yes, it would be for griefing, but isn't that exactly the argument used by those who demanded the split queues? That they were being griefed by the "big units"?

If that is actually the case, and these people really ARE out to grief the solo pugs, then why wouldn't they sync drop without tags?

Unless, of course, they were never griefing in the first place. But then if not, WHY split the queues?

[JaxRiot]

Hotthedd, on 16 January 2016 - 11:26 PM, said:

Basic math is not a lot of effort.

Yes, it would be for griefing, but isn't that exactly the argument used by those who demanded the split queues? That they were being griefed by the "big units"?

If that is actually the case, and these people really ARE out to grief the solo pugs, then why wouldn't they sync drop without tags?

Unless, of course, they were never griefing in the first place. But then if not, WHY split the queues?

Im not so sure its going to be that easy after Phase 3 to sync drop with 100% certainty.

The attack lanes are going to be drastically smaller, so the que up times will be much tighter too.

Plus throw in the new Freelancer role where a Freelancer gets Call to Arms for any faction, then the number of people populating ques can get pretty frantic.

Im not saying that it cant be done, or that people wont try it, but Im guessing that it wont work out as easily as they think it will.

Some might make it in, but I think there is a higher chance that the sync drop will get fragmented far more times than it will work.

But time will tell.

Edit- I just had a thought. The new Freelancer role, with their Call to Arms for any Faction, just might become the new Quick Play for CW.

Edited by JaxRiot, 16 January 2016 - 11:54 PM.

[Nick86]

Tarl Cabot, on 16 January 2016 - 07:10 PM, said:

If PGI does proceed with said split then unit players will access the map, see there is only one planet with an attacker/defender, no other players queue'd up and hit the regular queue.

And as previously noted, it is units that initiate "attack" before defenders start showing up......pugs, either unit or unitless, rarely initiate an attack. Are non-unit defenders going to queue up on a planet they already own hoping for someone to attack with the prospect of having the planet away from them?

I am not getting the thought process of those who want split queues when taking in the standard player behavior that has been seen in the CW.

Which is indeed why this is all so stupid and the people campaigning for it are total fu*kwits and why PGI, if they introduce this and screw it up may well damage it's baby beyond repair. Clap clap everyone..

[Sandpit]

Bonger Bob, on 16 January 2016 - 11:10 PM, said:

so long as their all aligned to your particular view of things i take it ???, you've done your best to berate and denigrate anyone who has spoken out about the split as positive.

why the sudden shift in attitudes to one that is more open and inclusive ???

yea, that's what I've been saying and implying. You caught me. I don't even have to point out your rhetoric anymore. You are quite apparent in your goals to try and discredit those you don't agree with. You just make yourself look REALLY silly when you say things like this and exactly why I don't bother taking anything else you say seriously because of stuff like this.

You want to do nothing but try and stir things up, imply ulterior motives where there are none, paint anyone that doesn't conform to YOUR point of view as some sort of seal clubbing elitist, meanwhile referring to the other players you try so hard to convince everyone else you're "speaking up for" as "scrubs" "newbs" and show nothing but disdain for them.

The only one here that has been trying to slant ANYthing into a negative connotation is you sir. It's quite apparent to those trying to have a constructive discussion and I've asked you to stop. It's off-topic, it's ridiculous and false personal implications you continue to make as to the sincerity of what I see and towards my personal integrity.

You're not fooling anyone, you're not able to hide behind your rhetoric anymore. You want to keep this up? I asked you politely to stop with the personal insults and to stop painting me, personally, as some sort of player who does those types of things and plays in that manner.

SO again, and for the last time, if and when you're ready to stop this ridiculous rhetoric, I'll consider taking you seriously and actually more than willing to discuss any ideas that help improve this community for EVERYone.

Until you can do that, you're just another in a very long list of wanna-be trolls that does nothing but make a lot of noise in the hopes that they'll be "popular" on the MWO forums.

[Bonger Bob]

Nick86, on 16 January 2016 - 11:44 PM, said:

Which is indeed why this is all so stupid and the people campaigning for it are total fu*kwits and why PGI, if they introduce this and screw it up may well damage it's baby beyond repair. Clap clap everyone..

a lot of people view CW as an alternate game mode, that's it, nothing more, removing them from influencing the CW campaign map and gaining the rewards the same as those of coordinated players, units and groups, but allowing them to still have the 50% or more game content that CW mode provides is what advocating a que split is about for a majority of us.

If they split the ques, rewarded groups / units better than pugs, and removed the influence pugs already have far too much of on the CW map, the problems doesn't exist to anywhere near the scale it does currently, or with the proposed griefing.

the possible griefing people are describing only occurs if CW ques are split, and nothing else is changed. Lots of other things are changing though, and picking out one thing that is still exploitable if nothing else is changed is not valid reasoning to bin it. If viewed as a whole, in a larger view of all issues, with all changes into play, its has benefit to groups / units, while not locking players out of a section of content.

All of this is progression of development, which is far better than doing nothing for fear of an exploit still being an exploit after the changes.

If its not broken you can't fix it, if it is broken you can't fix it...........just doesn't cut it.....

If it broken, lets fix it, and no ONE thing is going to fix it, but things do need to change, and if all changes are taken into account in an effort to maximize the game for as many sides as possible, the end result is positive. If people want to continue to state how one change will cause so many other problems without taking into account other changes or others perspectives, the railroad entitlement crud just goes on and on.......and we have the never ending stabs of discontent and more of the " people campaigning for it are total fu*kwits" garbage.

Not one person who has decried the split has come up with a solution that allows every player type to engage in the content that CW represents currently. Its not "your" hard mode, its not a war like sim, its a window dressed alternate game mode currently in a very limited and bland game that has been in development far to long. Its going to be split to remove some of the disparity in some rounds that is presently driving some players out of the content. Should this be happening just so pugs have an easy rewards path without grouping / joining a unit ?? NO, should it be happening because some players are going to exploit in a similar manner to the way they have been ??? NO, should it be happening to stop having full groups / units coordinating against pugs who have not done the same ??? YES, these rounds are a waste of time and only serve to distort the CW map, leave a sour taste in players mouths, and devalue a genuine win when it occurs.

If players want more coordinated matches, they can campaign for better team tools in the client. If players want to be able to recruit and train, they can campaign for better team tools in the client. If players want to be able to play as a group / unit and want to face others who are the same, they can campaign for that ( which is in part what a split brings about ). If players want to be able to play as a pug for a casual round, without dropping against a side that is comprised of groups / units, they can campaign for that.

As it seems, that players who want to be able to drop in CW as a collective, acting and playing in every way as a group / unit with the only difference being a missing vanity tag, they are and have been campaigning for that. These are the ones who don't want the ques split, issuing veiled threats to PGI and the community of how they will game the systems in an exploitative manner, while throwing a tantrum over how its targeting groups / units negatively that they prefer to not wear the tag's to represent the type of gameplay they seek.

Yet the players who are campaigning for split ques are the ones being called fu*kwits, go figure.

[Bonger Bob]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 12:03 AM, said:

yea, that's what I've been saying and implying. You caught me. I don't even have to point out your rhetoric anymore. You are quite apparent in your goals to try and discredit those you don't agree with. You just make yourself look REALLY silly when you say things like this and exactly why I don't bother taking anything else you say seriously because of stuff like this.

You want to do nothing but try and stir things up, imply ulterior motives where there are none, paint anyone that doesn't conform to YOUR point of view as some sort of seal clubbing elitist, meanwhile referring to the other players you try so hard to convince everyone else you're "speaking up for" as "scrubs" "newbs" and show nothing but disdain for them.

The only one here that has been trying to slant ANYthing into a negative connotation is you sir. It's quite apparent to those trying to have a constructive discussion and I've asked you to stop. It's off-topic, it's ridiculous and false personal implications you continue to make as to the sincerity of what I see and towards my personal integrity.

You're not fooling anyone, you're not able to hide behind your rhetoric anymore. You want to keep this up? I asked you politely to stop with the personal insults and to stop painting me, personally, as some sort of player who does those types of things and plays in that manner.

SO again, and for the last time, if and when you're ready to stop this ridiculous rhetoric, I'll consider taking you seriously and actually more than willing to discuss any ideas that help improve this community for EVERYone.

Until you can do that, you're just another in a very long list of wanna-be trolls that does nothing but make a lot of noise in the hopes that they'll be "popular" on the MWO forums.

I have 4 kiddies, popularity is the least of my concerns, im actually more of a hermit as most people in life are oxygen wasters. I couldn't care less how anyone perceives me, and I sit here on these forums attempting to discuss the game, its mechanics and the changes proposed so that in the long run, i hope to see a great game come to fruition, that can be enjoyed by many, without bias or elitism.

Im not about treating ANY of the player base differently for any reason, i don't believe any player no matter how much or how little they play is more or less entitled to aspects of the game then any other player. I don't believe my XXX dollars spent is of less or greater worth than any one elses XXX dollars spent. I don't believe any player ( or group ) should have treatment that is preferential over another player ( or group ) for any reason.

You claim i keep going off topic, yet all iv'e attempted to discuss with you and others has been in line with the thread title. Your the one who started the thread on a negative note ( as your title emphasizes ), and you continue to keeping going into negative reply mode with many, including myself.

You stated the thread negatively in general chat, your the one who has continually attacked players of all types from various angles in an effort to protect your favored play style. You've attacked others in other threads that were titled much more neutrally and continued to react negative to anyone who has shown any level of support for the que split.

If your upset with the end results, id suggest you look at yourself and your own actions a bit more thoroughly, You made the thread, you've continued to berate and deride myself and others for attempting to discuss what your thread was titled and concerned with. If you don't like the outcome of rational debate in a civil manner, your welcome to report me with the button on each of my posts accordingly. Please do, i have no problem with anything iv'e typed, can you say the same ??

Im sure those veiled threats and tantrums over punishing groups / units will be heard loud and clear at the town hall, at least i hope they are. It might be the first time PGI actually make a smart decision.

Edited by Bonger Bob, 17 January 2016 - 01:18 AM.

[MechWarrior3671771]

So, in light of all this, is my idea looking any better, at least as The Alternative?

PGI simply makes ques for Attacker/Defender visible to both sides. So when you click on a planet, you not only see that 6 solos and a 3 man are waiting for players, you also see that the other side is a 10 man premade. Now you can decide if this is how you want to spend your next 30 mins, and the beauty is that no one is punished or nerfed, its all self-selecting:

1) 12 man premades that are tired of grinding through solo newbs can now look for other premades
2) solo newbs that are tired of getting stomped by premades can find drops against other solos.

[Sjorpha]

Bonger Bob, on 16 January 2016 - 11:05 PM, said:

2 - Recruitment and training at the end of a gun barrel does nothing but make you lazy and alienate other players. There are better ways to recruit and if you want to use others to train against, that's what quick play is for.

That's not how it happens, it's not the enemy pugs you recruit.

You recruit by inviting pugs that fill up your team when you drop as less than 12. After a friendly match where the newbies have listended to commands and showed a good attitude you invite them to stay in the group and come to the faction or unit TS. After a while of positive experience from this they get invited to one of the casual units in your faction and work this way from there.

That dynamic is what we are sad to lose from the split. As a primary FRR player I can testify that helping and scooping up pugs like this have been central to building the casual loyalist units on the FRR hub. And the more elite units can also pick pugs up and funnel them to the casual ones.

We risk losing a very central part of faction community building with this split.

[Lupis Volk]

I'm a "wait and see it" kind of person. But this idea just screams of "solo elitism" and i have to say nope!

Units are needed to help new players in CW since none of the solo's or pugs bother to. Not all are big evil meanies.

heck from my time in the FRR they have a few units that'll go out of their way to help new players.

This whole splitting units from non-unit players smells of people wanting to harm units and the community at large.

If PGI does this i may think about leaving, since i'm in a unit. this idea treats me as if i'm a "bad" guy who clubs baby seals, even though i've only been playing since steam's release and am quite rubbish in CW (imo).

Edited by Lupis Volk, 17 January 2016 - 01:52 AM.

[Bonger Bob]

Sjorpha, on 17 January 2016 - 01:36 AM, said:

That's not how it happens, it's not the enemy pugs you recruit.

You recruit by inviting pugs that fill up your team when you drop as less than 12. After a friendly match where the newbies have listended to commands and showed a good attitude you invite them to stay in the group and come to the faction or unit TS. After a while of positive experience from this they get invited to one of the casual units in your faction and work this way from there.

That dynamic is what we are sad to lose from the split. As a primary FRR player I can testify that helping and scooping up pugs like this have been central to building the casual loyalist units on the FRR hub. And the more elite units can also pick pugs up and funnel them to the casual ones.

We risk losing a very central part of faction community building with this split.

fair enough, and agreed, that's a loss that no one has worded this well yet, and ill give that is a major loss for some units.

Its something that would be better served by having a teams list that is able to be browsed in game, with a list of units that are recruiting. Units then having ranks within the unit tag, that permits them to manage team members and recruit accordingly.

The said recruit is able to look at and browse the list, pick a team to join and experience dropping with a unit in the ques appropriate, while actually in a unit vs unit environment. Picking up a recruit with a unit while facing a team comprised of randoms, only serves to build false impressions for the recruit, as they haven't really experienced or seen how your unit performs against another unit. They haven't necessarily faced a unit either, they've just had their hand held through a round when your side was likely to win anyway.

The true test is when its unit vs unit, then it gets intense and the pressure is on. Making units more friendly to find and join, along with being able to then experience true units vs units play is what builds better players.

so is the problem really split ques ??? or is it the lack of team building and management tools in the client and how people work around that currently ???.

Splitting the ques is not going to break recruiting any more than it currently is, if anything players may be more inclined to seek out a unit to engage in the unit / group que with accordingly. If the group ques are more appealing ( offering a consistent and more uniform challenge ), people will want to play in them over others more.

[ztac]

The problem with CW is that it was badly implemented from day one.

Splitting the queue will bring longer wait times for all concerned, But the serious part of the problem is that MM simply does not work on any level, not in the solo queue or the group queue. And I don't think it even tries in CW!

The game itself has huge problems that are just glossed over and supported by the 'try hards' as it suits them.

The Bottom line is that it should be a FUN game, but is so far from that at times that you may as well just find something else to play, after all who wants to be stomped every match because of bad game mechanics?

The problems were addressed a very long time ago by the community and suggestions given as to how to solve these issues (way back in closed beta), PGI chose to ignore the solutions and seemed to blame IGP, now though they can not blame IGP and the ball is in their court , and what did they really do with it? Not much!

If you do run solo CW for most of the time you may as well quit your unit with the change! Or make an alt account and go solo from there (except that will take time to set up unless you already have one).

As per usual PGI put as much thought into this as they did the whole game (virtually none at all).

PGI need to remember that there are so called hardcore players and casual ... there will still be seal clubbing!
This move may retain more new players as bad experiences in games are why people stop playing them normally.... But this may well make some older players think twice about playing this game.............

Edited by ztac, 17 January 2016 - 02:37 AM.

[Bonger Bob]

ztac, on 17 January 2016 - 02:34 AM, said:

The problem with CW is that it was badly implemented from day one.

Splitting the queue will bring longer wait times for all concerned, But the serious part of the problem is that MM simply does not work on any level, not in the solo queue or the group queue. And I don't think it even tries in CW!

There is NO match maker in CW. PSR is not factored in, in any way, and there is currently no separation for group / units / solo's.

ztac, on 17 January 2016 - 02:34 AM, said:

The game itself has huge problems that are just glossed over and supported by the 'try hards' as it suits them.

Yup.

ztac, on 17 January 2016 - 02:34 AM, said:

The Bottom line is that it should be a FUN game, but is so far from that at times that you may as well just find something else to play, after all who wants to be stomped every match because of bad game mechanics?

The problems were addressed a very long time ago by the community and suggestions given as to how to solve these issues (way back in closed beta), PGI chose to ignore the solutions and seemed to blame IGP, now though they can not blame IGP and the ball is in their court , and what did they really do with it? Not much!

If you do run solo CW for most of the time you may as well quit your unit with the change! Or make an alt account and go solo from there (except that will take time to set up unless you already have one).

As per usual PGI put as much thought into this as they did the whole game (virtually none at all).

PGI need to remember that there are so called hardcore players and casual ... there will still be seal clubbing!
This move may retain more new players as bad experiences in games are why people stop playing them normally.... But this may well make some older players think twice about playing this game.............

Its a product to derive a profit from, and maximum exposure to the largest possible audience is what they need to seek to be profitable to the best effect. There will be players that decide not to continue due to what ever reasons, PGI need to limit those reasons effecting the largest player sections, so they can retain the maximum amount of existing players, while also trying to widen its appeal to new players.

Splitting ques may be positive, it may be negative, but it certainly won't be as bad as doing nothing with the current mess, further delays and ignorance of players by PGI is doing far more damage than what splitting ques ever will.

At least they are now showing mass amounts of change incomming, which is an obvious attempt to expand the games appeal and retain a higher percentage of players, both new and old. No matter what they do, they will never be able to please all players all the time.

If it means the game has to go more mainstream and less niche to stay viable, its going to happen. That's what i see reflected in the que split proposal. Its a step to opening up a wider game with more appeal to the average Joe. Some toes are going to be trod on no matter what they do, but its only a step, its not the only thing they are doing, and its been done to try and limit how many toes are being trod on.

PGI have shown they've failed with adhering to lore ( was bound to happen converting a table top turn based game to a FPS ) and making a niche game for the devoted worthy of the Battletech franchise, the time for clinging to those things is gone.

Faced with watching the game fail and fold, or changes coming into play that would reduce the horrible experiences of many players on both sides of the fence, i'd rather the changes myself.

Fun is key, and right now roflstopmping pugs / being rolled by units is detracting from that fun for many players, both units and pugs.

Edited by Bonger Bob, 17 January 2016 - 03:53 AM.

[Sandpit]

Bonger Bob, on 17 January 2016 - 01:05 AM, said:

You claim i keep going off topic, yet all iv'e attempted to discuss with you and others

I've specifically pointed out to you, quoted the examples, and left no doubt as that what I specifically referred to. You don't get to play the "victim" here. You have tried to slant and portray myself, specifically, as well as several others in these threads as something they are not.
Through direct statements
Not innuendos
Not thinly veiled trolling sarcasm

Period. I've quoted them out. I've made sure you know specifically and exactly what's being discussed in the replies I make to you.
So again, when I see you're done and satisfied that nobody here is silly enough to take our bait and when you're done with the sensationalistic stereotyping of players simply because they do not agree with you, I'll start taking you seriously.

Edited by Sandpit, 17 January 2016 - 04:34 AM.

[Sandpit]

ztac, on 17 January 2016 - 02:34 AM, said:

PGI need to remember that there are so called hardcore players and casual ... there will still be seal clubbing!
This move may retain more new players as bad experiences in games are why people stop playing them normally.... But this may well make some older players think twice about playing this game.............

well it's a philosophy change honestly. It's something the community itself has to start taking a little ownership of. Ranting at new players, solos, or any other player in this game does nothing except make that other player not want to listen to anything you have to say in the first place.

We've had several situations like that dropping CW this weekend in our PUGs. Some of our guys get worked up because quite literally we're losing due to very poor decisions made by 1-2 players. It sucks, but it's a game, and people are free to do as they wish inside the CoC. You suck it up and move on to the next drop and don't invite that player back if it can be avoided. No need to get upset, angry, or anything else.

That's the difference that has to be enforced through a little self-policing. You unit leaders, vets, and players that are involved in bigger units, start policing your TS servers. Start making sure YOUR guys aren't treating new players and solos like that. Use youe faction chat to help direct traffic. Accept that sometimes you'll have new players. Accept sometimes you'll have new players that are already frustrated with a complicated CW system. Accept that sometimes you'll have "vets" who "know best".

It's part of being a PUG type player and par for the course. If you really want the community to act a little better, then we as individuals need to do so. It starts there. Help other players you see trying to get some organization going. Talk to one another. Help direct traffic in your faction chat. Explain how things work. Be polite. Treat and talk to everyone else in the same manner you'd like to be treated in as well.

This isn't something PGI can "fix", this is something the players themselves have to assist with. PGI can definitely add comm and social tools to help, but those tools are pointless is we don't use them. Those tools don't help a new player find other players to drop with. They don't help a new player understand how our bigger units have public TS servers set up and how many of us try to coordinate through multiple factions to give a little spice and politicing to the CW map.

Help participate in the community itself. I had a great conversation with a player tonight that has played since OB. His exact words were, "I remember right after CB I started playing and the players and community were so helpful and welcoming that I want to try and do that to the next wave of new players coming in."

Say what you want about those "evil premades and unit" players. But those players are usually the ones at the forefront of the community trying to do things like this.

[Mystere]

Bonger Bob, on 17 January 2016 - 12:42 AM, said:

Not one person who has decried the split has come up with a solution that allows every player type to engage in the content that CW represents currently.

Wow! Just wow!

Repeating a lie a billion times does not make it true.

<smh>

[Kodyn]

Not wanting to get caught up in this back-and-forth, as it's devolved into a foodfight, as a large unit member, my 2 cents is that it just looks like longer queue times for units, and solo players will now have zero chance to improve without first joining units.

I'm sure there will be more to the system to prevent abuse of the solo queue by alts, or PGI will just nix the idea if that becomes a real issue.

I'll wait til the Town Hall to find out the details, but on the surface, this does appear the usual PGI knee-jerk response that will either get thrown out because Russ can only handle so much negative feedback before giving up, or just be implemented with a "deal with it" sticker plastered on.

No matter what, we won't truly know the extent of any real issues until it's either implemented or explained in full by Russ.

[Mystere]

Sjorpha, on 17 January 2016 - 01:36 AM, said:

We risk losing a very central part of faction community building with this split.

Nope. The demands of the whiny teamwork-averse solo player to excel on their own in a team-oriented mode of the game must be catered to.

On a less confrontational note, ... nope, I just can't do it..

Edited by Mystere, 17 January 2016 - 08:38 AM.

[Inti Raymi]

Sandpit, on 16 January 2016 - 05:45 PM, said:

They aren't?
I can personally go back through a few threads and posts and point out where the guy that liked your post right here? Has done nothing BUT try to paint anyone who is in a unit is just some dirty seal clubber.

Once again, you don't have to say "go away" to make that the intent of your words. Just search the premade on the forums some time. You'll see it plastered all over the place and it's almost always used in conjunction with negative connotations towards PUGs, solos, new players, etc.

Some of us are sick of a select few continuously trying to portray us in that manner.

And some of us who are actually not bad players are sick of a select few continuously trying to portray solo players as sub-moronic troglodytes who are incapable of finding their sleeves to wipe their noses on.

Back Atcha.