778 replies to this topic

[JaxRiot]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 05:58 PM, said:

Then maybe stop slinging around ridiculous rhetoric and say something meaningful. Your post equated to bashing people and saying something needs to change.

Myself, Mystere, and a few others have given many ideas, suggestions, written threads, etc.

So tell me, what's your idea?

Do you even know what some of the suggestions I've made are?
Since you say you can just "sit around listening to tryhards". Do you bother reading and making suggestions or supporting those threads with ideas you like?

I can safely say I do and have. Do you bother participating in the conversation instead of just slinging around slurs? Here's your chance, make sure you use it. I'd like to hear your ideas and have a discussion about them if that's what you really want. Same goes for Bong and others, stop the arguing and present your idea on how to improve CW.

It's as simple as that. Like I said, it's very easy to determine who really wants discussion about how to improve CW for everyone and who just wants to argue, make noise, and try to discredit others through stereotyping and rhetoric.

So which are you guys going to be?

P.S.
I'm still interested in whether ANY of you "critiquing" my feedback in this thread have even bothered to read some of the topic I started about how to improve CW.

If not, I have little hope that you're here for anything more than being the latter part of that example above and just being more noise instead of participating in an actual discussion.

Ball is in your court folks.

I know that question wasnt posed to me, but I have been reading too.

You want ideas but stand ready to pounce on any idea that isnt what you want. This entire thread is practically a one man crusade you are leading against any idea that isnt in line with yours.

There are multiple pages where you have posted 8 times per page. Each post attacking either someone who doesnt see what you want them to, or attacking PGI

If it wasnt for you this thread wouldnt even be half as long as it is.

And each time you oppose someone who doesnt think like you do, you start throwing out things that you Think might happen and make like they are actual facts (which they most definitely are not ) as to the reason someone is wrong.

You have been posting so much not only in this thread, but in others too, that Ive been wondering if you have even slept these last few days.

Despite our opposing opinions, I am seriously concerned. You seem to be taking all of this waaay too personal. This cant be healthy for you bro.

Maybe have a beer and watch a relaxing movie. Take some time off from the crusade and see how the next Townall meeting goes.

It may not be so bad.

[Bonger Bob]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 06:29 PM, said:

did you mention one thing about your thoughts on improving CW in there or not?
lots of noise no substance

no, im not going to be **** retentive and go multi quoting my own posts, as you are well aware of the ideas outside of ques splitting that I have touched on, but as they start to drift off the thread topic, I leave them to be expanded on in other places.

Some ( not all ) of the ideas i have briefly touched on are :

- real team management and building tools added to the client.
- VOIP lobby functionality for teams after grouping, but before dropping into a round so that builds can be discussed before the drop lock. This could extend to having a leader nominated at this point before the chaos begins.
- A team panel that lets you view what each players drop deck is comprised of, not necessarily detailing the loadout of each mech, but at least the mech types, this would go hand in hand with the voip function for the team prior to dropping in a round to allow people to alter their drop deck to suit what the team is taking into the round.
- CW galactic control map to have rewards for capturing a planet, and sustained timed rewards for keeping it. Give the CW map real meaning, not just the window dressing that it is currently.

there some, if you go back and read, there are more, and as i said, not often expanded on or discussed heavily because it drifts off topic. The thread was about splitting the CW ques with a good luck and go home if im not mistaken. Not how to overall improve on CW as a whole.

so, iv'e stood up to your request, can you now do so for mine ??? or did you skip past that again.

[Sandpit]

JaxRiot, on 17 January 2016 - 06:41 PM, said:

I know that question wasnt posed to me, but I have been reading too.

You want ideas but stand ready to pounce on any idea that isnt what you want. This entire thread is practically a one man crusade you are leading against any idea that isnt in line with yours.

There are multiple pages where you have posted 8 times per page. Each post attacking either someone who doesnt see what you want them to, or attacking PGI

If it wasnt for you this thread wouldnt even be half as long as it is.

And each time you oppose someone who doesnt think like you do, you start throwing out things that you Think might happen and make like they are actual facts (which they most definitely are not ) as to the reason someone is wrong.

You have been posting so much not only in this thread, but in others too, that Ive been wondering if you have even slept these last few days.

Despite our opposing opinions, I am seriously concerned. You seem to be taking all of this waaay too personal. This cant be healthy for you bro.

Maybe have a beer and watch a relaxing movie. Take some time off from the crusade and see how the next Townall meeting goes.

It may not be so bad.

okie doke, I asked nicely for your ideas on this. Either post something on topic instead of thinly veiled personal attacks or find another thread to troll. Period.

[Bonger Bob]

JaxRiot, on 17 January 2016 - 06:41 PM, said:

............

Despite our opposing opinions, I am seriously concerned. You seem to be taking all of this waaay too personal. This cant be healthy for you bro.

Maybe have a beer and watch a relaxing movie. Take some time off from the crusade and see how the next Townall meeting goes.

It may not be so bad.

well put, but i'm at the stage with him I hope he's not sleeping, and hopefully the sleep deprivation with his standard operating methods will combine to a very public breakdown and dummy spat at PGI in the town hall.

would be funny to listen to ( if he even get air time ) and the only thing funnier will be PGI's rebuke.

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 06:51 PM, said:

okie doke, I asked nicely for your ideas on this. Either post something on topic instead of thinly veiled personal attacks or find another thread to troll. Period.

lol, and you still fail to answer others requesting the same of yourself.

GJ

[JaxRiot]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 06:51 PM, said:

okie doke, I asked nicely for your ideas on this. Either post something on topic instead of thinly veiled personal attacks or find another thread to troll. Period.

Ya but we've already been over this.

Youre not interested in ideas.

Youre only interested in people who will support your crusade against spit ques.

And I happen to think that the split ques are a good idea.

Along with better rewards for Units, and better rewards for Loyalist, and Narrower attack lanes for better que times, and the 4x4 mode, and I also like the ideas of Lone wolf / Freelancer roles.

But you dont see all of those other good things. Youre only stuck on split ques and only interested in supporters that will prevent it.

Edited by JaxRiot, 17 January 2016 - 07:22 PM.

[Sandpit]

Bonger Bob, on 17 January 2016 - 06:46 PM, said:

no, im not going to be **** retentive and go multi quoting my own posts, as you are well aware of the ideas outside of ques splitting that I have touched on, but as they start to drift off the thread topic, I leave them to be expanded on in other places.

Some ( not all ) of the ideas i have briefly touched on are :

- real team management and building tools added to the client.
- VOIP lobby functionality for teams after grouping, but before dropping into a round so that builds can be discussed before the drop lock. This could extend to having a leader nominated at this point before the chaos begins.
- A team panel that lets you view what each players drop deck is comprised of, not necessarily detailing the loadout of each mech, but at least the mech types, this would go hand in hand with the voip function for the team prior to dropping in a round to allow people to alter their drop deck to suit what the team is taking into the round.
- CW galactic control map to have rewards for capturing a planet, and sustained timed rewards for keeping it. Give the CW map real meaning, not just the window dressing that it is currently.

there some, if you go back and read, there are more, and as i said, not often expanded on or discussed heavily because it drifts off topic. The thread was about splitting the CW ques with a good luck and go home if im not mistaken. Not how to overall improve on CW as a whole.

so, iv'e stood up to your request, can you now do so for mine ??? or did you skip past that again.

First let's go with a couple of things we know.
Russ specifically stated to me in regards to lobbies they're looking into it but don't even know if it is feasible for it to happen.

I think everyone across the board agrees we need a lobby system. A function social lobby system that makes it easy for players to quickly and easily find other players they're interested finding, ignoring those they're wanting to ignore, and active moderation to keep things "civil" in live discussions.
That's a lot of infrastructure and based on what PGI has stated, they don't know if it's feasible yet nor not, but they're looking into it.

So lets move beyond lobbies and voip.

CW galactic control of the map would help resolve a lot of issues with MM in general. That's how you can easily control match making without trying to shoehorn people into segregated queues. PGI needs to think of CW as more of a campaign than a persistent universe that will go on indefinitely. They do not have anywhere near the infrastructure needed for that. Real time economies, logistics, R&R, dropships, etc. Even based on what we've seen about Phase 3 it's nowhere near as in-depth as it would need to be in order to sustain a persistent setting.

So that means they have to acknowledge they are going to have to have regular intervals to reset the map and run Battle for Tuk. That naturally fits into treating it as a single season of CW from start to finish. That resolves a lot of the issues with "what's the goal". Until there is an official end date, the only "goal" is whatever the players decide they want it to be. Whether that be cbill rewards, planet tags, stirring up some on the forums in the faction threads, etc. Without a definitive ending and goal, there is no goal other than what we the players feel like making the goal at the moment.

By controlling the map PGI can control the queues themselves by simply throwing in some fluff just like a tabletop GM would do. "Today, Steiner and Davion announced a formal alliance in lieu of this new clan invasion, they have formed a united front. All mechwarriors are to report to their individual unit command for further instructions"
You can do the same on the other side for clans. Khan Wolf and Khan Falcon agrred to mutual batchall of (insert drop deck weight), all warriors report to your commanders for border incursion attacks commencing at 0600 hours.

That completely controls the map and attack and defend avenues and ensures that units can't dictate in completely unlimited terms the shape of the entire inner sphere.

Just have players choose a side in the war when they enter that season of CW. Then that prevents units from being able to switch during that season. It helps PGI have a solid number to look at when helping to determine those alliances and such to share borders and such when needed.

One thing every player needs to remember is that none of our units, no matter how big or small, loyalist, merc, or lone wolf one and all work for the factions. That means every "order" for attack and defend you get comes from that command. PGI simply needs to look at that and use that to help determine where and when attack avenues come open.

Those 2 changes nearly eliminate every queue and wait time issue they have. WIthout requiring anything extra in the way of coding or massive reworking of the system. It allows players the ability to still jump around factions, just not jump sides of the war, it helps narrow attack and defend queues to help have a more natural feeling funnel for player to keep it from being the uncoordinated mess it is now. It's a very simplistic approach.

As for new players, and helping slow down players rushing into CW before they're "ready" is to extend the cadet bonus period. They have to complete both the cadet bonus period AND training grounds before they can select CW queue option.

Upon graduation from the cadet bonus period, give the player a mech bay, a free mech of their choice, and xx amount of cbills to customize the mech or buy another mech, etc.

Then you put them into a "new CW drop queue", Make it a fairly quick and painless CW drops for players doing these first five matches. PGI could easily ask for community volunteers to help moderate it as well. There are plenty who would not mind pitching in to help with that at all. Once they complete that 5 drops they're released into the wild to fend for themselves.

There is a steep learning curve for a new player to take in the first time the play MWO. Toss in difficult to read and understand directions upon entering the CW queue. This puts in a very soft roadblock to players from just jumping into the deep end right off the bat and being a bit unprepared for CW sometimes.

That solves that entire issue and requires a separate queue (there's where that magical term isn't a "bad" thing) that funnels all new players into their first x games in a cw drop style that doesn't affect the actual planetary map. Give them a badge and achievement and another mech bay.

That right there gives incentives for new players to check out CW, gives 2 mech bays that would normally cost them real $$, gives them 6 mechs to work with in the future, gives them a much better and more comprehensive first time experience in CW.

That's going to do much more than simply implementing a segregated queue that just filters out anyone with tags and think that's going to solve anything.

That's an opening shot into my ideas for CW in general. Get specific with your ideas, put some thought into what specifrically you think could be implemented that would help improve it. Stick within the realm of what we know of about MWO and the limitations when coming up with ideas on what to implement.

JaxRiot, on 17 January 2016 - 07:21 PM, said:

Ya but we've already been over this.

Youre not interested in ideas.
.

yea ok

[JaxRiot]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 07:29 PM, said:

First let's go with a couple of things we know.
Russ specifically stated to me in regards to lobbies they're looking into it but don't even know if it is feasible for it to happen.

I think everyone across the board agrees we need a lobby system. A function social lobby system that makes it easy for players to quickly and easily find other players they're interested finding, ignoring those they're wanting to ignore, and active moderation to keep things "civil" in live discussions.
That's a lot of infrastructure and based on what PGI has stated, they don't know if it's feasible yet nor not, but they're looking into it.

So lets move beyond lobbies and voip.

CW galactic control of the map would help resolve a lot of issues with MM in general. That's how you can easily control match making without trying to shoehorn people into segregated queues. PGI needs to think of CW as more of a campaign than a persistent universe that will go on indefinitely. They do not have anywhere near the infrastructure needed for that. Real time economies, logistics, R&R, dropships, etc. Even based on what we've seen about Phase 3 it's nowhere near as in-depth as it would need to be in order to sustain a persistent setting.

So that means they have to acknowledge they are going to have to have regular intervals to reset the map and run Battle for Tuk. That naturally fits into treating it as a single season of CW from start to finish. That resolves a lot of the issues with "what's the goal". Until there is an official end date, the only "goal" is whatever the players decide they want it to be. Whether that be cbill rewards, planet tags, stirring up some on the forums in the faction threads, etc. Without a definitive ending and goal, there is no goal other than what we the players feel like making the goal at the moment.

By controlling the map PGI can control the queues themselves by simply throwing in some fluff just like a tabletop GM would do. "Today, Steiner and Davion announced a formal alliance in lieu of this new clan invasion, they have formed a united front. All mechwarriors are to report to their individual unit command for further instructions"
You can do the same on the other side for clans. Khan Wolf and Khan Falcon agrred to mutual batchall of (insert drop deck weight), all warriors report to your commanders for border incursion attacks commencing at 0600 hours.

That completely controls the map and attack and defend avenues and ensures that units can't dictate in completely unlimited terms the shape of the entire inner sphere.

Just have players choose a side in the war when they enter that season of CW. Then that prevents units from being able to switch during that season. It helps PGI have a solid number to look at when helping to determine those alliances and such to share borders and such when needed.

One thing every player needs to remember is that none of our units, no matter how big or small, loyalist, merc, or lone wolf one and all work for the factions. That means every "order" for attack and defend you get comes from that command. PGI simply needs to look at that and use that to help determine where and when attack avenues come open.

Those 2 changes nearly eliminate every queue and wait time issue they have. WIthout requiring anything extra in the way of coding or massive reworking of the system. It allows players the ability to still jump around factions, just not jump sides of the war, it helps narrow attack and defend queues to help have a more natural feeling funnel for player to keep it from being the uncoordinated mess it is now. It's a very simplistic approach.

As for new players, and helping slow down players rushing into CW before they're "ready" is to extend the cadet bonus period. They have to complete both the cadet bonus period AND training grounds before they can select CW queue option.

Upon graduation from the cadet bonus period, give the player a mech bay, a free mech of their choice, and xx amount of cbills to customize the mech or buy another mech, etc.

Then you put them into a "new CW drop queue", Make it a fairly quick and painless CW drops for players doing these first five matches. PGI could easily ask for community volunteers to help moderate it as well. There are plenty who would not mind pitching in to help with that at all. Once they complete that 5 drops they're released into the wild to fend for themselves.

There is a steep learning curve for a new player to take in the first time the play MWO. Toss in difficult to read and understand directions upon entering the CW queue. This puts in a very soft roadblock to players from just jumping into the deep end right off the bat and being a bit unprepared for CW sometimes.

That solves that entire issue and requires a separate queue (there's where that magical term isn't a "bad" thing) that funnels all new players into their first x games in a cw drop style that doesn't affect the actual planetary map. Give them a badge and achievement and another mech bay.

That right there gives incentives for new players to check out CW, gives 2 mech bays that would normally cost them real $$, gives them 6 mechs to work with in the future, gives them a much better and more comprehensive first time experience in CW.

That's going to do much more than simply implementing a segregated queue that just filters out anyone with tags and think that's going to solve anything.

That's an opening shot into my ideas for CW in general. Get specific with your ideas, put some thought into what specifrically you think could be implemented that would help improve it. Stick within the realm of what we know of about MWO and the limitations when coming up with ideas on what to implement.


yea ok

Sounds good, except keep the split ques and it would be great.

[Lupis Volk]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 07:29 PM, said:

First let's go with a couple of things we know.
Russ specifically stated to me in regards to lobbies they're looking into it but don't even know if it is feasible for it to happen.

I think everyone across the board agrees we need a lobby system. A function social lobby system that makes it easy for players to quickly and easily find other players they're interested finding, ignoring those they're wanting to ignore, and active moderation to keep things "civil" in live discussions.
That's a lot of infrastructure and based on what PGI has stated, they don't know if it's feasible yet nor not, but they're looking into it.

So lets move beyond lobbies and voip.

CW galactic control of the map would help resolve a lot of issues with MM in general. That's how you can easily control match making without trying to shoehorn people into segregated queues. PGI needs to think of CW as more of a campaign than a persistent universe that will go on indefinitely. They do not have anywhere near the infrastructure needed for that. Real time economies, logistics, R&R, dropships, etc. Even based on what we've seen about Phase 3 it's nowhere near as in-depth as it would need to be in order to sustain a persistent setting.

So that means they have to acknowledge they are going to have to have regular intervals to reset the map and run Battle for Tuk. That naturally fits into treating it as a single season of CW from start to finish. That resolves a lot of the issues with "what's the goal". Until there is an official end date, the only "goal" is whatever the players decide they want it to be. Whether that be cbill rewards, planet tags, stirring up some on the forums in the faction threads, etc. Without a definitive ending and goal, there is no goal other than what we the players feel like making the goal at the moment.

By controlling the map PGI can control the queues themselves by simply throwing in some fluff just like a tabletop GM would do. "Today, Steiner and Davion announced a formal alliance in lieu of this new clan invasion, they have formed a united front. All mechwarriors are to report to their individual unit command for further instructions"
You can do the same on the other side for clans. Khan Wolf and Khan Falcon agrred to mutual batchall of (insert drop deck weight), all warriors report to your commanders for border incursion attacks commencing at 0600 hours.

That completely controls the map and attack and defend avenues and ensures that units can't dictate in completely unlimited terms the shape of the entire inner sphere.

Just have players choose a side in the war when they enter that season of CW. Then that prevents units from being able to switch during that season. It helps PGI have a solid number to look at when helping to determine those alliances and such to share borders and such when needed.

One thing every player needs to remember is that none of our units, no matter how big or small, loyalist, merc, or lone wolf one and all work for the factions. That means every "order" for attack and defend you get comes from that command. PGI simply needs to look at that and use that to help determine where and when attack avenues come open.

Those 2 changes nearly eliminate every queue and wait time issue they have. WIthout requiring anything extra in the way of coding or massive reworking of the system. It allows players the ability to still jump around factions, just not jump sides of the war, it helps narrow attack and defend queues to help have a more natural feeling funnel for player to keep it from being the uncoordinated mess it is now. It's a very simplistic approach.

As for new players, and helping slow down players rushing into CW before they're "ready" is to extend the cadet bonus period. They have to complete both the cadet bonus period AND training grounds before they can select CW queue option.

Upon graduation from the cadet bonus period, give the player a mech bay, a free mech of their choice, and xx amount of cbills to customize the mech or buy another mech, etc.

Then you put them into a "new CW drop queue", Make it a fairly quick and painless CW drops for players doing these first five matches. PGI could easily ask for community volunteers to help moderate it as well. There are plenty who would not mind pitching in to help with that at all. Once they complete that 5 drops they're released into the wild to fend for themselves.

There is a steep learning curve for a new player to take in the first time the play MWO. Toss in difficult to read and understand directions upon entering the CW queue. This puts in a very soft roadblock to players from just jumping into the deep end right off the bat and being a bit unprepared for CW sometimes.

That solves that entire issue and requires a separate queue (there's where that magical term isn't a "bad" thing) that funnels all new players into their first x games in a cw drop style that doesn't affect the actual planetary map. Give them a badge and achievement and another mech bay.

That right there gives incentives for new players to check out CW, gives 2 mech bays that would normally cost them real $$, gives them 6 mechs to work with in the future, gives them a much better and more comprehensive first time experience in CW.

That's going to do much more than simply implementing a segregated queue that just filters out anyone with tags and think that's going to solve anything.

That's an opening shot into my ideas for CW in general. Get specific with your ideas, put some thought into what specifrically you think could be implemented that would help improve it. Stick within the realm of what we know of about MWO and the limitations when coming up with ideas on what to implement.

Boom there goes 90% of the issues in CW and that was done without splitting the CW playerbase.

though i'm still stumped why people would want to split the CW playerbase. Splitting the playerbase in multiplayer is a surefire way to kill your game.

Edited by Lupis Volk, 17 January 2016 - 08:27 PM.

[Sandpit]

JaxRiot, on 17 January 2016 - 08:07 PM, said:

Sounds good, except keep the split ques and it would be great.

split queues for what exactly?
I've already shown how this system right here eliminates any more unneeded segregation between players. All that does is create divides within the community itself. It's literally building in bias and separation. That's not how you build a community.

It's also been shown that that idea still wouldn't solve several issues.

Ok, you like separate queues. If that's all you ahve to say about the matter please refrain from further posting unless it offers something new. Your support for that idea is well noted in this thread. The rest of us have been discussing other issues so please, we've evolved past that discussion. We've got several good discussions going on in here about tools and ways PGI can improve CW across the board for everyone that wants to play.

The split queue has been discussed, debated, no other discussion can be had about it without one of two things happening
1.) You're just repeating yourself in which case is just a circular argument, nobody is interested in it. You said already, in some cases 4 or 5 times.

2.) Say something new on the topic that hasn't been discussed.

If your posts fall into category #1, don't bother. I've tried and politely asked to have an adult discussion here. If you are incapable of that there are plenty of other threads to troll, there's no food for you here.

If your posts fall into category #2, then by all means, please post it and lets discuss it. The more specific the better.

Expanding on some of the ideas and how to incorporate them into CW is constructive, repeating yourself and saying the same thing over and over is not. Don't act dense, and do the whole "but (insert the chosen scapegoat or bandwagon here) is just being silenced now.

The adults having a discussion don't even need to read that last paragraph, but a few of you do. I'm confident that the people wanting progressive discussion will know the difference and more importantly I'm sure the community and such will know as well.

So please, if your only "feedback" is "sounds good, except keep the split ques and it would be great" and you can't add anything new, stop rehashing the same thing over and over again
please

[JaxRiot]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 08:54 PM, said:

split queues for what exactly?
I've already shown how this system right here eliminates any more unneeded segregation between players. All that does is create divides within the community itself. It's literally building in bias and separation. That's not how you build a community.

It's also been shown that that idea still wouldn't solve several issues.

Ok, you like separate queues. If that's all you ahve to say about the matter please refrain from further posting unless it offers something new. Your support for that idea is well noted in this thread. The rest of us have been discussing other issues so please, we've evolved past that discussion. We've got several good discussions going on in here about tools and ways PGI can improve CW across the board for everyone that wants to play.

The split queue has been discussed, debated, no other discussion can be had about it without one of two things happening
1.) You're just repeating yourself in which case is just a circular argument, nobody is interested in it. You said already, in some cases 4 or 5 times.

2.) Say something new on the topic that hasn't been discussed.

If your posts fall into category #1, don't bother. I've tried and politely asked to have an adult discussion here. If you are incapable of that there are plenty of other threads to troll, there's no food for you here.

If your posts fall into category #2, then by all means, please post it and lets discuss it. The more specific the better.

Expanding on some of the ideas and how to incorporate them into CW is constructive, repeating yourself and saying the same thing over and over is not. Don't act dense, and do the whole "but (insert the chosen scapegoat or bandwagon here) is just being silenced now.

The adults having a discussion don't even need to read that last paragraph, but a few of you do. I'm confident that the people wanting progressive discussion will know the difference and more importantly I'm sure the community and such will know as well.

So please, if your only "feedback" is "sounds good, except keep the split ques and it would be great" and you can't add anything new, stop rehashing the same thing over and over again
please

But I agreed with you. I liked it

The only thing I didnt agree on was the split que part.

Oh thats right I forgot... you only accept "feedback" that supports Not splitting the que.

You dont want feedback. You want an agenda

Edit- and you cant tell me to stop saying the same thing. Youve been saying the exact same thing all throughout this thread. Youre just trying to come up with new ways of saying it.

Edited by JaxRiot, 17 January 2016 - 09:22 PM.

[Bonger Bob]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 07:29 PM, said:

First let's go with a couple of things we know.
Russ specifically stated to me in regards to lobbies they're looking into it but don't even know if it is feasible for it to happen.

I think everyone across the board agrees we need a lobby system

..........................................................

< very long detailed and respectful post that was a pleasure to read >
..........................................................

That's an opening shot into my ideas for CW in general. Get specific with your ideas, put some thought into what specifrically you think could be implemented that would help improve it. Stick within the realm of what we know of about MWO and the limitations when coming up with ideas on what to implement.

Thank you for finally coming to the table with a detailed breakdown of you think a restricted separate que could work, very interesting concept.

The split is likely to happen anyways, and so far we've reached a consensus on a few things at least :

- The ques split alone is not an "all fix" for the many problems CW has
- the split que, for newbs that "funnels all new players into their first x games" should not offer the same rewards as units, and should not effect the CW map.
- the game is very lacking in many area's separate to the ques debate

This doesn't prevent them doing the split now, which is probably beneficial to the situation you've outlined, as to do everything all in one hit would be a nightmare. There is just no way in hell PGI can remotely code it all without some big issues popping up, and the more changes you make in one hit will increase the volume of bugs that we players all get to deal with in one hit.

I'd rather see small changes take place that are individually implemented so that bugs can be squashed as they go, working towards the bigger and more complete picture, rather than have them rush into a massive set of changes that will cripple game play for all for an indeterminate amount of time while we wait for PGI to back peddle.

The que split opens up that possibility, its a small change, that in the short term will allow a more varied and purposed game for a wider section of players, while other changes that NEED to happen get under way. It is a quick and temporary fix, not a long term remain as is solution. Its something pretty simple to code in comparison to doing a lot of other things.

Its also something I think you'll agree they could really **** up, a good example of that would be allowing the separate que to yield the same rewards or influence to CW map to the same extent as groups.

Overall, its looking like the ques WILL be split, so how about we try and make sure PGI gets it right. Spot where the problems are, identify ways to prevent them occurring, discuss better ways to implement it. But while we do so, none of us should ever be saying to anyone your not allowed access to XXX content or XXX mode just for the sake of keeping it exclusive ( or for any other reason for that matter ). We should be fighting for a more inclusive game for anyone, no matter how bad / good they are, no matter what others think about how others play. Just adjust the influence on the campaign to be proportional to the work applied and everyone can do what they want.

Doesn't matter how hard or easy things are made, not everyone is going to engage in a preferred style of channeled play, admirable as though the system might be, if it excludes people from content by forcing a particular play method, without providing the tools to undertake the forced methods, its only going to continue what exists at the moment : a CW campaign missing the actual campaign, with absolute total randomness in matches that are largely decided before the first mech has moved in what is ultimately just an alternate drop mode and objective until massive changes are made.

If the split can change that in any way, i'm all for it. The more players that enjoy it in any manner, the more players we have in the game, the more players give money to PGI so they can keep developing the game beyond what is barely a passable game for being out of beta.

TL:DR - There is lots of other things that need doing as well, the que split is just one thing to at least TRY, especially while its still under the guise of "beta".

[Bonger Bob]

Lupis Volk, on 17 January 2016 - 08:26 PM, said:

Boom there goes 90% of the issues in CW and that was done without splitting the CW playerbase.

though i'm still stumped why people would want to split the CW playerbase. Splitting the playerbase in multiplayer is a surefire way to kill your game.

Lots of big title MMO's have separate ques akin to units in one, pugs in another. Just look at any major RPG with PvP, in some cases the pug que is more alive than the guilds / teams que.

[N0MAD]

Sandpit, on 15 January 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

Fact: (not hysterics)
You're not being separated from groups, just unit members with tags

Fact:
The players who stomp you and your fellow "scrubs" (as YOU put it) aren't going to be stopped by this segregation

Fact:
It makes it easier for those players to find and prey on new players

Fact:
It does nothing but enhance and make an easier environment for griefers to identify the players to do this against

Fact:
Those with tags aren't going to be hurt, we still have 12mans to drop with just about any time we want

Fact:
It fixes none of the problems in regards to stomps, seal clubbing, etc.

Fact:
The only thing those griefers have to do is create an alt, not join a unit, and club seals to their heart's content

Fact:
The griefers themselves doing this kind of thing have already stated and thought of how to bypass this "solution"

None of those are fact, just scare mongering, how can it be fact if there is no solo Q yet and none of that is happening because well there is no Q to get facts from, its just scare mongering and conjecture.
The mode isnt out yet and you are saying this is fact?
LoL.
Here is a likely scenario not claiming its fact, a could be future scenario..
The solo Q is popular, many play and there is a larger healthy Q, because the Q is populated and active multiple games are being launched every minute/few minutes making sync droping not work so well, sync droppers are being put into different games because games are launching frequently..
Cant say thats fact because well the mode isnt out yet.
Actually there are no facts on account there is no mode..
Lots of scare mongering, conjecture and opinion only.

[Sandpit]

N0MAD, on 17 January 2016 - 11:36 PM, said:

Lots of scare mongering, conjecture and opinion only.

sure thing sparky. that's my goal. you figured me out. There goes my "master plan"
smh
you're absolutely correct. I'm a horrible "fear mongerer" NOM NOM NOM I'm eating your fear see?

Now that I've admitted to that and you've foiled my evil plot can we move on to some meaningful discussion?

[N0MAD]

Sandpit, on 15 January 2016 - 05:27 PM, said:

your negative opinion of the vast majority of players in this game just continues to astound

This coming from the person who is repeatedly saying that hundreds if not thousands of players are going to drop unit tags and exploit the solo Q.
Seems legit..

[N0MAD]

Ghogiel, on 16 January 2016 - 06:25 PM, said:

If I understand correctly how this new queue works, I think in the new system I might have a legit use for my alt. I can coordinate my alt with players in units trying to take a planet. And similarly with other players alts. We can make sure both queues are getting farmed.

You can do that right now, Using your Alt you can be on the opposing team and you and your teams Alts can be tanking games vs your main faction.
Are you using your alt to exploit the system now? if not why would you and your team do it in a solo Q?

[N0MAD]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 11:38 PM, said:

sure thing sparky. that's my goal. you figured me out. There goes my "master plan"
smh
you're absolutely correct. I'm a horrible "fear mongerer" NOM NOM NOM I'm eating your fear see?

Now that I've admitted to that and you've foiled my evil plot can we move on to some meaningful discussion?

Drible because , well just because.
You tried to point things out as fact when i showed you that in fact there are no facts due to... you know there is no mode therefore no facts about it.
So you reply with drible.
Scare mongering yes, you are implying that there are dozens, hundreds even maybe thousands of players/units waiting to abuse/exploit the system, you are in fact accusing a large part of the CW population of being exploiters.
Basically one of your main points for not wanting a Solo Q, repeated many many times in this thread, is that there are to many exploiters in CW.

Edited by N0MAD, 18 January 2016 - 12:51 AM.

[Sandpit]

N0MAD, on 18 January 2016 - 12:05 AM, said:

This coming from the person who is repeatedly saying that hundreds if not thousands of players are going to drop unit tags and exploit the solo Q.
Seems legit..

quote please
EXACT quote please, not your "synopsis" of a post.

N0MAD, on 18 January 2016 - 12:49 AM, said:

hundreds even maybe thousands of players/units waiting to abuse/exploit the system, you are in fact accusing a large part of the CW population of being exploiters.

see above

I'm going to say this and leave it at that and not acknowledge nor engage in this any further. Either drop the personal insults and flame attacks or we'll let the mods sort it out.

Get on topic and constructive or not, you won't be engaged by me if you want to continue to troll though.

[mania3c]

Sandpit, maybe just don't present your opinion as facts. In fact (funny), none of your points are facts. You think you understand the system enough, so you can tell, how it will work with these changes but actually none of us has some clear idea what it will do. Many of us believe, it could improve life in CW for many. You are pointing on ways, how it could be exploited. Maybe you are right..but If it will be really exploited to the point, it wont help new players in any way, I say just put these CW maps into QW and let idiots play in their dying CW mode.

[Mycrus]

Just means 3 x 4 group launch vs 12...

More things change... more things stay the same...