56 replies to this topic

[Meathook]

Or even actually Servers? (Or call them Lobbies if they are on centralized servers)

What was wrong with them?

-One could just join one of them almost instantly without much searching
-One could see who is already on the server, so one could avoid or search stacked groups
-Matches would start right after one another, instead of 10minutes of playing, then 5-10 minutes of searching for the next game
-One could decide to stick with his team after a round for another match or choose to try another server
-One could choose servers with different map rotations, catering to all the tastes/builds

On the other hand we got matchmaking and tiers now. I cannot see much going for that one. Did I miss something? What are your thoughts about this? Do you think Matchmaking is the better system? Could something like servers even worked in through a way of creating public lobbies on MWO's servers that could be browsed?

I don't want to say that servers are above all, you still got your fair share with stacked teams and whatnot, but I just feel like I got... more out of my time playing games with servers than playing the matchmaking game.

[Shirow]

I second this, would be great to have a normal server list.
That way a unit/clan could always fight on their home turf.
Also make the mech battles bigger, I know I heard the maps
Are not big enough, but there are serval maps that are perfect
For it

Edited by Shirow, 25 January 2016 - 06:13 AM.

[RockmachinE]

I would love this, but unfortunately player mentality is different these days and stuff like it wouldn't fly. It also wouldn't be realistic in terms of PGI resources etc. It would require a major rework of the infrastructure.

[Meathook]

Louis Brofist, on 25 January 2016 - 09:57 AM, said:

It would require a major rework of the infrastructure.

Of course it would have to cater to the current MWO Infrastructure, so private servers are off the table. I see it more of an option to create lobbys, like the ones created in matchmaking, just with options and a longer lifetime than one match, that gets shown in a list similar to the LFG list. While this surely is not a job done in 15 minutes I think it isn't that unrealistic either.

Edited by Meathook, 25 January 2016 - 10:45 AM.

[KodiakGW]

Let's see. Players can have the ability to choose what map and mode they want to play. Players don't need to always take loadouts that will work on any map/mode (laser vomit) because they have no idea what the next match will be. Players don't have to play Conquest on Terra Therma because one person played the map mini game and got 12x multiplier to troll the rest of them.

Sound fine to me. Might even make me purchase more than one of the same chassis so I can take different loadouts of my favorite mechs. Right now, I'm only adding mechs to my inventory for MRBC and NBT. To play other queues, I just take the best quirked laser vomit fast (87+ kph) mech. I may get Assault Bog , followed by Conquest HPG, followed by Skirmish Caustic, followed by Conquest Polar. You never know. No other loadout would work effectively on each of those maps and modes. Which in turn makes this game boring to me.

[DAYLEET]

Servers always made the game better for the players. MatchMaker is a thing that grew popular with console because they could not afford and had the knowhow to have a server system of quality. It was simpler for them with a MM. The popularity of console gaming influenced the pc gaming world in so many negative ways. We spent decades evolving, maturing into something complex and suddenly its back to the stone age with gameplay, ui, multiplayer and even graphic with poor visual and locked framerate. It's changing again, i heard the new cod have or will have true servers again and will be moddable, welcome to 20years ago.

[KHETTI]

Apparently i'm not allowed to have an opinion or the right to post it on the forums.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Hit reg is server authenticated so it's never gonna happen.

[Tarogato]

lol, no. That would be terrible in this game. Finding matches would be annoying, matches would be completely imbalanced, people would ragequit and whine hax and premade stacking, ... it just wouldn't work in this game the way things are now.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

No, all they need to do is remove map voting, return the "pick a mode, go play, random map" version, and call it good. There's literally 0 reason for lobby's outside of private matches, which can already be done.

[Revis Volek]

KodiakGW, on 25 January 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

Let's see. Players can have the ability to choose what map and mode they want to play. Players don't need to always take loadouts that will work on any map/mode (laser vomit) because they have no idea what the next match will be. Players don't have to play Conquest on Terra Therma because one person played the map mini game and got 12x multiplier to troll the rest of them.

Sound fine to me. Might even make me purchase more than one of the same chassis so I can take different loadouts of my favorite mechs. Right now, I'm only adding mechs to my inventory for MRBC and NBT. To play other queues, I just take the best quirked laser vomit fast (87+ kph) mech. I may get Assault Bog , followed by Conquest HPG, followed by Skirmish Caustic, followed by Conquest Polar. You never know. No other loadout would work effectively on each of those maps and modes. Which in turn makes this game boring to me.

Whats so bad about playing on Terra Therma once and a while?

[Jetfire]

I very much dislike this idea, not with it being an option, but with it being the norm. I mean we have private matches, which basically would just need a small meeting room add on to get what you are talking about up and running, but having it be the default... It would lead to all kinds of issues. For starters I have always run into issues in games with those systems that there are either full or empty servers so you either end up playing against like 1 player or breaking up your group of friends and waiting for a server that is 99% full to open up a slot or two. That is a system that exists to get multiplayer in a game without any effort into trying to ensure good play experience. It really pushes them into the hardcore fan only box in my experience.

Again, as an option private matches already exist. One could argue a nice lobby to meet up and form private matches would be nice, but I would much prefer the present match maker.

[Jetfire]

CMDR Sunset Shimmer, on 25 January 2016 - 01:28 PM, said:

No, all they need to do is remove map voting, return the "pick a mode, go play, random map" version, and call it good. There's literally 0 reason for lobby's outside of private matches, which can already be done.

The only reason I dislike this is the present voting allows them to add game modes without splitting the community, not that they have put any in yet, but I really want the eventuality that we have 6-8 game modes.

[Troutmonkey]

Server browsers are a massive waste of time.

1. Look through big list
2. Find server with 23/24 players so you can start quickly
3. "Server is full"
4. Search through big list
5. Join half full server
6. Wait for server to fill up
7. Find out server host is AFK and won't start the game
8. Leave server and goto 1.

That's my general experience with server lobbies. That doesn't even include the server hosts who try and enforce stupid rules like "NO ECM MECHS!". Server lobbies are a massively flawed system, and matchmaking is a much faster and better solution.

[KHETTI]

Tarogato, on 25 January 2016 - 01:21 PM, said:

lol, no. That would be terrible in this game. Finding matches would be annoying, matches would be completely imbalanced, people would ragequit and whine hax and premade stacking, ... it just wouldn't work in this game the way things are now.

You just described what we have now.......

[Meathook]

Troutmonkey, on 25 January 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

Server browsers are a massive waste of time.

1. Look through big list
2. Find server with 23/24 players so you can start quickly
3. "Server is full"
4. Search through big list
5. Join half full server
6. Wait for server to fill up
7. Find out server host is AFK and won't start the game
8. Leave server and goto 1.

That's my general experience with server lobbies. That doesn't even include the server hosts who try and enforce stupid rules like "NO ECM MECHS!". Server lobbies are a massively flawed system, and matchmaking is a much faster and better solution.

As I said, keep the matchmaking and expand it with a lobby function. Boom. Both worlds.

Edit: About the faster. Yeah, maybe for one game. But I'd rather look 10min for a good lobby and play 2h straight, than fill 2h with 10 minutes of match, 5 minutes of "Searching", Voting, Connecting and Ready up. Thats about a third of game time wasted.

Edited by Meathook, 25 January 2016 - 03:52 PM.

[KodiakGW]

Revis Volek, on 25 January 2016 - 03:05 PM, said:

Whats so bad about playing on Terra Therma once and a while?

I want the choice of what mech to take on it. Especially Conquest mode. I guess you never had a player mocking everyone in chat that he made that map/mode happen. I've experienced it too many times. The current map/mode voting is enabling troll behavior. That needs to stop.

[Meathook]

Yes, it would be nice to see lobbies with different map rotations like "hot/cold maps only", so people could pit their specialized builds against each other. People might actually find that they like maps like Therma, if they know they are going to play it beforehand, instead of it being that one map that gets voted so rarely and is so special, that it feels more like a troll.

About points like host afk, admin abuse and cheating, as I said, they should be running like matchmaking games on MWO servers, people should be able to create lobbies and control a given set of options, but they should not have admin powers after creating said lobbies. Things like kicks and in game map changes should be only possible through voting, if at all.

I think it might also be a good place for units to recruit new members. A Unit could open a lobby, split themselves 4vs4 and let the rest fill up with randoms. They would be more inclined to join lobbies where they see a balanced team layout before joining.

[RedDragon]

Tarogato, on 25 January 2016 - 01:21 PM, said:

lol, no. That would be terrible in this game. Finding matches would be annoying, matches would be completely imbalanced, people would ragequit and whine hax and premade stacking, ... it just wouldn't work in this game the way things are now.

Well, it worked fine for MW3 and 4 ...

[Salvag3]

@ throutmokey

I feel you, it drove me nuts in Battlefield that people could run ranked servers and enforce rules on the players that don't allow them to use certain weapons or game play styles. Even more in that game because their TOS clearly stated that was not allowed. But EA refuses to do anything about it