28 replies to this topic

[Prof RJ Gumby]

[solution updated to fit the recent changes, outdated parts in spoilers]

Introduction:

Spoiler

I'm a unitless CW player jumping between factions, but when I can, I drop with any unit that will take me with them (salutations to HACK, MRR, GiFR and others who took me under their wings!). Currently I'm in the middle of getting Loyality level 6 with all factions. I base this solution of my observations, opinion on the problem and things announced to be implemented in stage III.

My observations:

1. The problem of repeated stomps isn't caused by unit 12-mans. It is caused by solo pugs. In particular, those inexperienced, uncooperative, clueless pugs. They bring stomps on themselves and their teammates. Even pug vs pug battles end in stomps often if one team works together and the other one doesn't.

Even a totally casual group can have a gg against most decent units. Yeah, they will most often loose, but it won't be stomps. The very design of CW works to prevent stomps now. Big maps,tons of turrets in one place, armed dropships, drop zones away in the back. Even if the score goes initially to 12-0, it is very easy to gather up 12 people and make a counterpush against now-wounded opponents, make the score more even and gather up some dmg/kills.

Stomps only happen if one team gets totally disorganised after loosing the 1st wave (or is from the very beginning).

TL, DR: stomps are caused by people playing CW solo style

1. I think many of us noticed and liked the overall increase in group Q match quality that came with solo/unit division. That part was nice. Sadly, solo Q will disappear on 28th April, because there isn't enough solo players. I think group Q works good enough to leave it as it is, without solos who should have some kind of their own space.

2. The problem IMHO is that the split made 20 possible queues and turned them into 40 Qs (adding faction solos of every faction on every planet with freelancers trying to fill the gaps). This is the main problem IMHO. There shouldn't be 20 Qs for solos. There should be 1. 2 at best. Exactly as I proposed before, this is why I'm necroing this tread.

3. We need a kiddie pool for diehard solo casuals, soloing newbies and the like. This is where the line should be drawn, not between tagged players and untagged ones.

Best solution idea I could come with: make a special CW Q available (only?) to freelancers. Solo players ONLY. It could work like that:

My solution:

A stage III CW Q for solos:
1. You're new. You go to CW tab and get to choose whether you'll be freelancer, merc or a loyalist. There is a big arrow pointing at the freelance option stating: "recommended for new players"

2. You become a freelancer.

3. Instead of looking for planets available, you can just choose if you want to with clan or IS dropdeck, then push the "I'll fight for anyone" button. (that has a big arrow pointing at it that states "recommended for new players". You can only go there solo, not even a 2-man available.

4. You get added to a Q that creates matches every (e.g.) 2 minutes, a timer shows how long it will be before the next drops (to mitigate synch dropping and to don't force people to stare at the game screen all the time while waiting)
5. Every 2 or so minutes, the server checks the players in the Q and distributes them into matches. It only takes the number of IS/Clan players into account, nothing else:
a) 12 IS players,12 Clan players - They get dropped against each other on a random planet on clan-IS border
b ) 24 IS or 24 Clan players. They get dropped against each other on random clan-clan border or IS-IS border
c) odd "fours" get dropped in scouting matches.
d) those left get prioritised in the matches that will get started in the next round (2 minutes)
6. You get loyalty rewards basing on the faction that hired you this time. To keep up with the changes: you get rewards for mercs.

Voila. Newbs and diehard solos get their own matches, without dividing them into 20 Qs that they cannot hope to fill. It's kinda like a backup solo Q introduced into the CW. Good for those who just want to try out CW, don't care about faction or want to farm that 2nd loyality level mechbays (level 6 is tricky, because you can't choose a faction at all) earn some rewards. Bad for anyone who want to drop in groups, get higher level rewards or have any influance on the actual map.

Issues to discuss:
- whether such matches should influence planet %
- whether unit players should be allowed to drop in that Q
- why this is such a wonderful idea
EDIT:
- whether or not disable LP loss with faction you fight against in such a random match (barely an issue IMHO, the loss is so small it's barely noticeable)
- whether to allow choosing scouting/invasion/scouting+invasion matches before getting added to the Q.
- can anything be done about solo loyalists

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 25 April 2016 - 11:58 PM.

[Hotthedd]

I think that any mode that excludes a percentage of the player base should not be able to affect the map. If an organized group in a unit cannot defend their own planet, it would be unfair.

Solo means solo, so I see no reason tagged solos should not be able to participate. The problem is if it is a Clan vs. I.S. battle, players can "organize" in team speak, and be assured of being on the same team when sync-dropping. I cannot see any barrier to this.

I like that you are trying to think of a positive way to handle the situation.

[jss78]

Prof RJ Gumby, on 27 January 2016 - 03:54 AM, said:

1. The problem of repeated stomps isn't caused by unit 12-mans. It is caused by solo pugs. In particular, those inexperienced, uncooperative, clueless pugs. They bring stomps on themselves and their teammates. Even pug vs pug battles end in stomps often if one team works together and the other one doesn't.

Even a totally casual group can have a gg against most decent units. Yeah, they will most often loose, but it won't be stomps. The very design of CW works to prevent stomps now. Big maps,tons of turrets in one place, armed dropships, drop zones away in the back. Even if the score goes initially to 12-0, it is very easy to gather up 12 people and make a counterpush against now-wounded opponents, make the score more even and gather up some dmg/kills.

Stomps only happen if one team gets totally disorganised after loosing the 1st wave (or is from the very beginning).

TL, DR: stomps are caused by people playing CW solo style

I agree on this point. To me, the whole "Units vs. PUGs" was always a false dichotomy. The issue is units vs. bad PUGs. There's no shortage of PUGs out there who are Tier 1-2 and who only roll in mastered and moduled mechs, actively use VOIP, etc. The disparaging way PUGs are often talked about doesn't seem to apply to these guys -- they're every bit as good as any unit guy, just don't have TS.

Then you have the truly clueless PUGs -- and I don't say this to be mean, just an observation as there clearly are players who're out of their depth in CW -- and these are a different case altogether.

So I agree on your general point that the separating PUGs vs. units isn't the core MM issue, but separating those PUGs who need the "kiddie pool".

I think it's also important to allow the experienced and competitive pugs continue grouping up with units and not force them into the kiddie pool/solo CW queue.

I agree on the need of a MM to separate the non-competitive PUGs. IMO it shouldn't be in anyone's interest to match these with units (and high-tier competitive PUGs). It's not a good experience to the PUGs or to the units. It's just a bad matchup and should be avoided. I've seen several comments suggesting that with MM units are being "punished", but I fail to see how removing bad matchups amounts to punishment.

IMO the only reasonable alternative to the "kiddie pool" is closing CW to newbies (e.g., people with too few played games or levelled-up mechs). But I think the kiddie pool is a better solution: the newbies get a new place to play (CW) and a richer MWO experience, and in either case the unit/experienced players will no longer play against them, so for the old guys it should be all the same.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Hotthedd, on 27 January 2016 - 04:49 AM, said:

Solo means solo, so I see no reason tagged solos should not be able to participate. The problem is if it is a Clan vs. I.S. battle, players can "organize" in team speak, and be assured of being on the same team when sync-dropping. I cannot see any barrier to this.

This is why I proposed the timer (this and predictable waiting time). The server wouldn't match up people in the order they went into the Q, so sync dropping would be a hit or miss. You can end up on the same match on the same side, on the same match in opposing sides (lS vs IS, Clan vs Clan), or in completely different matches. Increasing the timer (meaning more matches created at once) would mitigate this to a larger extent, but sync dropping is something that cannot be avoided if perpetrators get really presistent, even in quick play.

jss78, on 27 January 2016 - 05:02 AM, said:

I agree on this point. To me, the whole "Units vs. PUGs" was always a false dichotomy. The issue is units vs. bad PUGs. There's no shortage of PUGs out there who are Tier 1-2 and who only roll in mastered and moduled mechs, actively use VOIP, etc. The disparaging way PUGs are often talked about doesn't seem to apply to these guys -- they're every bit as good as any unit guy, just don't have TS.

Then you have the truly clueless PUGs -- and I don't say this to be mean, just an observation as there clearly are players who're out of their depth in CW -- and these are a different case altogether.

So I agree on your general point that the separating PUGs vs. units isn't the core MM issue, but separating those PUGs who need the "kiddie pool".

I think it's also important to allow the experienced and competitive pugs continue grouping up with units and not force them into the kiddie pool/solo CW queue.

I agree on the need of a MM to separate the non-competitive PUGs. IMO it shouldn't be in anyone's interest to match these with units (and high-tier competitive PUGs). It's not a good experience to the PUGs or to the units. It's just a bad matchup and should be avoided. I've seen several comments suggesting that with MM units are being "punished", but I fail to see how removing bad matchups amounts to punishment.

IMO the only reasonable alternative to the "kiddie pool" is closing CW to newbies (e.g., people with too few played games or levelled-up mechs). But I think the kiddie pool is a better solution: the newbies get a new place to play (CW) and a richer MWO experience, and in either case the unit/experienced players will no longer play against them, so for the old guys it should be all the same.

EDIT: Pugs loose to units almost all the time because for 12 random players, about 4 of them is usually really bad/clueless. That's enough for the team to fold if meeting an organised enemy.

I'm also not trying to look down on diehard casuals and newbs. It's just a fact. Especially in a low-population environment in an unpopular game mode, big portion of the solos are those who just started CW, probably to get stomped several times before getting the hang of it and joining a unit/leaving to never return.

--
Sorry for boasting, but even when I solo and my team is getting stomped I almost always manage to end up with a score comparable with the best players from the 'stomping' team, even though I can can't count on my team and they do. Proper map awareness, proper choice of mechs, proper timing, no stupid mistakes - good score everytime. And I'm not some kind of special snowlake. Seen quite a bunch of people murdering unit players until rest of the team folds like a deck of cards and there is just no way left to survive. Yeah, this could change if the most competitive units who dumped CW due to boredom of stomping return, I know.

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 27 January 2016 - 05:39 AM.

[DarklightCA]

This is what I've been stating for awhile, the problem of Community Warfare is not unit's vs solo's. Making a separate queue to protect solo's from unit's is not helping anything when the problem is casual player's vs non-casual player's.

There are a lot of solo player's out there in community warfare that work with their team to try and win their game and try to coordinate their games and these player's if grouped up with like minded solo player's would have a lot better time when facing 12 man's or other premade group's.

However as a solo player you are always gambling on who your teammates are and with so many casual solo player's as well who refuse to be a team player, use any form of communication or coordination. They really drag their team's down and make it extremely difficult for those solo player's trying their hardest to win the game to face organized group's or even better organized solo team's.

Obviously you can't exclude casual player's from playing Community Warfare so a kiddie pool could be more worth while rather than completely splitting the population of Community Warfare unnecessarily. Same Community Warfare experience, none of the beat down's and leaves majority of the Community Warfare population still intact to get easier drops.

Edited by l)arklight, 27 January 2016 - 05:45 AM.

[sycocys]

I like the idea of a noob zone.

The entirety of CW though should be MM'd into 3 play zones with the planet nonsense in the background. Then let whoever (Clan or IS) wants to group up for attack/defense group up instead of entirely destroying your friends lists.

People wanting to influence the map for their unit/faction will still tend to group together, people that just want good matches or to train new players can pick up outside of their faction to fill groups and have a more competitive queue.

Just count the W/Ls in the background and carry forth with the planet voting system. Whoever wins the most gets the tag.

-- Also I just re-read your first part, and correct me if I'm wrong but don't you lose rank for fighting factions you had loyalty for? Might just be better to grind 1 way up to a point you are satisfied with then move on.

Edited by sycocys, 27 January 2016 - 04:14 PM.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

sycocys, on 27 January 2016 - 04:12 PM, said:

I like the idea of a noob zone.

The entirety of CW though should be MM'd into 3 play zones with the planet nonsense in the background. Then let whoever (Clan or IS) wants to group up for attack/defense group up instead of entirely destroying your friends lists.

TBH I don't like dividing CW in any way, it's just opposite to the whole idea of Community Warfare, which is a great one, even with all its flaws. Unfortunately phases 1 and 2 shown that people need a place to learn CW without bringing stomps on themselves and their teams all the time. Otherwise we'll have what we had to date - most players (and most players are pugs) come to CW, get wrecked a lot, get frustrated, leave to never return to CW. This is the main reason why it has so low population, which in turn causes a new set of problems...

sycocys, on 27 January 2016 - 04:12 PM, said:

People wanting to influence the map for their unit/faction will still tend to group together, people that just want good matches or to train new players can pick up outside of their faction to fill groups and have a more competitive queue.

True, but I think the possibility of being a freelancer (announced for phase III) will solve that problem anyway, at least to a large extent.

sycocys, on 27 January 2016 - 04:12 PM, said:

-- Also I just re-read your first part, and correct me if I'm wrong but don't you lose rank for fighting factions you had loyalty for? Might just be better to grind 1 way up to a point you are satisfied with then move on.

The penalties for attacking a faction are negligible. Like 1LP lost for every 10LP won, or even less than that. And you CAN'T loose rank you already have, it only prolongs the grind for the next rank a bit.

On my current mechbay grab run I already got level 6 in almost all IS factions (FRR left, I do IS first), and even though I fought clans 90% of the time, I lost like 1-2k LP in each clan faction. This is a non-issue IMHO, doubt any newbie will even notice.

If anything, this may discourage more experienced players, which is a good thing.

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 28 January 2016 - 12:18 AM.

[MischiefSC]

So most the people getting stomped have tags. Most the people who play CW are not that good at it. The tagless population is pretty small.

The problem is that they are not generally leaders and many are not even good followers.

So you have a casual vs non-casual environment - the problem is that the non-casuals are not populous enough to fill the game and generally, by accident or design, don't play against each other. They play against the casuals. While not universal it makes up the majority of the engagements in CW and it's hard to say that's an accident.

More to the point you've got an environment in CW where the non-casual players are in competition with the casuals and, as is the wont of competitive people the non-casuals are getting actively stomped and farmed and periodically mocked over it.

The big, stupid mistake that's been made is this idea that the way for casual players to 'fight back' is to GIT GUD.

They're not going to GIT GUD. That's not going to happen, if that was a viable and realistic solution it would have happened already.

How casuals are going to fight back is things like getting the queue split and a matchmaker to eliminate the advantages that playing competitively (as in non-casual, not so much 'comp tier') gives.

That's already there and it's going to continue because the mentality of non-casuals farming casuals is viewed as 'how the game is supposed to be played' and using pugs like shields, etc. etc. etc.

With a year of dedicated apathy PGI has successfully taught the playerbase to not care about CW and they've taught pugs and small units to actively hate the big units and the big units to feel like farming everyone else who isn't a big unit is pretty much the point of CW.

So here is cold, hard reality -

Queues are getting split.

That's going to leave the small units and casual units to be farmed by the big, successful units.

Those people are going to leave and either quit CW or go tagless, where they can sync to get a small edge.

That's going to empty the tagged queue in CW as the big units start having pretty much only each other to play.

That's going to quickly point out that while they're all better than the casuals there is a distinct pecking order in skill for the big units.

All but a couple of the big units will either leave CW or farm tagless queue in alts or by dropping tags, leaving a diminishing loyalist diehard population and some diehard members of big units.

The tagless queue will get a matchmaker and CW will play like pug/group queue but with LP rewards. It will end up that way because the evolution of the old 8v8 open, then max 4 in 8v8 and 8v8 only queues, then 12man queue and max 4s in 12v12, then pug/group queue didn't happen by accident. It happened because while there certainly is a competitive core who wants good hard fights 98% of casual and non-casual players want to farm the easiest fights they can and play with every advantage they can get and has a 'Imma get mine and if possible yours' approach to the game.

PGI did a terrible job but make no mistake - if/when CW burns down we were throwing in logs, roasting marshmallows and saying 'Hey, it's a fire and I like roasted marshmallows. Someone needs to put that out though. Seriously, you guys need to put that fire out while I roast my marshmallows. It's someone elses responsibility to put it out there's nothing wrong with roasting marshmallows!'

Edited by MischiefSC, 28 January 2016 - 12:42 AM.

[sycocys]

Prof RJ Gumby, on 28 January 2016 - 12:16 AM, said:

True, but I think the possibility of being a freelancer (announced for phase III) will solve that problem anyway, at least to a large extent.

A 3 bucket system wouldn't do anything to hinder people from being lone wolves, that it isn't going to do anyhow. Your affect on the planet game is going to be minimal unless you represent a faction.

3 bucket system fills up the queue into a vastly more sustainable set of MM portions. Getting rid of the faction to groups split encourages more team play. The whole planet choice system has proven very well that it doesn't work well since phase 1.

[Irishtoker]

See I still think that adding a 50-100 game minimum is all that CW needs. Brand new players shouldn't be in that mode, it is for experienced players with 'Skilled" mechs and piloting Skillz period. Tagged or untagged is irrelevant.

Hell, you can join a unit the first day. Why prohibit friendship and support.

*Even 30 a match minimum would suffice.

* why not make going through the Academy a requirement.

*need to have received all cadet bonuses

I don't use LFG, but it seems it could be tooled as a resource for Solo players (if that isn't what it does already.)


Just my few cents. Yes, I'm aware it's all been said before.

Edited by Irishtoker, 28 January 2016 - 07:56 AM.

[Lazor Sharp]

so, Irish, you gona show up on the CLW web site and TS, your signed up........?

Edited by Lazor Sharp, 28 January 2016 - 09:49 AM.

[Lazor Sharp]

so it seams that every effert to throw the new players into a pub or cw solo Q is is full steam ahead..... vs doing what it takes to get these players into a TS hub or unit TS to have vets train them so they dont become baby seals.

new players are gona get stomped even by the solo rambo, ultra casual, terrabad's that the such HIGH % of the player base and the ones whining for a solo CW Q, NOT gona help the NPE at all.......

joining a unit is NOT the magic bullet thats gonna get ya gud instantly. but playing with a group of average casual players regularly, and having even one leader type that can call shots, learning a little team work, etc, is so much better than 12 randoms, its not even funny...

but PGI has done nothing to encourage TEAM WORK or units, and have incentivized the solo rambo, ultra casual, terrabad mind set to the point, that this is the biggest sub group of players..... So Now, group play, team work, and units in a TEAM BASED GAME suffer from this dedicated apathy

with so much of this solo rambo, ultra casual, terrabad mind set in PvP, when PvE gets here, i bet 40 % of MWO's population plays it exclusively, and NEVER COMES BACK to PvP....... this is how bad it has gotten with MWO's TEAM BASED GAME, because it is fastly becoming a single player solo pug only game.......

So,
Throw another Log on the fire
Cook me up some bacon and some beans
Go out to the car and change the tire
Boil me up another pot of tea
Then come and tell me why you're leaving me.....

Mean while, I think I will have marshmallows too.........

Edited by Lazor Sharp, 28 January 2016 - 10:59 AM.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Lazor Sharp, on 28 January 2016 - 10:11 AM, said:

(...)

You got it all wrong.

It's not PGI who "incentivized the solo rambo, ultra casual, terrabad mind set to the point, that this is the biggest sub group of players". It's that those people have formed up a large chunk of the playerbase and equally large part of paying customers from the very start. Just like in every other multiplayer game. And as customers, they have to get content created with their needs/preferences in mind too. Because they fund the game, probably in much larger extent that competitives do.

Some people don't have time/patience/manual abilities/english prowess/etc. etc. to play on your imagined terms. Or are just anitsocial, whatever. You may belittle them, PGI cannot. Your money isn't better than theirs. Your skill and preference of teamwork doesn't make you a better customer. For PGI making content that will appeal to a tiny% of the playerbase is a waste of time. A huge waste of time. Imagine that about 6 more maps and 2 more modes in quickplay were not developed because of CW. PGI won't admit CW is a commercial flop so far, but it is.

TL, DR: After phase III either we'll have CW that has a niche for those "terribads", with of without them having actual impact on the map, or we will have abandoned CW, because somebody finally decides it is a waste of time and money. And no, they won't tell us that, they'll just pospone further CW development until the infinite "later", to never pick it up again. Enjoy your elitism in the meantime.

[sycocys]

CW will be interesting... soon™

[MischiefSC]

A critical piece that keeps getting missed -

The bulk of solos and small units are bad at the game. In my experience worse than they are in quickplay, when there is not good players/leaders in the drop with them and leading/carrying.

They are never ever ever going to "GIT GUD". If they were the GIT GUD type it would have happened over the last year. There is no fix to the game that's going to involve 70% of CW population just taking the time to work out how to get good at the game. Their own queue won't do that, that's for certain.

Problem is that the real solution would be: Loyalist unit's only get MC for taken worlds, unit size caps to prevent single mega unit taking whole map for 1 faction, same lane for attack/defend each border, only 2 slots for full 12mans each side each border to force integration of pugs into coordinated unit drops. Require a 4 man minimum to start any slot but only 1 12man on any side per border.

What you need to make a single queue cw work is faction focused and a constant mix of units and pugs. That is the best way to keep pugs involved and playing, you need to embed them into competent groups.

That's not going to happen so the casual players will drive PGI to split queues and matchmaker.

[Lazor Sharp]

Prof RJ Gumby, on 28 January 2016 - 12:13 PM, said:

You got it all wrong.

It's not PGI who "incentivized the solo rambo, ultra casual, terrabad mind set to the point, that this is the biggest sub group of players". It's that those people have formed up a large chunk of the playerbase and equally large part of paying customers from the very start. Just like in every other multiplayer game. And as customers, they have to get content created with their needs/preferences in mind too. Because they fund the game, probably in much larger extent that competitives do.

Some people don't have time/patience/manual abilities/english prowess/etc. etc. to play on your imagined terms. Or are just anitsocial, whatever. You may belittle them, PGI cannot. Your money isn't better than theirs. Your skill and preference of teamwork doesn't make you a better customer. For PGI making content that will appeal to a tiny% of the playerbase is a waste of time. A huge waste of time. Imagine that about 6 more maps and 2 more modes in quickplay were not developed because of CW. PGI won't admit CW is a commercial flop so far, but it is.

TL, DR: After phase III either we'll have CW that has a niche for those "terribads", with of without them having actual impact on the map, or we will have abandoned CW, because somebody finally decides it is a waste of time and money. And no, they won't tell us that, they'll just pospone further CW development until the infinite "later", to never pick it up again. Enjoy your elitism in the meantime.

see my posts in this thread, on how to cater to this % of the player base: https://mwomercs.com...a-pve-campaign/

and not foul up the Team Players game

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Lazor Sharp, on 28 January 2016 - 06:50 PM, said:

see my posts in this thread, on how to cater to this % of the player base: https://mwomercs.com...a-pve-campaign/
and not foul up the Team Players game

I want to "foul up the Team Players game" by incentivising "solo rambo, ultra casual, terrabad's" to not mix up with team-oriented players? By providing newbs with a way to try out CW and decide if it is fun for them without making their lack of experience/quick play habits spoil the attempts for teamwork of "proper" players pugging?

It would provide you with what you said you want - much less not-team-players in (actual) CW. I never said I want this "solo Q" to have any influence on the planet%. And you strongly oppose this? Is it so painful to think that all those "anti social, solo rambos's and the uber casual's" would be able to play CW-like matches and not be 'punished' (along with their teams) with loosing every game? (just little above 50% of them).

Dude, wherever your head is now, take it out and look at the game and players as they are, not as you 'rightfully' think they should be.

And don't think I have anything against PVE. I don't. The problem is PVE may or may not ever be implemented. PGI doesn't have even the simplest AI at the moment.

MischiefSC, on 28 January 2016 - 12:36 PM, said:

(...)

Can't say I don't agree with you in most points and most suggestions.
I know most bads will stay bads, but newbs - not necesarrily. And again - let us allow the bads to have CW-like matches, if we can make them not spoil OUR matches. One thing I hate more than anything in CW is when my 6-man plays against other 6-man and victory is decided by who has more clueless pugs.

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 29 January 2016 - 12:26 AM.

[MischiefSC]

My current frustration with CW wasn't playing against units and getting stomped. I pugged the Davion front through the last half of CW1 - that was pretty much all day/every day.

It's that the pugs in the Clans are so bad, so intentionally, bitterly, angrily bad that it makes me want to shake a baby. People taking 4 LRM mechs (LRM ADDERS. I mean it) and who literally won't push in past the gate. They stay outside the gate and LRM. They probably think they are doing great and being useful. They would be more useful if they just started each match trying to TK everyone, at least then you would know how boned you were instead of erroneously thinking you had useful teammates.

All of which is beside the point though.

Casuals are in control of the future of CW. It's going to be what they want it to be. When the decisions come up between giving Units what they want and Casuals what they want it's going to give casual players what they want.

Right now units in CW have *nothing* to offer casuals and pugs that is good. Having a unit on your side? That's good. Generally though you're pugging vs units. Ergo there's no real positive impetus for casuals to play in the unit queue.

You can't say 'they should join units'. People who want to play in units look for and join units anyway. They would without CW even. Again, look at the players in your matches with pugs - most of them have tags. Most units are actually not that good. They don't have anyone in the unit to help them get good and even if they do most don't want to get good. That's not a motivator, it's not a benefit or a feature that is sold to the casuals/pugs.

So units need to find something else to offer in the experience of playing in the tagged queue that makes people want to come there to play even if they're pugs and casuals. Because otherwise the unit queue is going to go the way of the 12man queue for the same reasons. Even with MC rewards for tagged worlds.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

MischiefSC, on 29 January 2016 - 01:07 AM, said:

(...)

True dat. This will happen if Russ will divide the CW the way he's planning now. Dividing CW into "hardcore one that has some bonuses, but only for the best units" vs "more casual one that is identical + you won't meet those hardcore units" will cause almost everyone to go to the casual CW. We'll end up exactly where we are now, just without unit tags.

This is why I argue there should be a kiddie pool for newbs and casuals that will attract them due to its simplicity and lack of groups on the enemy side, while still having that CW flavour of faction warfare. If well designed, this kiddie pool will not attract more experienced and teamwork-oriented players due to its casual nature, inability to select side (what will make farming level >2 CW rewards a real chore), inability to play in a team and lack of any actual impact on the map. Win-Win.

[iLLcapitan]

I like your idea and would just add some strong incentives for the comp. queue, because as it was stated before, I expect many to switch to the casual queue for easy mode. Maybe holding planets (with its contemplated benefits) should be exclusively in the unit/comp queue. Idk, would just love to see more competition in CW.