512 replies to this topic

[Quintt]

This LP system also seems to take some similarities with EVE.

[SgtMaster]

This looks really awesome, i just hope we still have a community when it is launched...
out of the 400 members of my guild, we already lost 50% to (game unplayable atm)...
But if everything works when 1.0 launches, ill be here

[IIIuminaughty]

This is going to be so fun!
I can't wait until they release community warfare!

[Gremlich Johns]

Go check out the NBT-HC planetary league (closed) Starmap and see what should be at stake.

Go ahead, just click on the map, resize it, whatever. If PGI can ever get to the granularity of that League's efforts,......

[Syllogy]

Gremlich Johns, on 06 April 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

Go check out the NBT-HC planetary league (closed) Starmap and see what should be at stake.

Go ahead, just click on the map, resize it, whatever. If PGI can ever get to the granularity of that League's efforts,......

Correct me if I am wrong, but NBT only has 19 active units, and only 2500 planets...

According to Bryans interview, I thought I heard him say that there would be over 3200 planets to fight over.

[Gremlich Johns]

Syllogy, on 08 April 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

Correct me if I am wrong, but NBT only has 19 active units, and only 2500 planets...

According to Bryans interview, I thought I heard him say that there would be over 3200 planets to fight over.

The link is just to show people what is possible with a starmap and how many planets there can be, NOT to tell people about NBT- PGI has not shown us anything about the planets and detail re: CW is sparse, but I doubt they can replicate the effort Dark Phoenix did for the NBT leagues. BTW - NBT-HC is in some sort of evolution, looking to use the UDK engine. They are looking for help, if you are interested and can program.

[Void Angel]

Ari Dian, on 02 April 2013 - 02:15 AM, said:

And honestly, i would prefer new features that we are waiting for since long time over a 100% working game. Just because it will not work. You cant fix all bugs and polish everything to work fine before you start to add new content. You would NEVER make progress this way. just because you will add new or even old bugs again each time you add new content.

Well, you could, but only with a massive initial investment and large amount of risk; Some software actually is designed that way; it's called the Waterfall Development Cycle. In a hypothetical use of Waterfall development for MWO, you'd pick a start point: say movement of 'Mechs, including collisions, jumping, etc, etc. You would work on this until the system was developed to launch quality before doing anything else. Once that was done, you'd move on to the next step - weapon systems seems logical - and complete every single weapon you intend to have on launch day. THEN, you'd move onto the next step - maps, for example. Once every map intended for launch was debugged to launch quality, you'd go on to the NEXT step, say perhaps ECM and its countersystems, then perhaps vision modes, the 'MechLab, Community Warfare (or various aspects of CW), ranked teams, et cetera, ad nauseum, until everything was ready for launch.

That sounds like it would actually create a very polished, very well-made game - and it would... but only if nothing went wrong. If you run into unexpected difficulties, your budgeting and timeline will be thrown off, with possibly very expensive results. If you'll permit me the use of a wildly implausible example, what if you ran into a problem with your netcode, and had to re-write that part of the game engine? Sure, what are the odds of that happening, but what if? You'd end up spending a lot more money than you'd budgeted - not just in programmer pay, but in the opportunity cost of tying up computer resources on this project instead of working on another game. This means that you'd have to either skimp on the later stages of development or go over-budget - unless you were spending too much to make the game in the first place. Thus, I doubt that the Waterfall cycle is often used for projects like this one.

Because the many parts of a game like MWO interact with each other (and with players themselves) in complex ways, an Iterative and Incremental Development cycle is much more effective and low-risk. Particularly in Beta testing, "agile software development" is often used.

Edited by Void Angel, 08 April 2013 - 07:41 PM.

[Splinters]

Syllogy, on 08 April 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

Correct me if I am wrong, but NBT only has 19 active units, and only 2500 planets...

According to Bryans interview, I thought I heard him say that there would be over 3200 planets to fight over.

Great we have thousands of planets but only 10-30 maps, so we'll have uniquely 10-30 environments to fight over. The name of the planet will be changed and we will end up with River City - New Avalon, River City - Luthien, River City - Thakard, etc... If we don't get more actual content into the game there will be just this many maps to play over.

Unless PGI has 100 maps stashed away just waiting for CW, there's a good chance we are getting about 90% of what the game will be with additional mechs and maps at a pace of 1 each per month.

In the immortal words of Marshall Eriksen of HIMYM, "NOT GOOD ENOUGH!" **Whip Cracking**

-S

[Mjolnir]

I have to say, I'm going to be somewhat amused at the outpouring of rage when certain merc corps (*Cough* Crescent Hawks *Cough*) find themselves unable to register the name, as it's going to be used as a Steiner canon corps you can earn entry into.

Similarly with those merc corps that have named themselves after clans.

[Void Angel]

Well, they were warned, and that's really a minor thing.

[Michael Costanza]

You need to allow a way to generate LP by roleplaying, perhaps via posts on the forums. If this is included, you'll have players generating content for you and you'll be able to reward people who enjoy diplomacy, espionage and statecraft. Otherwise, it's just a robot game.

[Country Gravy]

good thing a giant robot game is awesome

[Void Angel]

Michael Costanza, on 12 April 2013 - 02:27 PM, said:

You need to allow a way to generate LP by roleplaying, perhaps via posts on the forums. If this is included, you'll have players generating content for you and you'll be able to reward people who enjoy diplomacy, espionage and statecraft. Otherwise, it's just a robot game.

That is precisely what you don't need - what you're advocating is the geek equivalent of political generals. That may have worked for Steiner in the story universe, but it won't work here. The last thing this or any game needs is to create a class of players who succeed, not by being good players, but by conforming to a rather insular roleplaying subculture. This is not a roleplaying game - it's "a game of armored combat."

Don't get me wrong: I'd love to see faction interaction and meaningful long-range decisions for Community Warfare. But shoehorning in forum roleplaying is emphatically not the way to get that.

P.S. Anyone who doesn't think that online team games have politics by default has never tried being a raid leader.

[Biffa Buttocks]

Ugh raid leader, please don't even mention the game where that title comes from!

My biggest fear about CW is the same as Splinters, there will be no immense feeling for the planets it'll be the same ol same ol, they need to seriously look at breaking the maps into composites or atleast changing the skyboxes and capture points to bridge the issue in the short term, I'd love to be able to do the maths below:

3200 planets x E (number of Environments need for each planet) x average time so far to produce each map = number of years.

[Moromillas]

Holy ****. December? Two year ago? What on earth could you possibly discuss here.

[Country Gravy]

Moromillas, on 16 April 2013 - 03:01 AM, said:

Holy ****. December? Two year ago? What on earth could you possibly discuss here.

Community Warfare?

[Moromillas]

Country Gravy, on 16 April 2013 - 05:38 AM, said:

Community Warfare?

....

From two years ago!

Edited by Moromillas, 16 April 2013 - 05:57 AM.

[Void Angel]

Biffa Buttocks, on 16 April 2013 - 02:54 AM, said:

Ugh raid leader, please don't even mention the game where that title comes from!

Everquest?

Moromillas, on 16 April 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

....

From two years ago!

Perhaps if you were to read the recent posts you would not be so... dramatically confused.

[Moromillas]

Void Angel, on 16 April 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

Perhaps if you were to read the recent posts you would not be so... dramatically confused.

Perhaps if you were to read the date on the OP, you would realise it's a summary of a design doc from two years ago.

[Country Gravy]

Perhaps if you were to read the last few pages, you will see that this is the place to discuss the upcoming CW aspect of the game.

Troll attempt 4/10