49 replies to this topic

[Pugger]

Sjorpha, on 12 April 2016 - 01:00 AM, said:

I understand this concern, but in my opinion, the idea of increasing resources for losing/occupied factions is completely backwards.

It's superficially appealing to "balance" populations this way but the problem is that it punishes winning and rewards losing, a breach of competitive logic which is ultimately much more demoralizing than losing itself.

Instead of rewarding losing (in fact, losing should be punished with a decrease of resources!), you have to make the underdog position fun and interesting in itself. Not everyone has to like it, but enough people do, and those are the types that will sign loyalist contracts in the first place. (The FRR hub was founded on the backs of players with this kind of "resistance" mentality during CW phase 1 when the FRR was constantly defending it's last few planets, which should prove that being in such a position can be very rewarding and fun)

You're right, again. I withdraw my previous balancing idea... I'm also convinced.

[slide]

Sjorpha, on 12 April 2016 - 01:00 AM, said:

You and I have a different relation to gaming that I think might be incompatible. Life simulation type games are, in my opinion, not very interesting. They can be interesting conceptually, but I'm not inclined to play them in most cases.

I'll agree that we certainly have a different point of view. I play games for fun and the experience, a fun loss is for me as much fun as win is for you I suspect.

My "Win at life" analogy wasn't in reference to life simulation games, the Sims has to be one of the most boring games ever IMO yet it was hugely popular. I think your ideas have a lot of merit for goals/missions/whatever that can be won or not. But the only "End Game" condition I wish to see is when they pull the plug on the servers.

[Sjorpha]

slide, on 13 April 2016 - 05:50 PM, said:

I'll agree that we certainly have a different point of view. I play games for fun and the experience, a fun loss is for me as much fun as win is for you I suspect.

I agree that a fun loss is as fun as a fun win, but neither of those fun experiences are possible without a win condition.

Let me put it this way: Would you prefer it if there was no win conditions for quickplay matches too?

If the answer is no, then why is your logic different in QP and FW?

Edited by Sjorpha, 14 April 2016 - 06:59 AM.

[Sjorpha]

Bumping this as I think it is still quite relevant to the upcoming round table.

[Dino Might]

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__5314291

[Unendingmenace]

Sjorpha this sounds awesome! If this was implemented it would be as though we were fighting an actual war and it would mean so much more to be a Loyalist as part of a faction. Win conditions as you stated are a must.

Now we just need to get it into the game...

[Sjorpha]

So I was surprised and disappointed to learn that win conditions and strategic goals for the factions weren't even brought up at the round table.

I find that very strange to be honest, surely the lack of strategic goals/victory for the factions to work towards is the major flaw of FW as a supposed war simulation.

Now I didn't expect it to dominate the round table, but I expected that the participating players would at least bring it up.

[Sjorpha]

This general issue or CW having no wincons or gameplay impact for winning planets or phases is still unaddressed and still yet to be discussed by PGI.

Will the upcoming roundtable make room to talk about it? Do we as a community care about it? Is PGI brave enough to enter into a dialogue on the topic?

[Positive Mental Attitude]

end game is sh!tposting here at the end of the day. its been working pretty good for a while now

[50 50]

I am going to disagree with the OP in that I don't feel an 'End Game' is a good idea for a universe that is at war for centuries.
For it to end means to reset which means doing it all again.
It's the same A to B design of story based games where you complete the final mission and beat the big bad guy, save the world and .... done. Oh, you can start again on the next difficulty level and redo the entire thing. That's what happens in Diablo and various other ARPGs and I have to be honest and say that after playing to B I've never had any desire to just do it all again.

For me, MWO should be a continual conflict where the 'End Game' might be a significant event but by no means 'The End' of the story. The capturing of a single planet is a significant event. It's just not given that significance in the game at the moment.

The Clans invading would be a significant event.. except they have already and also will always be 'invading'..... unless they could be pushed back out of the Inner Sphere. Which would be a significant event..... then the Clan's could re-invade.

If we are going to have more investment in the universe and the mode we need to have a mode that does not 'reset'.