Edited by Danjo San, 22 June 2016 - 10:08 AM.
#1
Posted 22 June 2016 - 09:48 AM
#2
Posted 22 June 2016 - 10:16 AM
~Leone.
#3
Posted 22 June 2016 - 10:32 AM
PGI has a track record for turning a blind eye to the forums and the massed suggestions on how to improve things. (Buy a mech pack) You can turn it into a drinking game how many times they've attempted to distract players from glaring issues with offerings of new mechs.
I appreciate your time and effort. I just have seen over the past 4 years that PGI will do whatever it wants. Regardless of popular demographic opinion.
#4
Posted 22 June 2016 - 10:50 AM
#5
Posted 22 June 2016 - 10:55 AM
rolly, on 22 June 2016 - 10:32 AM, said:
PGI has a track record for turning a blind eye to the forums and the massed suggestions on how to improve things. (Buy a mech pack) You can turn it into a drinking game how many times they've attempted to distract players from glaring issues with offerings of new mechs.
I appreciate your time and effort. I just have seen over the past 4 years that PGI will do whatever it wants. Regardless of popular demographic opinion.
Whine harder bro. This is so far from the truth, I cant believe any rational person still would hold these beliefs even after they have been proven wrong so many times. Pgi has already demonstrated that they can be able to fix mistakes made in the patches. For instance this new map idea is going to get tweaked fairly fast. Get your head out the gutters.
Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 22 June 2016 - 10:56 AM.
#6
Posted 22 June 2016 - 11:05 AM
I appreciate the effort, I do. I just don't find the listed problems or solutions to be overly applicable. Unfortunately that's probably going to be the case with a lot of people no matter what you write.
#7
Posted 22 June 2016 - 11:12 AM
MischiefSC, on 22 June 2016 - 11:05 AM, said:
I appreciate the effort, I do. I just don't find the listed problems or solutions to be overly applicable. Unfortunately that's probably going to be the case with a lot of people no matter what you write.
It's an overall impression of what I have followed up on reading and discussing in the forums, obviously I have not read every thread or every answer, I doubt anyone has...
Also keep in mind that answers and solutions listed in a poll should be short. to go fully in detail with everything would be too much...
Also it should not be the Community conducting the Polls... PGI should be doing that!
#8
Posted 22 June 2016 - 12:14 PM
If Kurita attacks Steiner, Davion should be able to help defend.
If Kurita attacks Jaguar, Marik should be able to help attack.
This would give the backseat IS pilots an avenue to the clans. They could put their tags on worlds even though their own faction doesn't stand to gain any planets for itself.
This would also reduce curbstomps, which usually occur on defense missions, by allowing skittle pugs into the attack queues, thus making defense missions less concentrated with them.
#9
Posted 22 June 2016 - 12:39 PM
Not only are they tiny and with chokepoints that serve no purpose other than to nullify respawns, they also lack any kind of relation to the planet they're supposedly on and the universe they're supposedly in.
I feel that at least a few maps from MW4:Mercs would make for better FP Invasion maps than the ones we have now.
Edited by Red Shrike, 22 June 2016 - 12:40 PM.
#10
Posted 22 June 2016 - 12:42 PM
Red Shrike, on 22 June 2016 - 12:39 PM, said:
If PGI would ever release a way for us to construct maps, like MW4's mapmaker, the game would have HUNDREDS of maps like MW4 had and PGI could pick and choose from dozens and dozens of maps to flesh out CW.
Give us a map editor.
Hold a monthly mapmaking contest.
Profit as people return to the game to enjoy the new content that streams in.
#11
Posted 22 June 2016 - 12:51 PM
?
#12
Posted 22 June 2016 - 12:51 PM
AnTi90d, on 22 June 2016 - 12:42 PM, said:
If PGI would ever release a way for us to construct maps, like MW4's mapmaker, the game would have HUNDREDS of maps like MW4 had and PGI could pick and choose from dozens and dozens of maps to flesh out CW.
Give us a map editor.
Hold a monthly mapmaking contest.
Profit as people return to the game to enjoy the new content that streams in.
100% This! +1
#13
Posted 22 June 2016 - 12:56 PM
Red Shrike, on 22 June 2016 - 12:51 PM, said:
OMG, we had such badass fights on that map in the SunderJunkies server. (We basically played FP Invasion type matches amongst ourselves.) That Invasion type map had a huge base in the bottom right with boats and turrets and scouting vehicles in the green pastures that you needed to destroy.
Good times.. good times..
#14
Posted 22 June 2016 - 12:57 PM
Red Shrike, on 22 June 2016 - 12:39 PM, said:
Not only are they tiny and with chokepoints that serve no purpose other than to nullify respawns, they also lack any kind of relation to the planet they're supposedly on and the universe they're supposedly in.
I feel that at least a few maps from MW4:Mercs would make for better FP Invasion maps than the ones we have now.
funny thing is, the percieved size is still quite large because you drop wave after wave and have to walk the entire distance again... I have heard players complain about sulfurus Lanes are too long to walk.
#15
Posted 22 June 2016 - 01:05 PM
Danjo San, on 22 June 2016 - 12:57 PM, said:
It used to feel like a ten mile hike, uphill.. until I took the advice of some of the units I was dropping with and redid my mechs to be 65kph+, (preferrably 70+.)
That and the advice to test out all your builds in Vitric Forgo to make sure they're not too hot to play have been the best pieces of advice I've gotten in the game.
#16
Posted 22 June 2016 - 03:09 PM
AnTi90d, on 22 June 2016 - 12:42 PM, said:
If PGI would ever release a way for us to construct maps, like MW4's mapmaker, the game would have HUNDREDS of maps like MW4 had and PGI could pick and choose from dozens and dozens of maps to flesh out CW.
Give us a map editor.
Hold a monthly mapmaking contest.
Profit as people return to the game to enjoy the new content that streams in.
Russ said it was coming....almost two years ago.
#17
Posted 22 June 2016 - 03:19 PM
Along with MWO in general is boring repetitive and its very un-Social.
But the devs are just stupid and ignorant in there drive to kill MWO and make it into some E-Tard Sport game.
A link to real MechWarrior/BattleTech Planetary http://mwo.netbattletech.com/
#18
Posted 22 June 2016 - 07:41 PM
#19
Posted 22 June 2016 - 08:02 PM
KahnWongFuChung, on 22 June 2016 - 03:19 PM, said:
Along with MWO in general is boring repetitive and its very un-Social.
But the devs are just stupid and ignorant in there drive to kill MWO and make it into some E-Tard Sport game.
A link to real MechWarrior/BattleTech Planetary http://mwo.netbattletech.com/
Looking forward to NBT coming back online.
#20
Posted 22 June 2016 - 09:09 PM
What I find not an issue..unit size, if you were here during beta you would know that many of the bigger units started as small alliances. MS for example was a combination of several units in Ghost Bear and House Steiner. So if you did break unit size, units would just go back to that small unit alliance strategy they had before and still do just as well.
Balance is not an issue either, if you are having problems "get gud". No seriously learn about your mechs pros and cons
And I agree this won't accomplish much, players have been suggesting changes since beta. I don't know if PGI just doesn't have the funding or they're just not listening to players. But staying the course is not the option as we are losing players rapidly, MWO only has a population of around 3000 right now...which is bad.
9 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 9 guests, 0 anonymous users