157 replies to this topic

[MischiefSC]

@Mystere

And you've said before you don't want a balanced game. Hence we are going to be talking apples to oranges and your game idea wouldn't even have as many players as FW does currently.

@1453 R

Why do you play Conquest? Domination? You play scouting to play 4man, max 55 tonnage. You play it for the same reason you play anything else.

If Scout queue provides critical advantage in invasion queue then scout > invasion. 4man queue closes 12man queue. Since most players don't enjoy scout queue (hence invasion queue, when LT is absent, is more populous) that means a minority of players can literally ruin invasion for everyone else.

The people saying thy don't want LT are the bulk of people on both sides. We don't want one gamemode to close the other. We want to play big stompy robots and win our matches because WE did better in OUR match. Not because someone else won theirs.

Worlds are flipped on how everyone did in each faction. Factions take worlds. However if you win or lose your MATCH based on how someone else played THEIR MATCH it's unenjoyable for the bulk of people.

Hence why nobody is playing. We can barely support 1 front, total, in FW right now. Not even all day. We're down to a few hundred total players at most over 24 hours and it's declining.

We don't like it. We don't want it. We don't enjoy the mechanic and as such people are not playing the gamemode.

[Felicitatem Parco]

The Long Tom mechanic is meant for Large Organizations to compete against other Large Organizations for prestige and bragging rights as they conquer the Inner Sphere.

It is not really valid when you have dozens of organizations and more freelancers fighting over a territory. The LT mechanic has great potential, however it is not employed in the correct environment - it should be a Unit v. Unit Mechanic only as far as I am concerned.

[Mystere]

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2016 - 02:41 PM, said:

@Mystere

And you've said before you don't want a balanced game. Hence we are going to be talking apples to oranges and your game idea wouldn't even have as many players as FW does currently.

You want balance at the per-match and/or per-Mech level. I want it at the strategic level. QP is where the former should be, while CW is where the latter must be. Are you getting it now?

What's the point of CW again?

Oh! By the way, your match-level balance is already non-existent precisely because of 12-man vs. PUG situations -- and the LT was a possible cure, even if it was very bitter medicine.

Deathlike, on 15 July 2016 - 10:37 AM, said:

It would involve a mega-nerf, even if you wanted to keep it.

I want to keep it -- as part of an overall campaign system. That is what is missing in CW, and that is what people seem to not get after all this time.

All we have are 3 simplistic game modes with nothing much to tie them together other than "take majority of planet slices before ceasefire for the win". CW just has no depth whatsoever.

Edited by Mystere, 15 July 2016 - 03:04 PM.

[Mystere]

Prosperity Park, on 15 July 2016 - 02:45 PM, said:

The Long Tom mechanic is meant for Large Organizations to compete against other Large Organizations for prestige and bragging rights as they conquer the Inner Sphere.

It is not really valid when you have dozens of organizations and more freelancers fighting over a territory. The LT mechanic has great potential, however it is not employed in the correct environment - it should be a Unit v. Unit Mechanic only as far as I am concerned.

I disagree. It is right where it should be: at the planetary invasion level. The problem is that the entirety of CW is extremely simplistic. There is just no depth to it.

CW needs a resonable campaign system with many types of battles and not this highly simplistic "take majority of planet slices before ceasefire for the win" "campaign".

Yuck!
Yuck!
Yuck!

Edited by Mystere, 15 July 2016 - 03:01 PM.

[1453 R]

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2016 - 02:41 PM, said:

@1453 R

Why do you play Conquest? Domination? You play scouting to play 4man, max 55 tonnage. You play it for the same reason you play anything else.

If Scout queue provides critical advantage in invasion queue then scout > invasion. 4man queue closes 12man queue. Since most players don't enjoy scout queue (hence invasion queue, when LT is absent, is more populous) that means a minority of players can literally ruin invasion for everyone else.

The people saying thy don't want LT are the bulk of people on both sides. We don't want one gamemode to close the other. We want to play big stompy robots and win our matches because WE did better in OUR match. Not because someone else won theirs.

Worlds are flipped on how everyone did in each faction. Factions take worlds. However if you win or lose your MATCH based on how someone else played THEIR MATCH it's unenjoyable for the bulk of people.

Hence why nobody is playing. We can barely support 1 front, total, in FW right now. Not even all day. We're down to a few hundred total players at most over 24 hours and it's declining.

We don't like it. We don't want it. We don't enjoy the mechanic and as such people are not playing the gamemode.

So in an 'ideal' world, where Scouting mode provides neither any sort of advantages for Invasion players, nor does it provide any sort of headway or contribution to planetary capture...why does it exist?

I get that Invasion players are deeply offended by the notion that Average Joes, singletons, and people not in mode-ruining megalliances might actually influence Faction Play, and I can even understand getting really frustrated with losing to Long Toms...but again, the Scouting mode is part of Faction Play. If it contributes nothing whatsoever to your faction in any respect...why is it in Faction Play?

I find it interesting that many players are really, really enthusiastic about the pipe-dream idea of Piranha rebranding their Transverse flop as AeroTech and tying that into the same overall Commodity Warfare maps as MWO's CW...but those exact same players absolutely hate the fact that Scout groups, in MWO itself, are able to influence FP in any meaningful way at all.

I'll be honest - if I were to ever get into FP in any respect, it would be utterly and exclusively as a Scouting specialist, because[redacted] there's really nothing in 'regular' Faction Play that's of any remote interest to me. But the continued hatred for Scouting and the fact that Scouting is actually allowed to influence FP whatsoever at all, even just indirectly by providing Invasion mode bonuses/penalties, is a big fat turn-off for most anyone I can think of.

I was actually really looking forward, at one point, to trying my upcoming Vipers in Scout mode at some point. Was going to make it my first foray into Commodity Warfare, a gamespace I normally consider actively harmful to MWO as a whole given its effects on the playerbase and its enormous drain on PGI's resources for such minimal return. Now, though?

Well...why should I bother, if the Invasion/FP Playerbase's opinion is so strongly "get this Scouting [redacted] out of our mode already!"?

Edited by Marvyn Dodgers, 16 July 2016 - 04:53 AM.
Language

[Mystere]

1453 R, on 15 July 2016 - 03:02 PM, said:

So in an 'ideal' world, where Scouting mode provides neither any sort of advantages for Invasion players, nor does it provide any sort of headway or contribution to planetary capture...why does it exist?

Beats me. Some people here seem to just want a "most wins takes the planet"(!!!) system, via a series of unconnected/unrelated matches(!!!), which in my view is even a whole lot worse than what we have now.

That's what CW should be in a nutshell as far as they are concerned.

1453 R, on 15 July 2016 - 03:02 PM, said:

I get that Invasion players are deeply offended by the notion that Average Joes, singletons, and people not in mode-ruining megalliances might actually influence Faction Play, and I can even understand getting really frustrated with losing to Long Toms...but again, the Scouting mode is part of Faction Play. If it contributes nothing whatsoever to your faction in any respect...why is it in Faction Play?

<chuckles>

1453 R, on 15 July 2016 - 03:02 PM, said:

I find it interesting that many players are really, really enthusiastic about the pipe-dream idea of Piranha rebranding their Transverse flop as AeroTech and tying that into the same overall Commodity Warfare maps as MWO's CW...but those exact same players absolutely hate the fact that Scout groups, in MWO itself, are able to influence FP in any meaningful way at all.

<more chuckles>

Please stop! The hilarity of the irony you are exposing is making me almost fall off my seat laughing.

<composes self>

It's the "match" () vs. "war" viewpoint in CW at odds.

Edited by Mystere, 15 July 2016 - 03:15 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Mystere, on 15 July 2016 - 02:59 PM, said:

I disagree. It is right where it should be: at the planetary invasion level. The problem is that the entirety of CW is extremely simplistic. There is just no depth to it.

CW needs a resonable campaign system with many types of battles and not this highly simplistic &quot;take majority of planet slices before ceasefire for the win&quot; &quot;campaign&quot;.

Oh, I agree that it should be at the planetary invasion level, like it is now. The problem I have is that planetary invasion is being performed by disparate groups, and the "invading" forces often have no connection to the scouting forces. People don't like how the efforts of random strangers they have no affiliation with in a separate combat environment has such a drastic effect on the local match.

If CW was based on combat between units or (at least) groups of players with some kind of bond, then it would be accepted more widely. Right now, people feel is if we're playing a game of soccer and, because some other guys 5 miles away who you don't know won a penalty kick comptition against some other guys you don't know, all of the sudden your goal became 3 meters wider.

[Deathlike]

The crux of the problem is primarily that Long Tom does overwhelmingly damage the Invasion queue.

I get that there should be an advantage to scouting. I mean, otherwise it would be pointless.

HOWEVER, this cannot be outweighed by the actual advantage provided. When a queue is completed vacated by a mechanic that completely imbalanced, then that mechanic needs to be revised significantly. There's no other way of saying it.

The point of FW is to get active units playing against one another.. not have something automatically kill their desire to play the game.


Otherwise, you're just asking for your cake and eating it too. Sure, you have your Long Tom, and noone else wanting to play your game.

[Mystere]

Prosperity Park, on 15 July 2016 - 03:12 PM, said:

Oh, I agree that it should be at the planetary invasion level, like it is now. The problem I have is that planetary invasion is being performed by disparate groups, and the "invading" forces often have no connection to the scouting forces. People don't like how the efforts of random strangers they have no affiliation with in a separate combat environment has such a drastic effect on the local match.

If CW was based on combat between units or (at least) groups of players with some kind of bond, then it would be accepted more widely. Right now, people feel is if we're playing a game of soccer and, because some other guys 5 miles away who you don't know won a penalty kick comptition against some other guys you don't know, all of the sudden your goal became 3 meters wider.

That is because "faction" is not much more than an icon beside a unit/player and is devoid of any meaning.

As I said in my posts above, it's the lack of depth on one hand, and the "match" mentality on the other.

[1453 R]

To clarify: I'm not actually arguing that the Long Tom isn't busted as hell and needs to be looked at, because a full-screen nuke every two minutes prolly doesn't feel very nice, no.

What I hate is the insufferable arrogance and entitlement a lot of FP Die Hard guys seem to be so heavily stewing in, where the Long Tom needs to be removed altogether, Scouting needs to be disabled/abandoned, and the entire focus of FP thrust back onto "be in a giant, strictly-disciplined and rigid pseudo-army 'unit', taking orders like you're at Mistress Theresa's Domme-ination Bar or GTFO OF OUR GAME MODE"

Half to all of the reason your game mode is dying is because it's incredibly inaccessible to the vast majority of MWO's userbase. And yet, every single time I decide I'm morbidly curious enough to check out a FP thread, it's more of the same hyper-exclusionary bullscheissen...or people crying about how FP is a barren g'damned wasteland almost entirely devoid of all the players YOU GUYS HAVE ACTIVELY CHASED AWAY.

What the hell did you expect was going to happen? And why should Scouting be dismantled completely because crusty Invasion players don't like that regular guys now have an escape from being put on MercStar farm status all night any time they step foot in Commodity Warfare?

[MischiefSC]

@Mystere-

If there was a billion other balance and depth mechanics in place your ideas would have merit. There isn't so you're saying the 4man queue should close the 12man queue. We already know this idea is a failure. You're arguing in favor of something that's already failed with the logic of people should just like it. That's the same argument you've used for why Clans should be totally OP. The validity of that argument or lack of it is played out in the popularion.

@1453 R

So you don't play FW but you like it because you feel it screw people you don't like. That's compelling.

You scout because you like the scout gameplay. Same reason you play anything else. If you're playing a gamemode because you want to **** other players then the mechanic allowing that is horrible game design.

[Deathlike]

1453 R, on 15 July 2016 - 03:23 PM, said:

To clarify: I'm not actually arguing that the Long Tom isn't busted as hell and needs to be looked at, because a full-screen nuke every two minutes prolly doesn't feel very nice, no.

What I hate is the insufferable arrogance and entitlement a lot of FP Die Hard guys seem to be so heavily stewing in, where the Long Tom needs to be removed altogether, Scouting needs to be disabled/abandoned, and the entire focus of FP thrust back onto "be in a giant, strictly-disciplined and rigid pseudo-army 'unit', taking orders like you're at Mistress Theresa's Domme-ination Bar or GTFO OF OUR GAME MODE"

Half to all of the reason your game mode is dying is because it's incredibly inaccessible to the vast majority of MWO's userbase. And yet, every single time I decide I'm morbidly curious enough to check out a FP thread, it's more of the same hyper-exclusionary bullscheissen...or people crying about how FP is a barren g'damned wasteland almost entirely devoid of all the players YOU GUYS HAVE ACTIVELY CHASED AWAY.

What the hell did you expect was going to happen? And why should Scouting be dismantled completely because crusty Invasion players don't like that regular guys now have an escape from being put on MercStar farm status all night any time they step foot in Commodity Warfare?

Um... blaming players because there are actual fundamental problems with FW (even before the Long Tom)?

I believe you're either ignorant of the problems, or completely oblivious to them.


The biggest problem with FW is that "we know almost exactly where you're going to funnel from" syndrome.

If the base was a wide open area with multiple entrances (more like being surrounded instead of having predefined entrances), we wouldn't be having conversations about craptacular map designs.

If the spawns at one point were in the way of an attacking force, we wouldn't be talking about spawn camping.

If the mode wasn't so flawed, we wouldn't be seeing units, let alone players be totally disinterested in the mode.


If you had taken a modicum of time to understand why these problems existed, instead of trying to blame the community outright for actual issues... then you'd see why the mode itself is not even something the average unit wants to participate in, let alone the solo players.

Feel free to keep blaming others while you can refuse to understand the core problems and issues of FW. I mean, who plays a mode that fails to give motivation to play it?

[MischiefSC]

Deathlike, on 15 July 2016 - 03:16 PM, said:

The crux of the problem is primarily that Long Tom does overwhelmingly damage the Invasion queue.

I get that there should be an advantage to scouting. I mean, otherwise it would be pointless.

HOWEVER, this cannot be outweighed by the actual advantage provided. When a queue is completed vacated by a mechanic that completely imbalanced, then that mechanic needs to be revised significantly. There's no other way of saying it.

The point of FW is to get active units playing against one another.. not have something automatically kill their desire to play the game.


Otherwise, you're just asking for your cake and eating it too. Sure, you have your Long Tom, and noone else wanting to play your game.

Advantages from scouting need to be minor, or else scouting invalidates invasion queue.

You play scouting for the same reason you play anything else. When one mode controls the outcome of another you've got a X > Y environment which absolutely creates issues.

This isn't rocket science. Sure, we want things to be interrelated but not dominant. If scouting > invasion then scouting balance > invasion balance and scouting balance is bad and unlikely to get fixed.

[Mystere]

Deathlike, on 15 July 2016 - 03:16 PM, said:

The crux of the problem is primarily that Long Tom does overwhelmingly damage the Invasion queue.

I get that there should be an advantage to scouting. I mean, otherwise it would be pointless.

HOWEVER, this cannot be outweighed by the actual advantage provided. When a queue is completed vacated by a mechanic that completely imbalanced, then that mechanic needs to be revised significantly. There's no other way of saying it.

The point of FW is to get active units playing against one another.. not have something automatically kill their desire to play the game.


Otherwise, you're just asking for your cake and eating it too. Sure, you have your Long Tom, and noone else wanting to play your game.

People obviously hate it when I do this. But, I'm doing it any way ...

In all battles and wars throughout history, what do armies try to do before engaging in battle?

If you said anything along the lines of "gain a strategic/tactical/any advantage" or give an example such as "achieve air/artillery superiority", then you are on the right track.

It is the job of someone designing a war game to figure out how to implement such depth-inducing mechanics and at the same time (very very important!!!) to explain their vision to the player base, especially if they're releasing stuff piecemeal and at a very slow pace.

In the mean time, if your enemy has LT superiority, maybe the first order of business is to either take it away from them, or better yet, take it for yourself.

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2016 - 03:27 PM, said:

@Mystere-

If there was a billion other balance and depth mechanics in place your ideas would have merit. There isn't so you're saying the 4man queue should close the 12man queue. We already know this idea is a failure. You're arguing in favor of something that's already failed with the logic of people should just like it. That's the same argument you've used for why Clans should be totally OP. The validity of that argument or lack of it is played out in the popularion.

See my two last points above. You could not be more wrong about me.

Edited by Mystere, 15 July 2016 - 03:35 PM.

[MischiefSC]

That is your argument though
You don't want a fair or balanced game environment.

[Mystere]

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2016 - 03:27 PM, said:

You scout because you like the scout gameplay. Same reason you play anything else. If you're playing a gamemode because you want to **** other players then the mechanic allowing that is horrible game design.

Some people scout because they want to gain a huge strategic advantage. Again, it's the "match" vs "war" mentality at odds.

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2016 - 03:37 PM, said:

That is your argument though
You don't want a fair or balanced game environment.

Sigh. I'm going to repeat myself:

Mystere, on 15 July 2016 - 02:47 PM, said:

You want balance at the per-match and/or per-Mech level. I want it at the strategic level. QP is where the former should be, while CW is where the latter must be. Are you getting it now?

What's the point of CW again?

After all that, are you still really going to insist that I really do not want a fair or balanced game environment? <smh>

Edited by Mystere, 15 July 2016 - 03:42 PM.

[dervishx5]

Mystere, on 15 July 2016 - 03:38 PM, said:

Some people scout because they want to gain a huge strategic advantage. Again, it's the "match" vs "war" mentality at odds.

If this game had any strategic aspect to it then you might have a point. But I seem to recall PGI saying something about marketing MWO as a tournament game.

[Deathlike]

Mystere, on 15 July 2016 - 03:33 PM, said:

People obviously hate it when I do this. But, I'm doing it any way ...

In all battles and wars throughout history, what do armies try to do before engaging in battle?

If you said anything along the lines of "gain a strategic/tactical/any advantage" or give an example such as "achieve air/artillery superiority", then you are on the right track.

It is the job of someone designing a war game to figure out how to implement such depth-inducing mechanics and at the same time (very very important!!!) to explain their vision to the player base, especially if they're releasing stuff piecemeal and at a very slow pace.

In the mean time, if your enemy has LT superiority, maybe the first order of business is to either take it away from them, or better yet, take it for yourself.

The problem with your argument is effectively advocating for Powercreep. That is, I gotta have it for the mechs/tech base that I like, and the opfor be damned.

You argue often to have Clan tech imbalanced... and fight matches in a 12v10 environment (the classic Gyrok wishlist). That simply doesn't work.


When something that is designed that there is absolutely NO DISADVANTAGE for having it, well... there it is... powercreep. There's no semblance of balance except the people that need such an imbalance to continue. That doesn't really help the game at all.


There's plenty of benefits of the Long Tom:
Auto-aimbot
Proven Headshot Provider
Eviscerates all mechs, even when it doesn't deal a headshot
Frequently shows up, every 2 minutes

What negatives are from the Long Tom:
Doesn't give a damn about friend or foe when the target is determined

Just wow, how balanced!


When people discuss having an "balanced imbalance", it's the idea that there is a counter or at least a weakness to the design, so that players that are familiar with counter it can perform the action. It can be as simple as LRMs not being useful vs cover (although, that in itself is a totally completely separate discussion).


If there was no such balance, it would just be the ONLY OPTIMAL CHOICE in a field of many choices. If we revert back to the days where PPC+Gauss were king, it's because the other options (non-PPC+Gauss options) were not as good. It's not good for the game.

It's bad enough we have enough min-maxing, but to make some chassis totally obsolete? What is the point of PGI even selling the mechpack for it in the first place? It's easier to sell mechpacks with mechs that are deemed OP for a bit until C-bills? I guess that's the current theme.


How does this all matter for the Long Tom?

If the design of something has virtually every positive benefit and nothing of negative consequence (like Clan XL engines before the nerfs), then what's the point of the alternatives?

I guess if you like that alternative for people to not play the game, then I'm sure PGI can arrange that for us.

Edited by Deathlike, 15 July 2016 - 03:45 PM.

[Mystere]

Deathlike, on 15 July 2016 - 03:43 PM, said:

The problem with your argument is effectively advocating for Powercreep. That is, I gotta have it for the mechs/tech base that I like, and the opfor be damned.

I'm not advocating for power creep. I'm advocating for an immersive Community Warfare full of depth, something way beyond this ultra-simplistic system we have now.

Now whether or not PGI is up to the job or is even remotely inclined, that's on them.

Deathlike, on 15 July 2016 - 03:43 PM, said:

You argue often to have Clan tech imbalanced... and fight matches in a 12v10 environment (the classic Gyrok wishlist). That simply doesn't work.

Once again, depth can solve the 12v10 environment. But apparently, it just takes more imagination and creativity than I give developers and players alike credit for.

And for crying out loud, it's only 12v10!

<Calling JM! Calling JM! Where are you?>

Edited by Mystere, 15 July 2016 - 03:52 PM.

[1453 R]

Deathlike, on 15 July 2016 - 03:31 PM, said:

...

Unfortunately, Commodity Warfare isn't going to get the ground-up complete redo most players 'suggest' it needs. It'd cost too much for a company which has already sunk a disastrous amount of resources into a game mode that players wanted more for nostalgia reasons than because they actually wanted to play it.

Frankly, I see things like the Scouting mode as about the only way you're going to get any sort of fixes for CW. New game modes, using existing or easily-built resources, that try new spins on the game rather than trying to salvage the truly incredibly awful Invasion mode. Except...people keep trying to demand that Piranha basically create a brand new game from scratch, which we all bloody well know they're not going to do.

Thus a lot of my frustration with people kvetching so much over the Long Tom and the fact that Scouting actually has something resembling a point. We should be pushing for more stuff like Scout mode, not saying "dump all of CW and spend another two years rebuilding it from scratch AGAIN, and get it right this time!"

Experience shows that even if they did just throw away updating the rest of the game to focus exclusively on CW - AGAIN - for a while..it wouldn't really end up the way people keep demanding it end up.

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2016 - 03:33 PM, said:

Advantages from scouting need to be minor, or else scouting invalidates invasion queue.

You play scouting for the same reason you play anything else. When one mode controls the outcome of another you've got a X > Y environment which absolutely creates issues.

This isn't rocket science. Sure, we want things to be interrelated but not dominant. If scouting > invasion then scouting balance > invasion balance and scouting balance is bad and unlikely to get fixed.

Why is it bad for Invasion players to have to care about Scouting, Mischief?

Sure, the Long Tom is too much, but if your faction as a whole decides to blow off Scout altogether and let the enemy claim an enormous intel advantage, why shouldn't your faction be at a noticeable disadvantage because of that? Why do Scout bonuses have to be minor/irrelevant/unimportant? The idea behind Invasion is that you're gunning for the lucrative* goal of claiming control of a planet (yes, I know that 'lucrative' is not really the word here, but that's supposedly Piranha's intent). Why should Scout mode guys not have a worthwhile goal to work towards as well?

People keep complaining that Commodity Warfare lacks depth, immersion, meaning, and motivation...yet they want to ensure that Scout mode has less meaning than Quickplay matches, via removing any real worthwhile impact it has on Invasion whatsoever. That makes no sense.

Yes, you want Invasion to not be invalidated by Scout...but you should also have a worthwhile motivation to actually Scout as opposed to just Invading all day erry day, eh? Elsewise we're back where we started - no reason for anyone other than the big Invasion-specialist megalliances to ever set foot in FP again.