110 replies to this topic

[Danjo San]

Armando, on 18 July 2016 - 04:34 PM, said:

So stop acting like you care about the game or the people that play it, end the pretense that you care about anything or anyone outside your self.

Are you to good to share a tag with Tikonov Commonality Armed Forces / 4th Tau Ceti Rangers / Mean and Green / Harloc Raider - Irregulars? Or, will they simply have nothing to do with your unit?

hahaha ... I connect with TCAF and 4TCR on a regular basis, they invite me to drop with them, Also I invite them.
Mean and Green has not been very active lately, but Shin Vector usually always drops into our TS when we see him, we are in a different Time Zone. Harloc Raiders I usually never see around, maybe because our Timezone is different from theirs ... I have connected with Epsilon 9 though and have told them to contact me if they want to drop together and train together... so please do not pretend you know about my network.

[Armando]

Danjo San, on 18 July 2016 - 04:43 PM, said:

hahaha ... I connect with TCAF and 4TCR on a regular basis, they invite me to drop with them, Also I invite them.
Mean and Green has not been very active lately, but Shin Vector usually always drops into our TS when we see him, we are in a different Time Zone. Harloc Raiders I usually never see around, maybe because our Timezone is different from theirs ... I have connected with Epsilon 9 though and have told them to contact me if they want to drop together and train together... so please do not pretend you know about my network.

Hay, as long as YOUR Network is uneffected right? Are we to assume TCAF and 4TCR are in agreement with you then, since they are in 'your network' and have more than 36 member your plan will FORCE them to kick players....and they think it is a good idea?

It seems you don't even care about 'your' network....All credibility LOST

Edited by Armando, 18 July 2016 - 05:15 PM.

[Danjo San]

Your team puts up no effort... You do not connect with other units in your faction ... you do not put in work to build a community. Stop pretending you care about the game... All you want to do is hurt the large units .... whääääh whääääh whäääh.
When all else fails, start insulting your opposition, that sure helps your case!

[Armando]

Danjo San, on 18 July 2016 - 05:08 PM, said:

Your team puts up no effort... You do not connect with other units in your faction ... you do not put in work to build a community. Stop pretending you care about the game... All you want to do is hurt the large units .... whääääh whääääh whäääh.
When all else fails, start insulting your opposition, that sure helps your case!

I thought you are comfortable in your selfishness...who knew you would find it insulting.

Sorry, I thought I was dealing with someone who actually cared about the game as well as the people playing it...only to find some guy looking out for #1 who stepped in #2 and is stuck at #3 behind a pair units with more than 36 players. Seriously though, good to see you true colors... now I can file your posts appropriately.

Edited by Armando, 18 July 2016 - 05:48 PM.

[MischiefSC]

I pug with HHoD, C4, CBR1, everyone else who drops with Davion. Most my unit goes to sleep by the time I get on.

They're good people and I enjoy playing with them.

Not the same as being in the same unit.

So I tell you what Danjo - just eliminate units completely. We'll have no units and tags and just play together with our friends since unit tags don't mean anything. Right? It's all just the same.

Except that has no basis in reality and human behavior. None. It runs contrary to how we function, manage individual and group identity and layers of social affiliation.

Your idea doesn't work. At all. Again, the only thing it will do is get people to quit. The total # of units won't appreciably change, you'll just have more people who can't be in the unit they want to be in. That's it. That's the only impact it will have.

The size and population of units is a byproduct of specific leadership players and the environments they create and how they handle seeking out and recruiting other people to join them. Capping units will not create more leaders in the population or change how and who with people enjoy playing. All it will do is exclude the bulk of people currently playing in units from being part of the group they want to belong to.

That is it. That's all it would accomplish. It would not create new groups or force populations to equalize among existing groups. Just exclude a bunch of people from being in the same group as the people they want to be in a group with.

[Danjo San]

Armando, on 18 July 2016 - 05:06 PM, said:

Hay, as long as YOUR Network is uneffected right? Are we to assume TCAF and 4TCR are in agreement with you then, since they are in 'your network' and have more than 36 member your plan will FORCE them to kick players....and they think it is a good idea?

It seems you don't even care about 'your' network....All credibility LOST

haha... more condescending insults... so yeah, my network only consists of Liao... hahaha lol, you know nothing and yet you claim as long as my network is unnaffected. BS³
4TCR and TCAF are in my extended Network, yes, I can hop to their teamspeak and join groups with them or invite them to my groups etc. Do we have to roll the same political agenda... no. Other than that my network consists of multiple mercenary units, davion units, players from rasalhague and so on, we group, drop, drain, event together all aside from being in different factions, having differend sizes and having different tags. It does not matter....
So once again, before you claim to know what and what not affects my network, nor how far my network spans, please do not comment on my network... After all I am not claiming ou live in a bubble that only consists of your 300 firends and when they take 270 away from you you will only have 30 left and will be forever alone

MischiefSC, on 18 July 2016 - 05:37 PM, said:

I pug with HHoD, C4, CBR1, everyone else who drops with Davion. Most my unit goes to sleep by the time I get on.

They're good people and I enjoy playing with them.

Not the same as being in the same unit.

So I tell you what Danjo - just eliminate units completely. We'll have no units and tags and just play together with our friends since unit tags don't mean anything. Right? It's all just the same.

Except that has no basis in reality and human behavior. None. It runs contrary to how we function, manage individual and group identity and layers of social affiliation.

Your idea doesn't work. At all. Again, the only thing it will do is get people to quit. The total # of units won't appreciably change, you'll just have more people who can't be in the unit they want to be in. That's it. That's the only impact it will have.

The size and population of units is a byproduct of specific leadership players and the environments they create and how they handle seeking out and recruiting other people to join them. Capping units will not create more leaders in the population or change how and who with people enjoy playing. All it will do is exclude the bulk of people currently playing in units from being part of the group they want to belong to.

That is it. That's all it would accomplish. It would not create new groups or force populations to equalize among existing groups. Just exclude a bunch of people from being in the same group as the people they want to be in a group with.

Okay Mischief I will be quiet from now on...

[ccrider]

Danjo San, on 18 July 2016 - 04:38 PM, said:

Is it the Mercs that caused balance issues in multiple phases... absolutely
Are loyalists to blame for not moving around? Nope, count the top 100 units for merc and for loyalists and see compare the numbers, you will see that there are the same amount, or even more, mercs than loyalists that span 10 factions
Loyalists counted into that that won't play vs. mercs, if mercs have the same amount or more players than the respective loyalists...do I really need to answer?
Those with loyalist contracts that don't play very often... good question. You should ask yourself why they don't play very often?
maybe one of the reasons can found above. maybe one of the other reasons applies, aside frm incentive or mercs dominating the map

Mercs don't dominate the map anymore. We cant hold tagged planets if we switch contracts. Merc units tend to attack more than defend so its readonable to think that if a merc unit takes a planet for your faction the reasonable response shouldnt be "bad mercs!" it should be "defend that planet taken by mercs with loyslist units since they can hold the tag longer." Loyalists can coexist with large merc units easily; let them use their numbers to take planets for your faction then loyalists can drop defense in between attacks to tag and hold said planets. Most of us could care less about the 45 MC a day we lose as soon as contract day rolls around. Im all for loyalists taking them over. Instead of trying to disrupt or destroy big units, instead we could look at ways they can be beneficial to your faction.

[Danjo San]

ccrider, on 18 July 2016 - 05:43 PM, said:

Mercs don't dominate the map anymore. We cant hold tagged planets if we switch contracts. Merc units tend to attack more than defend so its readonable to think that if a merc unit takes a planet for your faction the reasonable response shouldnt be "bad mercs!" it should be "defend that planet taken by mercs with loyslist units since they can hold the tag longer." Loyalists can coexist with large merc units easily; let them use their numbers to take planets for your faction then loyalists can drop defense in between attacks to tag and hold said planets. Most of us could care less about the 45 MC a day we lose as soon as contract day rolls around. Im all for loyalists taking them over. Instead of trying to disrupt or destroy big units, instead we could look at ways they can be beneficial to your faction.

So having multiple mercs cluster in one faction with no direct opposition is not controling the map?

O **** sorry, I promised Mischief to be quiet

[ccrider]

Danjo San, on 18 July 2016 - 05:45 PM, said:

So having multiple mercs cluster in one faction with no direct opposition is not controling the map?

O **** sorry, I promised Mischief to be quiet

clustering is a byproduct of wanting to get matches. When we were in wolf, we found it difficult to attack. Same in kurita if it was a time loyalists were offline. In jade falcon and steiner i get matches anytime i please. Its not done to piss on smaller units or factions; i owe it to my guys to find a spot we can get drops in. The biggest issue in fp isnt large merc units, its players who want fp to be quick play with respawn who care little or not at all about teaming up. Those are the ones who have an issue with units, of any size. Fp shouldnt penalize people for playing it as it is intended to please a very small minority who cae little for coordination, cooperation or teamwork.

[Armando]

ccrider, on 18 July 2016 - 05:51 PM, said:

clustering is a byproduct of wanting to get matches. When we were in wolf, we found it difficult to attack. Same in kurita if it was a time loyalists were offline. In jade falcon and steiner i get matches anytime i please. Its not done to piss on smaller units or factions; i owe it to my guys to find a spot we can get drops in. The biggest issue in fp isnt large merc units, its players who want fp to be quick play with respawn who care little or not at all about teaming up. Those are the ones who have an issue with units, of any size. Fp shouldnt penalize people for playing it as it is intended to please a very small minority who cae little for coordination, cooperation or teamwork.

Forget it cc, Danjo San belongs to a 30 member unit sitting @ 3rd on the Leaderboards behind a pair of 36+ member units because he thinks 'numbers' is the reason they do better than his unit....he will say anything to get PGI to split up TCAF and 4TCR in hopes that his unit will rise up the boards.

Sad fact is, if he gets his way his unit will likely drop from 3rd to 13th because 'numbers' are the reason his unit is in 3rd....just not the 'numbers' he is thinking of. The units above his unit are above his unit because of the number WINS they have, and has NOTHING to do with membership totals, but ya...'numbers'. LoL

Edited by Armando, 18 July 2016 - 06:14 PM.

[justcallme A S H]

^ fact right there.

[MischiefSC]

Danjo San, on 18 July 2016 - 05:40 PM, said:

Okay Mischief I will be quiet from now on...

Not saying that. People say incorrect things and have bad opinions on the forums all the time. I'm just pointing out that your idea is wrong and has no basis in human behavior or game telemetry to support it. If it would work I'd be all for it. I'm in a small unit myself.

I'm not questioning your motives or the like - I don't know what your motives are or what you're thinking. I do however know how people work and I can pretty easily get the telemetry of population sizes and shifts and that impact on the game. Again, plenty of big units who are causing no issues to the game. If it was only MS moving around and everyone else was stable even that would be fine. When 60% Of the games existing population shifts to one faction that obviously creates an issue.

Groups are built around leaders and specific social environments and identities. Unit caps does not create more leaders, does not foster more distinct environments with equal levels of attraction and does not create new identities. Your suggestion literally doesn't work any more than saying 'we should all just get along' doesn't work for creating world peace. It's a concept that exists independently of the subject and has no relation to the realities of the environment it's trying to affect.

[A Shoddy Rental Mech]

Not sure why the pissing contest over the corpse that is faction warfare. PGI don't care about balancing the factions or the merc units. They don't care about Faction Warfare at all.

Would you like to buy a mechpack?

[MischiefSC]

The Nerf Bat, on 18 July 2016 - 07:37 PM, said:

Not sure why the pissing contest over the corpse that is faction warfare. PGI don't care about balancing the factions or the merc units. They don't care about Faction Warfare at all.

Would you like to buy a mechpack?

Yes, I would like to buy a mech pack. I'd like to buy all the mech packs. I just really dislike feeling like I'm paying someone who otherwise holds me in utter contempt. It makes me twitch.

We all want MW:O to do well. We want FW to be fun and engaging and packed full of people enjoying themselves. We want to spend money on it and feel good about spending that money.

That's a big part of the problem. If we just hated it and PGI and everything about it we'd just go.

[Danjo San]

MischiefSC, on 19 July 2016 - 12:54 AM, said:

Yes, I would like to buy a mech pack. I'd like to buy all the mech packs. I just really dislike feeling like I'm paying someone who otherwise holds me in utter contempt. It makes me twitch.

We all want MW:O to do well. We want FW to be fun and engaging and packed full of people enjoying themselves. We want to spend money on it and feel good about spending that money.

That's a big part of the problem. If we just hated it and PGI and everything about it we'd just go.

agreed

[Danjo San]

MischiefSC, on 18 July 2016 - 06:17 PM, said:

I'm not questioning your motives or the like - I don't know what your motives are or what you're thinking. I do however know how people work and I can pretty easily get the telemetry of population sizes and shifts and that impact on the game. Again, plenty of big units who are causing no issues to the game. If it was only MS moving around and everyone else was stable even that would be fine. When 60% Of the games existing population shifts to one faction that obviously creates an issue.

With no control instance preventing a shift of 60% of the existing population to the same factions over and over again how can we ever achieve balance? Simple "Motivators" have proven to be utterly ineffective. Negative contracts do not help, nor did recruitment costs limit the size and return prevent large groups of players moving in bulk. You have to create an incentive high enough to balance these bulk movements. is balancing by creating a super high bonus for loyalists gonna help? I don't believe it will. How will you create enough Motivators to play loyal for each faction and balance population at the same time?
I think your 25% bonus proposal with combined with a bidding system will still not be enough of a motivator to balance it out.
I believe the only way this can be achieved is hard gating. closing contracts when population becomes imbalanced. However, take into consideration that there are units that choose Merc contracts are super large but rarely play faction warfare at all. Would it be fair and balanced to say if one of these 300+ Companies takes a contract and hogs 300+ of those available slots. But in reality only 5-10% of them play FW? Opt-In gating could be a solution, but would require much more work within coding and balancing of contracts.
Maintaining "Freedom of choice" and "equal distribution" is close to impossible. If you emphasize one, the other will have trouble. The question arises is an equal balance more fosterable to create an enviroment where players get matches no matter what Faction or group they are in. Or is freedom of choice to be fostered. Players chosing to play loyalists, made use of their Freedom of choice once and no longer require that aspect to be emphasized. Loyalists regardless of Faction in theory therefore foster "equal distribution". I would hope that Marik, Clan Wolf, Smoke Jaguar etc. all get an equal amount of active players and get matches, attacking or defending just as easy.

[Danjo San]

Mercs will emphasize "Freedom of choice", they will not like it, if and when a controlling measure of whatever kind tells them you can only choose between 2 out of 10 Factions, because balancing the numbers you have in your unit only allows you to play here or there. Maybe even the only two choices week after week end up being for an underpopulated house such as Liao and Marik. Players that wish to take out their newly purchased Clan Mech Packs will have trouble with that.
The best solution however would be that suddely thousands of new happy FW-Players sprout out of nowhere and flood the queues on every planet in every faction in every timezone and all population and unit size issues are null and void. But until then we need to think about a system that balances itself, without relying on NAPs. Gentlemen Agreements. Mercs actually going to all factions instead of clustering into one.
The current system is flawed, I guess we can all agree on that!

[KinLuu]

The best short term solution would be to axe the small factions.

[Danjo San]

KinLuu, on 19 July 2016 - 03:18 AM, said:

The best short term solution would be to axe the small factions.

Short term bandaids only bring a quick temporary relief, the wound will still bleed though. You need to stitch up that cut, a surgical intervention needs to be done.

[KinLuu]

But that would require to completely redo the gamemode itself. And that is not going to happen.