869 replies to this topic

[Darkmalakan]

I have a few idea's to get more people to play FP since most of the problems revolve around the lack of players:
1) In FP instead of Supply Chache for 1 member of winning side in which most pugs wont want to drop since we all know how bad some pug FP games can be is to give 1 member from both sides a supply cache key. This would have am every daily possible reward for anyone to try it out and to keep doing it. People can still get supply chache in QP and would have more of them try their luck in turn giving us all more matches which in turns means more people playing FP then some of those new people might spend more $$$ so everyone wins.
2) When ever there is an event that has FP rewards there are more people playing which is nice. More events around or with FP extra rewards helps. Recommend getting rid or reducing the Win requirements. Make it more play and so much match score to ensure people aren't AFKing it. In most of the FP I play during the events the enemy team is usually complaining about this for half the match after their first wave is destroyed. Which in turn gives them a bad opinion of FP. When you go play a quick play I generally see over half of the people not in a unit and not every faction has a good hub to go group up with people.

[Stormbringer13]

Kael Posavatz, on 26 July 2016 - 09:12 AM, said:

My general sense is that people have stopped playing FW. It isn't even so much a case of burn-out as it is "we've seen all that FW has to offer us, why are we still here?" A lot of those I know who are still playing FW are playing under inertia, not because there is anything driving them.

I think many are just joining FP to grind out quick Mech Bays at the 2nd and 6th Loyalty spots. Then they go back to QP. Maybe they stay to grind out some gxp and other little cockpit items, but they don't care to really learn or stay.

[Jables McBarty]

Jables McBarty, on 26 July 2016 - 10:04 AM, said:

And as a coda I do think there are lots of logistical barriers to gameplay (clunky dropdecks, confusing interface, long queue times, etc.), but that these would be ignored if the game mode was *that good*.

In other words, here are some things that have never been said:

“There are just too many barriers to doing heroin. I like it, but just too expensive, too risky. Also it’s illegal.”
“I used to do heroin, but it just took too long to find someone to shoot up with. So I went back to cigarettes.”
“Shooting up is so complicated. The rubber strap, the needle, the spoon. Nah, doing heroin just wasn’t worth the effort.”
“I used heroin for a long time, but found it lacks narrative cohesion. I kept thinking, ‘what’s the point of all this?’”
“I used to like heroin, but now I find it boring.”
“No, I’m not willing to spend that much on heroin.”

But we don’t have heroin.

What we have is more like Ecstasy. Which appeals to a niche audience, but isn't nearly as potent.

And when the club owners come to their E users and ask, “Why aren’t we selling drugs?” the E users might say “because people want heroin,” but then they might also come up with answers like the lines outside the club are too long or that we need more glowsticks—definitely not enough glowsticks—or that the best dance troupes go to a different club every weekend and we dance here every weekend so we should get more free stuff.

And the E users might be right about the lines and the glowsticks and the dance troupes and the free stuff, and changing these things might change sales by a percentage point or two, but to really double their figures the club owners need to start selling heroin.

(heroin is a metaphor for gameplay)


EDIT: Added contextual quote.

Edited by Jables McBarty, 26 July 2016 - 11:23 AM.

[T I N M A N]

Jables McBarty, on 26 July 2016 - 10:04 AM, said:

EDIT: Looks like I failed to address your post in my original. Lots of ideas in those links, but lots of them are overworld based. I keep getting back to gameplay gameplay gameplay. Stick to what PGI does best--arena shooters--and add variety to that element. Though again, I won't disagree with you about the barriers to gameplay that keep an already low population even lower.
...
But first, better gameplay to engage a wider audience. Then these might be good things to tack on.

With the now 30 pages beyond my last major post, let me create a simple list in order of priority, of the things PGI needs to do for FP to come back.

1) Make it so people can actually get matches. (Condense the Queues)
-THIS IS BY NO MEANS THE SOLUTION. For everyone out there, do not interpret this as a suggested solution. It is not. It is a way to ensure that when more people come to FP, they will actually get matches.
-(this is not addressed to you Jables, just a general thing)
-[condensing the queues will also have an effect on the faction population imbalance. If we condense first, we can afterwords attempt to balance the factions (merc/player limits and what have you) with the new data.]

(Now below is the solution. The trick is finding which ideas fit where.)

2) Make the game play fun.
-(this does include some lore elements too, because a lot of the lore suggestions would be fairly easy and fun)
-Makes people stay and continue to play

3) Shove lore/complexity at em'
-This will make people engrossed in it and become part of it.

Keep releasing new content and events the whole time.

There are hundreds of ideas inside of each of those points, but I think that is the basic plan for what PGI should do.

Edited by NightStalker97, 26 July 2016 - 11:46 AM.

[VoodooLou Kerensky]

Yes PGI We know its hard to make mechs and maps and etc etc. How do we know? Well could it be that some of us over the last 20+ years have made maps, had them crushed just to rebuild it and have it widely accepted across Leagues (I wont name n shame they know who they are and some of the rest of you will know who I speak of).There are those of us that have ran Leagues since the MW2 days and has been a CONSTANT in the Community, who integrated all the Planetary Lore Variables by adjusting settings that were already in the game so that Lore was maintained (as well as could be done no ones perfect and we dont expect perfect).There aint a Forrest Colony on a airless moon ya know?Both of these things didnt happen just because of a handful of people,because there are those of us who helped both with map making and league building and all of the little things that trip you up. You called it Community Warfare to start with but excluded the Community that had made Planetary Warfare woirk over and over again. WE Can Help! We'VE been where your at. WE did this On DIAL UP CONNECTIONS. You've lost alot of us already to ignoring the pleas,because these arent new issues. You can easily weed out the chaff ask those that ran the leagues of the past they can work you around the pitfalls and it doesnt have to be open communication but involve the Community more than just as consumers.

[Stormbringer13]

VoodooLou Kerensky, on 26 July 2016 - 11:25 AM, said:

... You called it Community Warfare to start with but excluded the Community that had made Planetary Warfare woirk over and over again. WE Can Help! We'VE been where your at. WE did this On DIAL UP CONNECTIONS. You've lost alot of us already to ignoring the pleas,because these arent new issues. You can easily weed out the chaff ask those that ran the leagues of the past they can work you around the pitfalls and it doesnt have to be open communication but involve the Community more than just as consumers.

Dial Up? Hell, I did it with paper, pencil and DICE for Kerensky's sake

[Tahawus]

Allow teams to vote for a drop commander prior to launch. If the team wins, drop commander's rewards are doubled, and he gets an awards pool to split as he sees fit among his team. This award should be over and above the normal earnings. Give the commander quick buttons to distribute the award equally, by kmdd, by damage, or let him do it by hand. Then let the team rate the commander's performance, and give him/her titles or other swag for meeting goals or totals.

This will give people a reason to call, a vested interest in following orders, feedback on performance, and address concerns about coordination in match.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

-VOTING OBJECTIVES: Objectives where the players vote on various options, so the defenders need to find out exactly what the attackers are after.

-SECONDARY OBJECTIVES

-FACTION SPECIFIC MECH VARIANTS AVAILABLE ONLY TO LOYALISTS OF A CERTAIN RANK

-FACTION SPECIFIC DECAL AVAILABLE ONLY TO LOYALISTS OF CERTAIN RANK
-GAME MODE: Raid
For a certain amount of time in the 3 time zones we have servers. Intel points and Generic Supply caches with normal equipment, plus the possibility of extra MC Supply caches. Get the loot, get out. Defenders can still get supplies if they defend properly, with the attackers getting back to the drop ship.

-LONG TOM- hen used, denies opposition the use of arty and air while reducing the using teams cooldown on arty and air. This is a good compromise over a giant gun that is way too powerful

-SCOUTING IN FORCE: Different types of scouting. (All Lights. 2 L 2 M. All Medium. 2H 2A All Assaults.)
-Scouting in force has intel points, but the main objective is destroying targets/builds and even a certain amount of mechs before heading to the drop ship. Sure, you can kill all mechs, but that doesn't net the max amount of rewards for t he scenario.)

-PLAYER PLACED MISSIONS: Missions players with high enough rank in their Loyalist faction that can be placed. They have cooldowns. Yield more results and have tweaked alternative objectives. There is a lot that can be done with this.

-NEWS FROM THE FRONT- Comstar battle reports on the faction page. Pilot achievements. Units achievements. Best Improved Units in regards to stats on the Battlefield. New units and players that fulfill the requirements in match.

-MECH BIO- Players have a little notepad feature in each mech where they can fill out information that is relevant to them. Tournaments it has played in. Players it has collected a bounty on. Lore based background.

-PROPER SUPPLY ON WORLDS/ A REASON FOR FACTORIES AND TAKING THEM
Take a look at WW2Online and how they do their persistent battlefield, player missions, unit placements on the map. Supplies. Re-Supplying towns that have been depleted etc It's been around for about 15 years.
In that game you had people simply engaging the supply aspect of the game. Convoys with tanks, equipment to towns/cities before an attack, during an attack. Any reason not to suicide your mechs and equipment in matches because it hurts the overall strategy of your faction is a good thing.

Supply cut off? Arty, air, UAVS, Coolshots may be out of action. Leadership needs to decide which items are getting priorty when supplies are low. Allow units to contribute funds to beef up supply options on planets.

http://www.battlegroundeurope.net/home

Edited by Mechwarrior1441491, 26 July 2016 - 12:23 PM.

[Uncle Stickyfinger]

From Bombadil:
But again, this first Roundtable will be primarily focused on large-scale issues, like player population, buckets and queue times, solo and group play, factions, and the overall format of Faction Play (ie. 24/7 vs. scheduled times or other options). If successful, this Roundtable will lead to more meetings, which can then focus on additional topics, such as game modes, rewards and incentives, lobbies and chat, maps, the role of mercenaries, barriers to entry (ie. new players), PvE, lore, and on and on.

Is any thought being given to just how alien and off-putting the FP interfaces are compared to "click play, shoot robots" in QP? If a new FP player manages to decipher the menus and icons, manages to select a faction that they have mechs for, assemble a drop deck, and is able to get into a queue at all, they then have to wait 20 minutes to play. Then they find unfamiliar maps, a game mode they don't understand, with objectives they haven't seen before, requires a whole new skillset in terms of playstyle and coordination, and a herd of experienced players leaving them to fend for themselves bc they're ";just a pug" (or even worse, 11 other people who don't know what's going on). If they win it's bc they were carried, and if they lose it likely ended in a spawn camp where they felt powerless (or again, worse scenario- LT was active). And at the end of this little one hour adventure they are told they get no faction rewards bc they are on probation and need to go through this 10 times before they get something for it.

We all know what happens next. They walk away from FP and never return. QP and FP are such different animals that no casual player is interested in learning the game all over again, because there is almost no preparation for the dizzying array of menus and micromanagement and meta knowledge involved in Faction Play versus “pick mech, pick map, pick mode, go” in Quickplay. Faction Play is fundamentally inaccessible at every level for a casual player who wants to shoot robots

. . . whether the gameplay itself is any good is largely a secondary consideration

Edited by Uncle Stickyfinger, 26 July 2016 - 11:44 AM.

[_Jefe_]

I love FP when I can get it. But for the last 2 months, I have been unable to get it. On the rare occasions when I talk my mercenary group into entering the FP queue, we end up watching the boring planet finder screen for as much as 30 minutes before giving up and going back to QP. Sometimes the queue will fill, and we'll start "transferring orders" but after a few minutes of staring at an otherwise unchanged screen, it will turn out somebody disconnected and we're waiting again. The worst is when, after all this waiting, we end up with a ghost drop and simply walk off with the contract cash and no experience.

That's not a game, it's a badly conceived screen saver.

My suggestions:

Let only loyalists choose their planets for attack or defense. Only allow loyalists to actually hold planets. House Davion isn't gonna let mercenaries actually own a planet, however permanently they may be stationed there. Mercenaries and freelancers go into a single bucket and drop wherever their employers need them to drop. There is time on the drop screen to adjust your deck to be mission-appropriate. Why should a freelancer or mercenary unit expect to be able to demand payment for defending a planet that isn't being attacked?

So a Raselhagian loyalist group can assault and perhaps take and hold the planet of Novy Barsoom. Five of them are online and the planet is contested. They group up, select to defend, and the queue info screen shows one group of 5 waiting. FRR-aligned mercenaries in smaller groups select FP but they don't get a planet finder screen. They just click "Faction Play" the same way they would "Quick Play". They are assigned as needed to complete companies within their faction, and they get told where they're going and what they're doing while they're approaching their drop. Drop time extends to five minutes by default but goes to one minute or time remaining (whichever is lower) once all members have clicked ready. That way the mercs can adjust their decks for defense or attack now that they have their mission and map assignments. They had no idea they were going to Novy Barsoom. No matter how many times they fight there, they will never get to be the holding unit because they are not members of their faction, they're just employees who might join the enemy next week. If the designers want to be extra cute with their copious spare time, they may one day allow mercs to submit graffiti designs which could be added to buildings on the maps so that mercs can make some kind of mark on their stomping grounds.

Uncontested or ghost drops go away entirely. If there are not 24 players interested in faction play at a given time, FW groups can do QP drops without having to regroup, until FP becomes an option again.

[Icantswim]

S C A R, on 26 July 2016 - 09:30 AM, said:

http://imgur.com/a/QVGmU this is why FP needs to change. No fun for anyone(((

No offense, but the only problem I see there, is that so many top pilots are allowed to gather on a single team.
You see, if you take top 10 pilots from leaderboards and put them on one team, I doubt there would be anything at all that can stop you (yeah, I know that on that screenshot you didn't have all the strongest players, but you get the idea).

[Zainadin]

Faction Play and Quick Play needs, ground troops, elementals, vehicles and aerospace fighters. Period the game needs more than just stompy robots if it wants to appeal to a broader audience.

[Biclor Moban]

I guess I will say one more thing.

Stars vs. Squads in FP/CW 10 Clanners vs. 12 IS.

I can compromise though. 2 Stars plus one Star Captain 11 vs. 12 IS.

Maybe we can unnerf some of the clan mechs then. I own one clan mech so I am not really the poster boy for Clanners though.



Maybe PGI sould just let the team going into battle decide.
When a premade of 10 or more is sitting in the queue and have a "ready" button like QP if everybody clicks it they go with 10 or 11 instead of waiting.

PGI, micromanaging the game only makes you more the target of every perceived unfair game people have.

Edited by Biclor Moban, 26 July 2016 - 12:47 PM.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

12v10 won't ever happen nor does it need to happen.

[T I N M A N]

Biclor Moban, on 26 July 2016 - 11:47 AM, said:

Stars vs. Squads in FP/CW 10 Clanners vs. 12 IS.

I can compromise though. 2 Stars plus one Star Captain 11 vs. 12 IS.

Maybe we can unnerf some of the clan mechs then. I own one clan mech so I am not really the poster boy for Clanners though.

PGI already made the choice to not do 10 v 12. Instead they went for a more balanced approach to the different sides.
They will not make the choice to reverse all that. If they ever did it would be more than a year from now or further away at the soonest.

(There was extensive community testing on this subject. Soon after release of the clans, PGI wanted to do testing on whether 10 v 12 would be better or 12 v 12. There were hundreds of people playing on NGNG TS and hundreds of matches played on the days the testing was open. 12v12 was the result. PGI has put in most of their hours trying to build and maintain a balance between IS and Clan. With the amount of effort they have put in, they simply won't, and for good reason, undo all they have done and switch to another system.)

Edited by NightStalker97, 26 July 2016 - 12:06 PM.

[Stormbringer13]

Tahawus, on 26 July 2016 - 11:34 AM, said:

Allow teams to vote for a drop commander prior to launch. If the team wins, drop commander's rewards are doubled, and he gets an awards pool to split as he sees fit among his team. This award should be over and above the normal earnings. Give the commander quick buttons to distribute the award equally, by kmdd, by damage, or let him do it by hand. Then let the team rate the commander's performance, and give him/her titles or other swag for meeting goals or totals.

This will give people a reason to call, a vested interest in following orders, feedback on performance, and address concerns about coordination in match.

nope, that will contribute to playing favorites. I want no part of that.

[Biclor Moban]

_Jefe_, on 26 July 2016 - 11:42 AM, said:

I love FP when I can get it. But for the last 2 months, I have been unable to get it. On the rare occasions when I talk my mercenary group into entering the FP queue, we end up watching the boring planet finder screen for as much as 30 minutes before giving up and going back to QP. Sometimes the queue will fill, and we'll start "transferring orders" but after a few minutes of staring at an otherwise unchanged screen, it will turn out somebody disconnected and we're waiting again. The worst is when, after all this waiting, we end up with a ghost drop and simply walk off with the contract cash and no experience.

That's not a game, it's a badly conceived screen saver.

My suggestions:

Let only loyalists choose their planets for attack or defense. Only allow loyalists to actually hold planets. House Davion isn't gonna let mercenaries actually own a planet, however permanently they may be stationed there. Mercenaries and freelancers go into a single bucket and drop wherever their employers need them to drop. There is time on the drop screen to adjust your deck to be mission-appropriate. Why should a freelancer or mercenary unit expect to be able to demand payment for defending a planet that isn't being attacked?

So a Raselhagian loyalist group can assault and perhaps take and hold the planet of Novy Barsoom. Five of them are online and the planet is contested. They group up, select to defend, and the queue info screen shows one group of 5 waiting. FRR-aligned mercenaries in smaller groups select FP but they don't get a planet finder screen. They just click "Faction Play" the same way they would "Quick Play". They are assigned as needed to complete companies within their faction, and they get told where they're going and what they're doing while they're approaching their drop. Drop time extends to five minutes by default but goes to one minute or time remaining (whichever is lower) once all members have clicked ready. That way the mercs can adjust their decks for defense or attack now that they have their mission and map assignments. They had no idea they were going to Novy Barsoom. No matter how many times they fight there, they will never get to be the holding unit because they are not members of their faction, they're just employees who might join the enemy next week. If the designers want to be extra cute with their copious spare time, they may one day allow mercs to submit graffiti designs which could be added to buildings on the maps so that mercs can make some kind of mark on their stomping grounds.

Uncontested or ghost drops go away entirely. If there are not 24 players interested in faction play at a given time, FW groups can do QP drops without having to regroup, until FP becomes an option again.

I like this but why can't we simplify it.
Break planets down into 3 groups.

1. Major lore related planets loyalists not PGI get to decide which and when they will fight. they can hire Mercs and freelancers if they want. = will transfer as house own planets.
Limit to 2 percent of planets per week.

2. Minor lore related planets. Loyalists and House employed Merc units decide if planet will be targeted. Can bring on whomever to attack or defend daily. = will transfer as house owned Planet in control of whomever instigated action.
limit to 2 percent of planets per day.
3. Backwater planets and moons. PGI decides which planets are available and can increase and decrease number available based on the other 2 and current CW/FP pop. Then if pop is low none would be available. = Anyone can own planet but if it's in the system of one house it stays in control of that house.

Border planets would always be part of Major or Minor lore planets.


Maybe that's not more simple......... does it make more sense from a scale-ability perspective? PGI can't control pop but then they can control planet availability.

[Biclor Moban]

NightStalker97, on 26 July 2016 - 12:03 PM, said:

PGI already made the choice to not do 10 v 12. Instead they went for a more balanced approach to the different sides.
They will not make the choice to reverse all that. If they ever did it would be more than a year from now or further away at the soonest.

(There was extensive community testing on this subject. Soon after release of the clans, PGI wanted to do testing on whether 10 v 12 would be better or 12 v 12. There were hundreds of people playing on NGNG TS and hundreds of matches played on the days the testing was open. 12v12 was the result. PGI has put in most of their hours trying to build and maintain a balance between IS and Clan. With the amount of effort they have put in, they simply won't, and for good reason, undo all they have done and switch to another system.)

I understand what they have invested in the current system. I see that problem as a maintenance cost. The balancing system hamstrings them in every other change they want to make in the game. What percentage of resources/our money do they waste every month on keeping game balance. How many things don't they do because of potential resource cost of balancing on top of initiation cost?

A bicycle is inherently more stable and faster than a unicycle because you only have to maintain balance in one plane. Stopping and starting is also less fraught. PGI insists on having us ride this unicycle.

Edited by Biclor Moban, 26 July 2016 - 12:57 PM.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

I'm a firm believer of established Lore units placed on the map and assigned to war zones by the loyalists. Merc units have drop ships and travel the map for contracts. Even let units buy drop ships, upgrade them, allowing further travel and resources on the drop ship. House units are less mobile, merc units, more so. House Units have more resources, but are fairly stationary. Merc units can attack units within their range, but behind the established attack routes, messing with supply to the front line.

Clan honour points. Introduced, somehow.

[Tahawus]

Stormbringer13, on 26 July 2016 - 12:06 PM, said:

nope, that will contribute to playing favorites. I want no part of that.

Possibly, so we allow only allocation by game stats, and we let people voting for the commander have a summary of the commander's history.