869 replies to this topic

[Chiun44]

28 pages is TL;DR territory.

My 2 cents:

1 - the appeal of FW is large units driving big mechs. In quick launch, you drop with 12 players, you have 600 tons max. You are facing 900 - 1050 tons in opposition much of the time. FW, it's a neutral-ish playing field for tonnage. To me, that's the driving force to do FW.

2 - Let ECM counter Long Tom. Mechs in an ECM bubble do not get targeted by Long Tom. Otherwise, when someone runs up the scouting intel advantage, forget hitting that planet IMO.

3 - we need multiple drop deck capability. At least 3 IMO. And they need to be easy to tweak. When it's frantic, you have roughly 90 seconds max from when you launch to when you drop if you are on a heavy action planet. That's not reliably enough time to actually make real deck changes. This could be greatly improved.

4 - too many factions splitting the player base for FW.

5 - FW and pugs...I can't even. Just not much coordination, and going against a 12-man is grueling most of the time.

6 - even weight/point/firepower distribution between clan and IS.

7 - I'd love to see real stats on game play outcome for the various FW maps. In my head, I'm thinking there are a few combinations that heavily favor one outcome. My perception is defintely skewed from my own experiences, but PGI has the data, I'd think. Given stats available on profile, I'm sure there is something showing outcomes readily available to PGI. For instance, I'd love to see stats on Vitric Forge for attack, defend, etc.

[T I N M A N]

Biclor Moban, on 26 July 2016 - 12:36 PM, said:

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?

I'm afraid I don't really understand quite what you're saying. Are you saying you don't want quick play at all? Because then I totally disagree with you.

Even without quick play they would have to balance the mechs in FP.

(If it was 10v12 they would have to invest the same in balancing.)

And what waste is it? At least there is a working game mode in quick play.

Also, no matter what they do, this is an FPS. There must be some sort of balance to everything. Inherent balance is impossible in any shooter. Resources are always spent on balancing.

You cannot avoid that cost.

Edited by NightStalker97, 26 July 2016 - 12:57 PM.

[The Dancing Joker]

Personally think planets flip too fast. Make it feel like something earned. A few suggestions.

1. No more waves. Planets flip real time when it is 100% conquered. Votes are cast by faction, and faction mercs, on what the next target will be. Emails will be sent out to all faction members for voting, 7 hour response time. [average sleep time for most people, and with today's smartphones, if you dont vote, you dont count]

2. Planets have an actual map with zones to conqueror. Randomly distributed FW maps across the world. Can only hold ground or defend zones already taken through attack. Can only attack zones adjacent to held zones. Each planet has 50+ zones so planets do not flip like candy.

3. Respawn and camping. Drop zones will be increased from 3 to 5 per side. Drop zone A and B will be on the edge of the map corresponding initial assault. Drop zones C-E will be combat drop zones further into the territory, but not inside the enemy base. Pilots can select where they will drop. Initial drop must be at either A or B, respawn drops can be A-E.

4. @PGI. we need open range maps for in-between bases. Not every location is a base.

5. A surrender button? Allow a team to vote[majority rule] to leave the map before losing more resources. Surrender is only possible after losing half your force.

6. @PGI we need a way to drop faster. instead of always forcing 12 v 12 allow numerically matched groups to drop with 4 respawns. Allow a lone wolves queue to fill out said forces. This should lead to faster dropping.

7. Instead of basing percent conquered, on maps taken. Base it on resources. All armor, weapons, ammo, strikes, arty, etc. has a cbill value. This could allow tactical surrenders of a map to conserve resources. This would also allow teams to surrender if it would just turn into a farming session.


Those are some of my thoughts for now.

[Biclor Moban]

NightStalker97, on 26 July 2016 - 12:55 PM, said:

I'm afraid I don't really understand quite what you're saying. Are you saying you don't want quick play at all? Because then I totally disagree with you.

Even without quick play they would have to balance the mechs in FP.

(If it was 10v12 they would have to invest the same in balancing.)

And what waste is it? At least there is a working game mode in quick play.

Also, no matter what they do, this is an FPS. There must be some sort of balance to everything. Inherent balance is impossible in any shooter. Resources are always spent on balancing.

You cannot avoid that cost.

This is a CW/FP thread it was about CW/FP.

Quick play is inherently balanced because you can bring anything. Granted sometimes your luck will be bad but that happens even now with this magic Mech balance system you laud.
If Target can predict you are pregnant. Then PGI sould be able to balance a match. Maybe they should invest in 1 or 2 more statisticians and fix the Tier system, but that is a different conversation.

http://www.forbes.co...d/#9957a7734c62

Balancing a Mech is an insane way to balance the game. Moreover how to you balance a Spider against a Warhawk or a Hunchback against a Timberwolf.
You would like to think you can chose whom to engage as they come over the saddle but you can't.

90% of my games are QP and you know as well as I do the players have more to do with who wins and loses than mech balancing. Don't get me started on broken hit boxes and broken terrain.

[cazidin]

Excuse me, Bombadil, I'm uncertain if you can answer this but what is PGI going to do for this round table to show the players that they are genuinely listening and not merely holding this event as a PR stunt? I think I speak for some of us who are disappointed with PGI's lack of communication over the last year that following the loss of Procurator Derek as moderator and only a brief re-appearance from Tina Benoit that we are not adequately assured that much will come out of this meeting.

That is not to say that it shouldn't be held, it should and it is a definite step forward but the question is whether or not this will likely lead to improvements not just for FW but this game as a whole. Will PGI take the advice from the various leaders elected and apply it to the game in a timely manner? Not in a year, not in 60-90 days but in the earliest convenient patch.

If not, and please take this question in the most respectful manner possible, will it be remembered and open for as much discussion as necessary? In the past, PGI has forgotten certain elements and either completely scrapped them without a word or got to them but much, much later than it otherwise should've just because it was a lost piece of paper in the trash.

Edited by cazidin, 26 July 2016 - 01:44 PM.

[Count Zero 74]

So many people with so many opinions. looks like a lot of people care about CW. Why don't I see most of you on the battlefield?

[Skaav]

Count Zero 74, on 26 July 2016 - 01:47 PM, said:

So many people with so many opinions. looks like a lot of people care about CW. Why don't I see most of you on the battlefield?

Because it became boring after 500 games

Edited by Skaav, 26 July 2016 - 01:49 PM.

[Triordinant]

Bombadil, on 22 July 2016 - 06:10 PM, said:

I'll be monitoring, taking notes, and participating in this thread as much as possible throughout the weekend.

I'll be leaving for a long journey tomorrow morning so I won't be around for the round table. I'd just like you to forward a suggestion to all the round table participants for their consideration before it starts so they can discuss it (or dismiss it out of hand if they want) during the event. I won't be answering any replies to this post (assuming I can even access this website from where I'll be) because it's meant for the round table participants only. Thanks in advance and best regards from a 30 year veteran of BattleTech and Mechwarrior.

SUGGESTION:

As many have pointed out, a lot of Faction Play's problems are caused by low population and many possible solutions are not viable also because of low population. The reason why 90+ percent of MWO players stay away from Faction Play is because they know that unless they're part of a well-trained and organized competitive Unit they will be curbstomped 9 out of 10 times (and if they're new they'll learn this soon enough). More importantly, the vast majority of these same players do NOT want to be part of any Unit, let alone an organized competitive one. Rather than play solo in a comp team-oriented game mode, they simply stay out of it -a decision appreciated by a lot of comp Units by the way.

Contrary to what some have suggested in the past, it's simply not possible to make Faction Play "solo friendly". Even a Faction Play solo queue like the one in QuickPlay wouldn't work. The reason the QuickPlay solo queue is so popular is because it's nearly impossible for an organized comp premade group to sync-drop into it because their team members are almost sure to drop into BOTH opposing teams since player selection isn't segregated by specific Faction or by culture (Clan or IS).

For a solo queue to work as well in Faction Play, both teams in a match would have to randomly draw players from all 6 IS Houses and all 4 Clans, which would totally wreck the whole concept of FACTION Play. Whatever problems QuickPlay has, at least solo players (which again are the vast majority of MWO players) know they'll almost always be in a fair fight against another team made up of random soloists and both teams are balanced to some extent by a matchmaker. That's why almost all MWO players are in the QuickPlay solo queue.

There are only two possible outcomes. 1) Find ways to improve Faction Play but within the confines of knowing that it'll never have more than 5% to 10% of the MWO playerbase (not counting spikes during Events designed to bribe players into playing it even if they'd rather not) and design based on that assumption, and 2) Stop throwing good money after bad and shut Faction Play down. For a playerbase as small as MWO's the goal of immersing players in the strategy, politics and battles of a galaxy-wide war is best served by a PvE single player or co-op campaign. The small minority of comp players can duke it out in Solaris as teams or soloists, but there simply aren't enough of them for a galactic scale war. If PGI (or someone they contract to do it) makes a PvE campaign, lots of people will pay money to buy it (and the yearly DLCs that come after).

I've got no problem with Option 1 but it doesn't sound like good business unless PGI charges a fee to join Faction Play.

[cazidin]

Count Zero 74, on 26 July 2016 - 01:47 PM, said:

So many people with so many opinions. looks like a lot of people care about CW. Why don't I see most of you on the battlefield?

Because, right now, it simply isn't fun. There are a lot of us who like it and want to see it improve but we simply don't find it to be an entertaining alternative to quick play. Some of us also have time constraints that prevent us from playing often, or from joining our unit.

[K O P 320]

1 - more payments are Needed after faction play. I in a rapid game earn anymore and more advantageous in correlation time / money. 2 - Anymore choice of planets for an attack and defence. 3 - to give more universal trial mechs of internal sphere, for those, who does not have furs (at the clans of trial deck gathers more better) began to Play not interesting and main not advantageously in this mode.

[Count Zero 74]

Skaav, on 26 July 2016 - 01:49 PM, said:

Because it became boring after 500 games

Killing Clanners never gets boring, not even after 1300 matches:

[Skaav]

Count Zero 74, on 26 July 2016 - 01:58 PM, said:

Killing Clanners never gets boring, not even after 1300 matches:

I agree that the killing part isnt boring, but the maps, static attack and defense, and especially the always sameish builds.
There is very little space for brawling in FW, there is verly little space for fast mechs (beyond lights) in FW because you just cant utilize speed and maneuverabilty like you can in standard play.
And sure, you can make anything work, especially in a 12 man, but its still far from optimal or even being "competitive"

Those all are factors, that make it boring to me.

If anything about that changes,you can be sure you will see me playing just as much FW as I'm currently playing solo/grp. Hell, even the minor changes for phase 3 brought me back in for like 200 games, so its not like im not giving it a chance...

Edited by Skaav, 26 July 2016 - 02:17 PM.

[Zolaz]

Pat Kell, on 26 July 2016 - 10:29 AM, said:

Approaching your lying cheating ex-wife in the manner that you are approaching PGI is likely one of the reasons she is a lying cheating ex-wife and if you don't understand that, you need to take a long hard look at yourself and how you treat others. Not getting the response that you like, life kicking you in the balls...??? change something, start with your attitude and approach to things and you would be amazed how well things will start to go for you.

lol ... You talk like this is the first day of my relationship with PGI. I have been supportive, I have offered suggestions, I have given them money, I have been loyal and done my part. The definition of insanity is to do the same thing and expect a different result. My position and take comes from a long history with PGI.

I wasnt the one making promises that I had no intention of keeping. I was there for CW in 90 days. I was there with I was told that the Founders were no longer the target audience. I was there when Russ Bullock said that the people who were upset with the game were all on an island. I was there when PGI said there would be no consumables and 3rd person view. I was there when Quick Play was the hold you over till we get Community Warfare up and running. I was there for all of the heavy censoring of these Forums and the attempt to do it on Reddit. I was here for the great Developer exodus, where we no longer hear from them here on their own Forums. I was there for all the videos, launch parties, "town halls" and the promises and the let downs.

Here let me give you few more:

https://www.themitta...ure-communicate
http://raksarmory.bl...to-mwo-yet.html
http://www.nerdgobli...warrior-online/
http://forums.mmorpg...ctive-published
http://america.pink/...ne_2942080.html
https://taw.net/foru...1251/54939.aspx
http://forums.hardwa...-3922571-5.html

I like you a lot Pat and respect what you and the Commando's do in FW but even you have to admit that PGI has a checkered past and a less than stellar roll out of the game they promised 4 years ago. Like what Major General Clyde W. Spence used to drum into me over and over, "The best indication of future performance, is past performance."

[Satan n stuff]

Count Zero 74, on 26 July 2016 - 01:47 PM, said:

So many people with so many opinions. looks like a lot of people care about CW. Why don't I see most of you on the battlefield?

I don't know about everyone else but I'm off to fight the clans.

[Big Tin Man]

More on Long Tom, late to the party with this.

For the moment Long Tom needs to be put away because scouting has issues. There may be a time that it can and perhaps SHOULD come back, but for now it needs to go away.

Things that must be addressed before LT can return:

--Clan v. IS balance in scouting. Is cutting to 45 tons the answer? Energy draw? Streakcrow makes clan noobs too powerful.
--Gather intel vs. Defend Intel is a 50/50 split of game mode. This favors the side that is stronger, as it is easier to maintain the lead. If you have 90% of the intel, why are you gathering more intel every other match? Should be addressed to have the gather/defend ratio adjust as one side gets an advantage.
--Rewards for gathering intel points are pathetic. A locust that collects 10 points by itself and escapes without firing a shot will not achieve a qualifying match score for an event. Awful. The point of the game is to collect intel and doing that is not rewarded accordingly.
--LT strike is WAY too frequent, too powerful and should not be automatic. Once the above is addressed, I'd be ok with LT strikes coming every 6 minutes as targeted on the battlegrid by the company commander. LT can only be fired when sat sweep is active, so the commander can potentially miss the firing window and have to wait 2 minutes before the next window.

[K19]

They talk a lot but conclusions are few.
1 ºbegan to update the maps of the game and FW because this map is very limited tactics that you can use.
2 ºThe mech in FW can not use the e3º person view why there qirks ???
3 ºFW and very bad knowing that the player can access the part of the battle that is only used the cavalry "mechs".
4º Work step by step when one has repaired go to the next.

Good luck. Once 500MC the color icon on the mech is much.

[Not A Real RAbbi]

What ever happened to the ComStar Intercepts campaign? Why is that no longer a thing?

[DivBy0]

You are right, but they haven´t made a solo queue and a group queue. They made a unit tag group and a non unit tag group.
I don´t know why they didn´t implement a solo queue for CW. Would be much more fun for the newbees.

theJason, on 24 July 2016 - 09:41 AM, said:

2. Population and queue times. There's a ton of suggestions above. This would be a good time to throw things at the dart board and see what works. As a community, we need to be more open to trying out things without crying apocalypse every time it doesn't work. Split Group / Solo queue didn't really work out, but it was at least an attempt to address the problem. Keep rolling things out, see what sticks.

[Count Zero 74]

Skaav, on 26 July 2016 - 02:06 PM, said:

I agree that the killing part isnt boring, but the maps, static attack and defense, and especially the always sameish builds.
There is very little space for brawling in FW, there is verly little space for fast mechs (beyond lights) in FW because you just cant utilize speed and maneuverabilty like you can in standard play.
And sure, you can make anything work, especially in a 12 man, but its still far from optimal or even being "competitive"

Well, we love to brawl, its the clammers sitting on hills or rooftops sniping. Can't really blame PGI for that.

U can't utilize light mechs in CW thats right, but its not because of the map design its because clammers blasting lights to pieces with streak boats.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Faction specific drop decks saved. These could perhaps be extra MC buys over a couple free ones. With the introduction of decals, it would be nice to save our lore based drop decks.

K O P 320, on 26 July 2016 - 01:57 PM, said:

1 - more payments are Needed after faction play. I in a rapid game earn anymore and more advantageous in correlation time / money. 2 - Anymore choice of planets for an attack and defence. 3 - to give more universal trial mechs of internal sphere, for those, who does not have furs (at the clans of trial deck gathers more better) began to Play not interesting and main not advantageously in this mode.

Payouts isn't what will keep FP alive. More game modes. Secondary objectives. Real supply and strategy. A reason to attack factories with factories and bases. This will give extra payout when satisfied, but simply ramping up c-bills and Xp with existing FP won't do much to attract people or keep the ones that are here.

A new CAPITAL CITY map, when an important planet is being attacked. Make certain requirements unlock that missions for a certain amount of time. Government buildings. More than 4 mechs to drop?

Edited by Mechwarrior1441491, 26 July 2016 - 03:21 PM.