869 replies to this topic

[Pihoqahiak]

Count Zero 74, on 26 July 2016 - 03:03 PM, said:

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.

Inner Sphere Lights can be utilized, even against Streaks, but very, very few players are willing to put the effort into making builds with AMS (preferably dual AMS) and coordinating using multiple ECM mechs to defend themselves against them. A dual AMS mech staying around 250 meters from a Streak Stormcrow will severely cripple their damage output, more than 2 AMS staying around a Streak boat will reduce it's damage output to near zero. It ends up worth much more than it's weight in armor, no doubt about it.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

If it is confirmed there are streak mechs on the field, lights shouldn't be off dog fighting. They should be keeping an eye on the formation. Safe guarding assaults. Chasing away harassing enemy lights. IF lights go out, mediums and heavies with streaks will eat them up. They can't get close enough to them if they stick close to the rest of the team.

[Count Zero 74]

Pihoqahiak, on 26 July 2016 - 03:17 PM, said:

Inner Sphere Lights can be utilized, even against Streaks, but very, very few players are willing to put the effort into making builds with AMS (preferably dual AMS) and coordinating using multiple ECM mechs to defend themselves against them. A dual AMS mech staying around 250 meters from a Streak Stormcrow will severely cripple their damage output, more than 2 AMS staying around a Streak boat will reduce it's damage output to near zero. It ends up worth much more than it's weight in armor, no doubt about it.

When scouting was introduced we did intensive AMS testing in private lobbys, You're right, double AMS can shoot down a lot of streaks. But we found that most mechs have quite big dead zones where AMS doesn't work at all against SRMs.

[Skaav]

If you cant Brawl, its not about the other teams abilty to shoot you, but about your ability to close distances, streaks are completely irrelevant cause bad and i have never not run a light because of streaks, and finally, if there were no hills overwatching EVERY (of the two) entrance, then they couldnt be abused by sensible people running sensible builds for one sided maps.
Also, if there are so many streakboats you should easily be able to brawl, since every halfway decent brawler shoots the **** out of a streakboat.

Sorry Count, but the sentence " We love to brawl, but our enemies wont let us " just shows how off you are.
Blaming a virtual Enemy for an obvious Design flaw in map design is just ridiculous.
Im done discussing this. I think you made your point clear and i really dont want to argue more.
You think FW is fine, i dont.

Edited by Skaav, 26 July 2016 - 03:50 PM.

[A W 0 L]

Double post

Edited by A W 0 L, 26 July 2016 - 04:12 PM.

[Count Zero 74]

You ever played a match on Vitric without half the clanners sitting on the rooftop?

[Leone]

Every Vitric match I drop with my unit in.

-------

Now, to the real stuffs.

I personally do not feel the rewards for CW are subpar, and prefer the gamemode to quickplay, so that's where I'm coming from.

As for Improvements to Community Warfare, I'd like to actually defend whilest Long Tom was going off, just to try it, but my unit never seems to want to. I think it'd be all fun and immersive. So maybe downgrade it to Arty Strikes instead? I 'unno, but having attacked whilest strikes were going off, they did seem a bit much.

Also, I would not mind the first wave of defenders hot dropping closer to the gates on full on defense mode, just so the invading team can't beat them there. But that's just a small flavour thing, a bit of a tweak, an prolly not needed. (Not that I wouldn't mind a hot dropping option.)

I do fully throw my weight behind the idea of saveable decks. I've gotten quite adept at swapping mechs on the fly, but I sometimes try an drop with new folk, and they often as not, fail to switch out their load outs for the map at hand.

I also love the idea of throwing some CW into the academy. Tutorial it up! Of course, I can understand that this'd take some time, as it'd require AI to do right, to really give players the feel for it, but as long as we're wishing for fishes, I might as well go all the way.

~Leone.

Edited by Leone, 26 July 2016 - 04:10 PM.

[A W 0 L]

29 pages tldr, but here are the reasons I only play FW during FW events (and only invasion so far)

1) Waiting times too long
Most of the times waiting for my queue to fill takes more time than actual play time.
I know if FW lacks players this will always be the problem and the only way out of this is to increase player numbers - how to do that? No idea, that's PGIs job.

This is also related to
2) Random drop vs 12 unit
Normally ends with even less playtime and really annoying if the last 2 mechs don't even have a chance to do damage because they get destroyed before they touch the ground.
Solution? Only allow preformed lances (4 players) to drop vs randoms - probably sucks for the big units, but would give new players a better FW experience. (why am I not in a unit - what for, don't really need one for QP and I don't enjoy FW)

3) Always the same
Gets boring quite fast. The same map seems to be attacked all the time and only seems to change once that was successful. But then same map again other way around in counter attack.

4) Not enough rewards
I mean not the mechbays you can get, that's cool and probably the only reason I will play FW in the near future.
I started playing early May (already tier 3 - which is anoying as well, as it does definitely not reflect my skill but can potentially match me with T1 & belongs somewhere else) and still level a lot of mechs and buy mechs/equipment & modules ($!!!). If I Would play FW that would take much longer and is related to 1 - I can drop more often in QP to get more money and more xp for selected mechs.

[Cy Mitchell]

I have seen a lot of comments saying that the only purpose of this round table is to answer the question of "WHY?" the player population in FP is so low. I have offered my suggestions for fixes in previous threads. Just in case those are not going to be considered at this time and the only purpose IS to answer the question of "WHY?", I will tell why I do not play FP.

It is not fun! I think a lot of people who no longer play FP feel the same way about it.

It was not fun being on the winning side of one sided games. It was not fun being on the losing side of one sided games. It became repetitive after only about twentyish games and I simply had no desire to play it anymore.

I get much more enjoyment out of Quick Play matches. There is more variety in maps and modes. The games sometimes offer up some competitive matches between PUG teams which never happened for me during FP.

I really hope that this panel will move beyond the population and focus on how to make Faction Play fun.

Do that and I will play. I am guessing a lot of other people will too.

Edited by Rampage, 26 July 2016 - 04:49 PM.

[Johnny Z]

Scrap Catastrophe, on 26 July 2016 - 01:12 PM, said:

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.

Planets flip to fast and to slow.

The planets needs maps with sectors instead of the sector wheel currently used to cap planets. This way the planets actually has progress that's interesting, without flipping entire planets every 4 hours to keep it interesting.

On the bright side I think that is already planned to be added some time. The wheel is just a prototype for that. Its sucks until then though.

Not to hard to figure out, but anyone who gets this now knows why I think faction play will be awesome some day.

Edited by Johnny Z, 26 July 2016 - 05:06 PM.

[Duncan1dah0]

Wow, this is a lot of 2 cents. I don't think there are any words left to say after 580 posts. Saying that, here is my 2 cents.

1) More role based modes are needed. I like the scout mode, but perhaps reduce the weight in scout and then open open up another mode for the medium class to do something.
2) Allow the Units to use the MC to purchase their own custom decals. We will spend serious money to get our own design on our mechs.
3) Improve the rewards for loyalist. It should include unique things per faction. I would run my Purple chicken mech with pride if I earned it through loyalty.
4) I've lost my train of thought... let me go back to the wine glass and I'll be back with you.

[The Dancing Joker]

Johnny Z, on 26 July 2016 - 04:08 PM, said:

Planets flip to fast and to slow.

The planets needs maps with sectors instead of the sector wheel currently used to cap planets. This way the planets actually has progress that's interesting, without flipping entire planets every 4 hours to keep it interesting.

On the bright side I think that is already planned to be added some time. The wheel is just a prototype for that. Its sucks until then though.

Not to hard to figure out, but anyone who gets this now knows why I think faction play will be awesome same day.

So imagine a planet with a map divided up into sectors. Each sector is a map or mode like scouting or the other modes in quick play or the cannon defense maps....

Will each planet have its own unique map divided up into these sectors? Entirely possible. Eventually. Most likely of course there will be a few to be used by the planets to start.

Important worlds would have larger maps maybe with varying details. Supply lines could be added to the planetary maps between sectors.

All of this is obviously already being done. They hinted at this years ago.

This doesn't solve all the problems which is why this upcoming podcast will be interesting.

Problems/questions I can guess at?

.......

Yup. PGI should focus on both short term and long term fixes to make FW better. You, I, and others touch on things that should be relative quick fixes that could go a long way to making FW more playable. While others have the wish lists for long term development.

Ultimately I would rather see FW as its own economy. Not tied to your quickplay 'mech hangar. Possibly with a $5/mo. subscription fee.

Start with one medium 'mech, and build up from there. Salvage is real. Repair and rearm is real.

[Johnny Z]

Scrap Catastrophe, on 26 July 2016 - 05:07 PM, said:

Yup. PGI should focus on both short term and long term fixes to make FW better. You, I, and others touch on things that should be relative quick fixes that could go a long way to making FW more playable. While others have the wish lists for long term development.

Ultimately I would rather see FW as its own economy. Not tied to your quickplay 'mech hangar. Possibly with a $5/mo. subscription fee.

Start with one medium 'mech, and build up from there. Salvage is real. Repair and rearm is real.

Also how does the Galaxy map work with all of this. How exactly do units and solo players fit in. In exact terms.

Edited by Johnny Z, 26 July 2016 - 07:22 PM.

[50 50]

Great to see so many people interested in Faction Play with so many thoughts and ideas. That there is such interest shows how much the community would like to see the game succeed and grow and that's really encouraging.

There will have to be a new thread started for the next round table and @Bombadil @Tina I would suggest the discussion points get put up first to try and focus the discussion.

That said, it is difficult to talk about one aspect of the mode without discussing the other aspects as there are different layers which affect each other..... it's a bit of a vicious cycle but there are answers.

If we talk about population in Faction play we need to think about it not only in terms of how many players are needed to start a single battle, but the size of units and the population of factions. Part of this problem is based on the resources it takes (how many players) to control a planet. Initially with just the invasion 12v12 mode, with all the sectors... counter attacks... you need a large number of players that can be directed and coordinated for an 8 hour attack phase. This is why only the largest units can actually make the territories change on the map but it could be that this structure is why these units have become so large. They have enough people to make a difference.

Let me state right now that this is not a dig at the big units or suggesting that unit size should be restricted. More that the mode is structured in a way that smaller units who might be able to field a single 12 man regularly cannot make a difference because they simply cannot sustain the battle for long enough. That's a high level problem with the structure of using sectors on the planets.

So, that was the case for a while but then the scouting was added and suddenly there is a need to effectively take it from a 12 player group to 16 players. The requirements increased but the available resources didn't scale up to cope with it. This created the situation where the conquest of a planet would start but there would be no invasions going on, only scouting missions to get control of the intel before those players swapped over to their invasion decks and tried to capture the sectors.

What has happened is that Faction Play has expanded in scope but reduced the game play because the resources have to split and divide their times. The queue times were long to begin with, but became longer as a result. This is also a high level problem with the structure of Faction Play.

What needs to be done is to enable the mode for smaller numbers of players and allow that to scale up which is one of the reasons I am pushing for a continual battle which combines all the modes. We need to think of the mode at a smaller scale so we can have a larger game.

• We don't use the match maker to find us a battle, with the voting we've decided where to fight, now enable us to fight.
  
• Open the zone and let players start to join in from a staging area where we commit our drop decks to the battle.
  
• When a player's mech is destroyed or they retreat, they return to the staging area and another player can take their place. Given how quickly this can occur, there may not be much waiting time at all.

This is more about managing or enabling the resources/players to use Faction Play.

The appeal of Faction play, what draws them in and engages them is about how the actual battles are structured. This is about the design of the maps, but also what we can do on those maps.... the objectives/missions/dynamics of the battle. At the moment this is rather limited and why I am pushing to have all the modes brought together for Faction Play. If we can consider Quick Play to be our preparation for Faction Play, then it makes sense to use Conquest, Domination and Assault objectives in one big battle.

That's not to say that they should function the exact same way, but we use those elements to put in more detail/objectives and make the mode bigger. I also suggest that the Invasion and Scouting is also part of the one map.... with a few changes.
If we have the map designers available, lets build BIG maps, allow these elements to all be placed on there with a bit of randomness so there is more replayability, hide it with a fog of war and let it run as an open battle.

This is about making the mode appealing and engaging to players and enjoyable at any level and number of players. We are not restricting groups, though a larger group would be able to do more and be more successful. But we enable smaller groups and even solo players to do something.

As stated at the start, there are many other parts to this discussion and it is difficult to only focus on one aspect.... but for this part of it, these are the two biggest aspects that will change the mode.

[Merit Lef]

I would like to see a purpose for taking over planets and parts of planets. What I have in mind is patterned after the terrain effects of "Company of Heroes" (CoH). Meaning that each and every section of terrain has a purpose to fight over. The battle is not focused only on destroying your opponent but for positioning/location on the battle field. As you learn to position your troops throughout the map and not death-balling you create a more complex and creative field of battle gaining greater/superior benefits over your opponents.....than you push for the final kill.

Same idea can be placed on the galactic scale too. Certain planets could also provide unique benefits and or resources to the owning unit. BUT the best kicker about all of this for both the galactic and single planet conquest is the Broken Supply Lines. In CoH if you advance too fast and leave some of your terrain open and unprotected your opponent can flank in and break your connecting territory. When broken, all territory not connecting to your base of operations is lost (no longer providing benefits). This idea on the galactic scale can allow a smaller house to brake the spine of larger house if they push to quickly, leaving their connection (supply line) venerable to attack. In todays FW if Steiner could break a line to FRR, splitting Jade Falcon in half, all the planets conquered by Falcon not connected to its home world would be lost or temporally disabled from resupply.

In order for these supply lines to be of any practicable function PGI will have to allow a plethora of planet attacks. And the only way to allow for a plethora of attacks is to create AI or PVE. The AI will fill in the gabs when their is not enough players to fill a 12 or 4 man drop.

In short:
Individual terrain and planet benefits
Supply lines and Broken Supply Lines
Plethora of attack lanes
AI and PVE

Effects of said implementation:
Smaller groups of 2 or 5 man groups will now play FW. No longer bound to a full 12 man.
These small groups/units feel that they have worth and purpose as they fight for the planet of their choosing.
Tactics on a galactic scale can now be unleashed as units position and spread their drops over key locations.
No longer only who can place the most drops onto one single planet wins the war but are you positioned properly.
Small units can carve out a small piece of space for themselves.
Larger units will have to send/leave behind lances to defend conquered planets or risk a break in their supply change.

[Appuagab]

FP currently is totally unplayable for huge amount of players due to lack of matchmaking. 12 people premades are wrecking pugs (some of which are even using trial mechs, wtf). You don't even know if you will play against premade or not before deploying. As well as you cannot tell if you will play normal game mode or counter-attacking abomination.
Instead of encouraging players to enter big unit game forces them to do it through frustration of unavoidable wreckages without even surrender button. Searching premade through LFG is pointless because it's always empty. As well as faction chat (which is accessible only from FP tab). Why there's no global faction chat channel (for clans or IS)? Just take a look at Warframe, you always have recruiting chat in front of your eyes.


If game forces me to join abusers of matchmakerless gamemode just to have a chance to win but doesn't even offer me any useful tools to do this, I'd rather play another game.

[BearFlag]

Hi Bombadil. This is no softball question and would be best towards the beginning of Q&A (would be kinda pointless at the end). It's a question, I think, many on the 90% side of the fence would like to hear answered.

TL;DR
Thank You for taking my question, Panel. Sorry, I have a preamble for context. As an FRR pug loyalist and no great fan of the Invasion/CA mode, I think have solid perspective on why the 90% are not showing up to FW. It is not unit caps, planet tags, or attack lanes. It is fundamental gameplay and enjoyment. After a year and a half of personal experience, of talking to players and of reading the forums, the most common summary from players as to why they don't play FW is: it's not fun. Then follows a list of reasons which, frankly, I think we're all familiar with. But it's apparently guarded by a leper with a laser because no one will go near it. The sublist is this: choke point maps, repetitive carnage, spawn camping, unbalanced (sometimes grossly imbalanced) matches, no variety in maps, modes, play style, and wait times (which is both symptom and cause). Is this panel, and PGI, really prepared to address core problems deeply affecting the popularity of FW or can we expect hyper-specialized discusions on items clearly of much lower priority?

==================
My fear is that this Round Table will engage the FW players (as stated in the announcement) and miss the big problem - 90% of players don't play FW. It will focus instead on relative minutae, on incremental fixes and on bells and whistles. There will be talk of lore and immersion, of units and population. They'll broach time and rewards and mention buckets and queues. Someone will bring up economies and planet benefits, UI's and dropdecks and on and on. All the while they'll miss the scariest number: 90%.

As an FRR pug loyalist, I may have a better view of both sides of the fence - those that love FW as is, and the 90% who can't stand it. I am in that 90%. Invasion/CA I avoid and for the same reason as those who have rejected or left FW: it's not fun. And THIS is the root problem. The forum has literally hundreds of posts using these same words. Sometimes they give reasons, sometimes not. When they do it is almost always something that is in the list below.

That said, I do have about 450 matches in I/CA. So I'm not out of the loop. But that's 450 matches over the 1.5 years of CW/FW. By contrast, in the short time that scouting has been available, I'm already approaching 1000 matches. Why? I know it's not for everyone and has a few problems, but Scout is a real blast to play. Simple equation. I play what I like (have fun with), avoid what I don't like. It's the same for the 90%.

It should be plainly obvious that if FW had the same or greater appeal as QP, it would be the popular mode. Particularly given that QP is randomly great game, good game, bad game or terrible game, you'd think that ANYthing could beat it. FW does not. With 90% preferring QP, you don't need to look further for proof that FW has fundamental and serious problems.

And here they are:

double carnage (96 mechs in 30 minutes vs. 24 in 15 QP)
chokepoint maps (every one)
gates (every map)
canons (every map)
seal clubbing/matchmaker (frequent, grotesquely imbalanced matches)
one mode (single dimensional goals with the "variations" of destroy canon, defend canon, retake dead canon, defend dead canon)
gen/spawn rushes (still happen)
spawn camping (Still here but should not exist, period)
contextless (no sense that this is a planetary invasion - and other immersion issues)
wait times (initially a symptom, now a cause unto itself)
repetition, bad repetition and more repetition (lack of variety in maps/modes/play styles)

The sad thing is that every item on the list was aired in the forums by the end of January 2015. That was the big missed opportunity. That was the time for the important reset. Sadder still, FW may well be beyond fixable within PGI's budget since needed changes are fundamental and, likely, expensive in time and money.

If anyone thinks I'm blowing smoke with the "hundreds of posts" claim, I'm actually being generous. Consider this thread alone:

Mr Inconsistent, on 22 July 2016 - 06:26 PM, said:

...

The voice of the customer needs to cover all areas of the player base, not just the top faction play units. If you are trying to broaden the number and types of players who play what is considered a core game mode, you need to talk to a broader audience.

...

Wintersdark, on 22 July 2016 - 06:43 PM, said:

...but what's important here is fixing faction play so it doesn't suck.

...

NightStalker97, on 22 July 2016 - 06:57 PM, said:

Can we place suggestions for fixing faction play here? More so than commenting on already existing features. I feel like there is a lot to say in that regard.

Not everything we have to say can be phrased into a short question, especially in regards to a system that needs as much love as faction play.

And I agree. Taking feedback from only the big units won't be of much use to fixing it. As many of the people who do play and who PGI should try to attract are new players (since there aren't enough people in FP), usually single, or small units.

Zuesacoatl, on 22 July 2016 - 10:20 PM, said:

I do not play FW anymore because of how much sway the big units have...

Rampage, on 26 July 2016 - 04:06 PM, said:

... I will tell why I do not play FP.

It is not fun! I think a lot of people who no longer play FP feel the same way about it.

It was not fun being on the winning side of one sided games. It was not fun being on the losing side of one sided games. It became repetitive after only about twentyish games and I simply had no desire to play it anymore.

cazidin, on 26 July 2016 - 01:51 PM, said:

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. ...

Desintegrator, on 22 July 2016 - 11:18 PM, said:

No thanks, I will NOT join the discussion !

...

No, not with me - I join the "Quick Play" for the next 10 years.

Skaav, on 26 July 2016 - 10:33 AM, said:

...
Making the mode fun and rewarding solves ALL issues its currently facing, population, buckets, no possibility for a split Q, these are all not issues of immersion, or of not having what we want, its just a matter of fun/reward, and the reward is high (Cbills wise at least, could ofc always be improved) but fun is, IMHO, non existent, not after 500+ Matches.
...

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

...
The "extra sh*t" (lore, dropships, unit interactions, etc.) would be nice, but the "core sh*t" (repetitive gameplay with little variation) will always keep population low.

I posit this: That the jaded units that want more "extra sh*t" are jaded because the core sh*t is fundamentally uninteresting. If the core gameplay was interesting and varied, there's a reason to play.

Don't get me wrong, I really really really want to see all the extra sh*t. Economy, dropships, logistics, you name it. But it's really just icing on a very, very bland cake.
...

Malleus011, on 26 July 2016 - 10:49 AM, said:

Cross posted from Reddit:

Community Warfare as designed isn't FUN for the general population. That has to remedied or the game mode will remain dead. FUN is the most important thing. If it isn't FUN to play, all the other points are cockpit items.
...
Fun. Fun. In case you missed the point, make it FUN. For as many kinds of players as possible, from the worshippers of the church of skill to the longbearded lore expert to the wet-behind-the-ears newbie who can't spell PPC. CW must be fun. Got it? Deliver the fun. Stop holding the fun hostage...
...

NightStalker97, on 26 July 2016 - 11:24 AM, said:

...
2) Make the game play fun. ...

JernauM, on 23 July 2016 - 03:35 AM, said:

...

Way ahead of you bud [in preferring QP]. Me and most of MWO's smallish player-base, it seems. But I guess that's the problem PGI would like to solve here.

...

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(((

Pjwned, on 23 July 2016 - 10:43 AM, said:

There's so many things I dislike about faction warfare overall that it's hard for me to suggest where to start.

I guess the maps would be a good place to start since they boil down to going through some crappy lanes and that needs to change.

The mode itself is also just not very fun because it's always either a tedious chore trying to wear the enemy down (with all the respawns involved) or else it's a crapshoot where the generator gets rushed down and then it's all over; not fun.

...

XX Sulla XX, on 23 July 2016 - 11:08 PM, said:

Some thoughts.....

1. Improve basic play in CW. If the basic play is not fun whats the point....

Jack Booted Thug, on 25 July 2016 - 04:47 PM, said:

...
PGI needs to understand the REASONS behind low population which cause long que times, etc... IE... shallow game mode, boring maps, lack of variety and interesting game play, etc...

If the mode itself is not interesting and fun boiling it down to fewer factions and offering bribes and such won't get many more people to play, at lest not long term.
...

The popularity problem facing FW is both BIG and BASIC in its nature. The quotes above, I hope, are representative of the 90% who don't play FW or have played and quit.

To reiterate, my fear is that this Round Table may miss the mark and fail to consider the true depth and seriousness of the problems. It seems likely it will careen off into deciding what color of lipstick to put on the gorilla. There is a lot of great discussion and great ideas being aired here, but few actually hit on the core, the depopulating, problems. Unit caps may be a worthy topic to many, for example, but these lesser issues, problems and ideas will not save FW.

For PGI, it's a rock and hard place. FW simply cannot be fixed by tweaks and lipstick. Yet a direct approach to the current maps, modes and their problems would break the bank.

In my next post, I'll offer an integrational path that addresses the list above, leverages existing maps, modes, resources and hopefully makes FW as appealing as QP.

[BearFlag]

tl;dr (still long)

1) The viability of FW is threatened by low participation and retention.
2) The problems are not solvable by tweaks, bells and whistles.
3) The problems are deep and fundamental. Repetitive gameplay, lack of variety, not fun (for most), spawn camping, match balance, et al.
3) Wait times are a symptom of, but also exacerbate, the problem.
5) Within the current structure of FW and with the current maps, fixes would be long in coming and high in cost.
6) Restructuring the way FW works utilizing existing resources, rather than massive redos on maps and modes, would be quicker and cheaper (by no means easy though).
7) 48v48 respawning placed on hold until its problems can be fixed.
8) Planets reenvisioned as node maps with lines of advance to major objectives. Example:
8a) Node type: Orbital Defense. Map: HPG. Mode: Domination.
8b) Node type: Planetary Defense. Maps: FW. Modes: Inv/CA
8c) Node type: Bridgehead/Log Base. Maps: Many "remote" types. Mode: Skirm, Dom?
8d) Node type: Hinterland/Approach. Maps: Many possible. Mode: Assault. Hinterland has many nodes between Bridgehead and Objective.
8e) Node type: Major Objective. Maps: Riv City, Mining, Crimson. Modes: Assault, Dom.
9) Players can opt-in to Call to Arms
10) Players' dropdeck(s) consist of one each light, med, heavy, assault mech with one 'preferred'
11) Matchmaker extended to complete FW queues from Call to Arms participants. If both teams are pug, some MM balancing can be applied. If a potent team is queued, MM can use tonnage to help the disadvantaged team. If the QP queues are humming along, FW matches might even be built from scratch. Note that while players in FW queue may have been waiting a bit, players called from QP queue get a game right now.


=========
I had intended to write a long post on the ideas outlined above. But I don't have the time before the Round Table. Thanks to 50 50, Carl Vickers and many other forum posters. These ideas are not entirely my own.

In my previous post, I argued that the problems facing FW and population are big and fundamental and won't lend themselves to quick fixes and small ideas (many good ideas though). If the list of basic problems isn't fixed, FW will never be fixed.

To that end I sought to address those big problems using existing resources, like the maps and modes of QP, while maintaining a reasonable separation of the two. I also wanted to avoid heavy map work or the need to dive deep into CryEngine.

That said, this calls for a massive restructing of how FW works. Some UI and DB work would also be necessary. And extending the functions of the MM is no small potatoes.

To create some (admittedly small) degree of immersion, the feeling that battles are raging across a planet, I invoke a node map approach. Node maps are extremely flexible for creating a schematic of a planet's contents, its geography and the geometry of attack and defense lines. Planet size/importance can be illustrated by the number of nodes, the number and length of node lines, the number of "Major Objective" node types.

Node type allows marrying certain battles or phases to maps. If the first phase of an attack means capturing orbital facilities, then we can have maps that look and feel the part. Right now, only HPG has a spacey feel to it. And it will do. But having the node "type" suggests the possibility of future maps (an orbital platform, a starbase, a natural satellite?).

A node map representation of the planet opens a load of future improvements. New node types could be wedded to new maps and modes. An attacking team could select which next node to attack. A person, hero, mech, ship could have an actual "location" on the map (New Bergen, node 33). You could set your DB up so nodes have place names. A particular planet/node could have some cache of whatever residing.

I also wanted to preserve the enormous effort PGI put into the maps and modes of FW. The node type "Planetary Defense" does this. The canon(s) must be taken out before a Bridgehead can be planted on the surface.

What about the Big Problem list?

double carnage (respawn temporarily suspended)
chokepoint maps (relegated to one node type)
gates (ditto)
canons (ditto)
seal clubbing/matchmaker (MM is now involved. It will still happen. But to only one drop and hopefully a tonnage buffed drop at that.)
one mode (many modes)
gen/spawn rushes (upper ditto)
spawn camping (respawn temporarily suspended)
contextless (node types provide some context)
wait times (much larger population available, matchmaker involved, 'instant' FW games possible)
repetition (not any more)

[Naduk]

My biggest gripe is queue times
I am sure the mm is straight up broken

I have sat in small groups in the lobby
We watch as others slowly fill the room
We can sit on "transferring pilots" for over 20mins with a full list of 12
Then a 6 man team comes along and takes 6 of the pugs waiting for us , gets a 12 and instantly drops
We sit in queue , fill another 12 then wait for another 15 mins and bang it happens again

We don't play faction play because of this utter garbage

We want to , we enjoy it when we can
But it's so damn frustrating to get a single game
Where you usually end up fighting a 12man pre-made and are destroyed in under 10mins

As for making the rest of faction play better

Tanks , air units , inf
Make it happen
The way you guys have the maps setup it's a league of legends style lane attack
Yet we have no fodder to support the heros (mechs)
Put a hanger down for defenders and a big dropship for attackers
Spawn tanks and other support units to attack the base in waves

Include the solo queue maps
Conquest would be perfect for a mission type as will your new assault mode
Recapture territory is just skirmish , so let's use the skirmish map pool

Get more immersion , the voice overs were a great start
Do more
Defenders should come out of a hanger or parked dropship
Not landing in hot drop

Dropships should never land with just one Mech and even more it should not be happening 3 ships at a time
It's a massive waste that would never happen unless absolutely necessary

Dropships should NEVER drop units when hostiles are in range , a ship with 12 enemy Mech right under it is not going to drop a locust in that pit if teeth
Let alone a 1000year old heirloom Atlas
A dropship would circle around and find a safe place to deploy

Let's get some smaller missions too
The scout system was a good start
But let's make it better
Make scout points earned be consumed (as if a purchase) to buy things like long Tom
Then points must be earned again to get another one
This will allow you to let scout players to feel more rewarded as they get coms from high command telling them their efforts just did a thing

Heavier 4v4 and full deck 5v5 ,8v8 games should be a thing
You can call these raids and you can unlock them via scouting
Hit supply lines , assassinate vip, convoy escort , air base assault , long Tom hunt
These are the kinds of missions I expect to see for raids
Each raid would have a effect on ongoing or incoming invasion modes

I have ideas for days
Pm me if you want more

[Javenri]

I have two suggestions to offer regarding FP.

-The first is about Long Tom. I suggest that you turn this from a destruction weapon to a debuffing weapon. That means it will have an effect like an EM pulse. It will temporarily disable certain parts of a mech for a period equal to the next LT activation. This will make parts like ECM, BAP, normal sensors, weapons or even parts of the engine (making the mech loose speed, turn rates, heat dissipation, etc) to shut down. The number of systems affected will be proportional to the distance from the center of the EMP blast (closer to center, more systems shut down). This mechanism gives an advantage to the owner of the LT without defining the outcome of the battle. A gimped mech can still fight, a dead mech can’t.
-The second is about filtering the players who can participate in FP. Both modes (scouting and invasion) should require from the mechs maximum skills (elite mechs) with all module slots filled in order to participate. That way, only players with relative experience can participate in FP.