869 replies to this topic

[dario03]

-Let players choose a faction. But make the mode mostly Clan vs IS.
-Any Clan player can group with any Clan player regardless of faction, same for IS.
-Have Clan vs Clan and IS vs IS at certain times or all the time when there is enough players.
-Have only one planet contested at a time per vs mode. So if there is only Clan vs IS at that time there will be just one planet where everyone plays on. Or have multiple planets contested but the player does not decide where they drop.
-Put in a match maker that takes team sizes and skill in to account.
-Instead of one group getting the whole planet and all the bonuses of the planet, groups can take parts of planets and those parts add up to points for bonuses.
-Make the points awarded based on match performance so instead of just big groups spamming planets to get all the points, smaller skilled groups that perform better on average could get points too.

-Make the bonus effects of mech id, radar scan, and long time earned in scouting mode be a physical item that is dropped on the map in invasion mode. This item can be attacked by the enemy and destroyed to stop it from working in that match.
-Let both sides get bonus effects like those.
-Reduce the frequency and/or area of effect on long tom.

Edited by dario03, 26 July 2016 - 06:53 AM.

[Skaav]

Bud Crue, on 26 July 2016 - 05:47 AM, said:

How is the gameplay loop of QP that much different that FP? Best I can tell is that the gates are really the only difference but once they are opened it is still Move mech - find enemy mech- shoot enemy mech- repeat. Yes you can base rush in FP, so to can you base rush in Assault, but in the end the loop darn near the same. So how does making the maps a bit better or the map based objectives different change that loop for the better or improve player retention any more than QP does?

To my way of thinking many of the features of "immersion" that us players of "Mechwarrior Online A Battletech Game" are requesting are what potentially differentiates the gameplay loop of FP from QP. But I admit I, like most of the posters over the last 25 pages, am one of those less than sensible people that you dismiss as causing problems for PGI with my desire for "non relevant fluff" and so I probably don't follow your higher level of analysis.

FP and Standard play very differently. In FW, teams are funneled into very static paths, and that is just not the case on the regular maps. Engagements always go the same way, and usually it comes down to stand offs between firing lines, which reuires very little positioning and movement in general, which are actually the most important aspects of standard. The game is balanced towards this kind of play, and this can be seen by the vast difference in views on balance by the "only" FW population and the rest of the MWO community

Immersion is not reached by a menu telling you about a planet, a ******* menu or label is actually the OPPOSITE of immersion. Also its not "immersive" to earn more MC, or to have supply lines. Its also not immersive to loot mechs, have destroyed mechs disabled for a period of time or whatever else ridiculous **** some people here come up with. All that stuff is, is feature creep, which means were just piling more and more **** onto the shitpile, instead of trying to get stuff right.

Scouting was a great addition to FW, although the relevance/implementation is still questionable. The game mode is fun, for the most part, offers a unique experience and offers variety, on top of that.
Invasion offers none of the above.

Edited by Skaav, 26 July 2016 - 06:22 AM.

[Yellonet]

Here's my suggestion:

Faction Warfare would very likely be much more populated if there was Faction Quick Play, and that players feel that the rewards are as good or better than regular QP (relative to time played).

Just have this:



And if you select FQP you'd get into a FW match with other people through the matchmaker, just as regular QP. When you press the button you get to a regular (hopefully a better one) invasion match screen so you can pick drop deck and so on.

The fight would be on a planet selected through the regular FW, so it would basically just be more people in FW.

This would remove the IMO biggest hurdles for getting people into FW, the waiting, and the constant stomping by premades.

Edit: Although I have no facts to back this up I believe that most players in most games want to feel that they are fighting for something more than just the current fight, it feels better to see that you are affecting the game world. It's just that many players, myself included, doesn't want to bend over backwards (or bending over forward for that matter ) just to get into FW and make a difference.

I would very much like to participate in FW, but I don't have the will to be in a unit or the will to only win once in a decade. It would feel better to know I was fighting for some great house and helping against the clanners.

And this would also in practice be IS vs Clan QP so hitting two birds with one rock

TL;DR:

Faction Quick Play would make it easier to get into a FW game and remove the risk of getting put against pre organized teams. This coupled with rewards being on par or better than QP for the time spent would very likely bring more players to FW.

[Radkres]

O.o Was thinking about Lore and the people with large Mech bays but can't play all their mechs without being merc.
How about having more pilots than you could have one as Clan and another as IS O.o

[patataman]

dervishx5, on 26 July 2016 - 02:39 AM, said:

It would behoove the people in charge of this fun little meeting to include someone from the NBT team since they've spent literally over a decade recreating FW in a far more grand and long-lasting manner.

Probably the best idea in the entire thread. How to make FW good? Ask the guys with a working FW.

[Bud Crue]

Skaav, on 26 July 2016 - 06:20 AM, said:

FP and Standard play very differently. In FW, teams are funneled into very static paths, and that is just not the case on the regular maps. Engagements always go the same way, and usually it comes down to stand offs between firing lines, which reuires very little positioning and movement in general, which are actually the most important aspects of standard. The game is balanced towards this kind of play, and this can be seen by the vast difference in views on balance by the "only" FW population and the rest of the MWO community

Immersion is not reached by a menu telling you about a planet, a ******* menu or label is actually the OPPOSITE of immersion. Also its not "immersive" to earn more MC, or to have supply lines. Its also not immersive to loot mechs, have destroyed mechs disabled for a period of time or whatever else ridiculous **** some people here come up with. All that stuff is, is feature creep, which means were just piling more and more **** onto the shitpile, instead of trying to get stuff right.

Scouting was a great addition to FW, although the relevance/implementation is still questionable. The game mode is fun, for the most part, offers a unique experience and offers variety, on top of that.
Invasion offers none of the above.

I agree that the modes play differently but I still see the loop as being nearly the same.

Nevertheless I appreciate your points and I agree with your comments about FP vs CW balance and Scouting mode.

But I disagree with your view on immersion. I think the last 25 pages of comments make clear that a large number of the community want exactly what you dismiss as **** on the ****pile. They are not looking for QP matches in a different environment, rather they are looking for matches that affect the IS map and play out over the long term at best like a story and at worst like a military campaign with the flavor of mechwarrior and/or battletech. To achieve that I think PGI does indeed need to make the maps and objectives better, as you and many of us suggest, but it also needs to consider adding some of that **** for the mode to feel like it is indeed "faction" play with a hint of flavor of the MW and BT universe. To each his own.

[Cy Mitchell]

Skaav, on 26 July 2016 - 04:42 AM, said:

90% of the suggestions in this thread will not help raise player retention, the overall fun/attractiveness of the mode or just even enjoyment for the random casual dropping in. They just introduce 100's of hours of work time for non relevant fluff, which is cool and nice to have and a good time all around, no doubt, but not worth prioritizing developement time over actual sensible game related improvements.

I think the Viridian rework shows how drastically even little changes can alter the flow of a map, and IMO this should be the priority for FW, reworking the maps, overhauling the objectives and thereby trying to reduce the static nature of FW these days.

BatWing, on 26 July 2016 - 05:23 AM, said:

PGI has just a bare layout of a Stellar Map, to make it short they need:
1 - Maps
2 - Missions
3 - Economy
4 - Goals to achieve
5 - a Story line engaging the crowd (at least a bit..)
.. just to name some...

PGI already has developed the assets they need to improve FP drastically. They just need to use them;

1. Maps - Use the QP maps in FP. Match them up with the planets theme to keep the look of the world were the battle is taking place consistent.

2, Additional modes - Use some of the QP modes in FP. Add Assault, Conquest, Domination, etc to the series of battles that must be contested to take a world. This would be in addition to Scouting, Invasion, Counter Attack, etc. All of these modes could potential include Drop Decks for longer, more involved battles.

3. Training newbies - Add the FP maps and modes to QP in a scaled down manner (no Drop Deck) so new players can learn the mechanics of FP without facing pre-mades.

4. Make the rewards for playing FP at least equal to if not a little better than its competition. QP is FP;s competition. I do not believe rewards are that big a deal if the game mode is fun but some players will not play the mode if they are earning less rewards for playing it than they can earn elsewhere.

5. Finish the global map. At least the major planets DO need to have their bios completed.

6. Utilize the Comcast Transmissions to drive the story of the campaign. Report on battles and guide the campaign with it. Let this mechanic tell the story of the campaign.

7. Control the Merc population through the use of proper campaign long contracts and quotas. Mercs only fight for payment. They should not place tags on any world. The Faction they fight for places their tag.

8. Revisit the Long Tom. Revise it, remove it or make it a destructible asset on the map that can be hunted down and destroyed.

PGI has already developed all the tools they need to greatly improve Faction Warfare and attract interest from old and new players alike. They just need to put them to use. Fixing FP is not something that needs to take years or is not obtainable at all. Using the existing tools will cut the time to improve the base mode to months. Once the mode is attracting players then more loftier goals can be pursued.

Using the existing assets to fix FP makes this an attainable goal in a reasonable time frame.

Edited by Rampage, 26 July 2016 - 06:43 AM.

[cazidin]

Am I the only one concerned about this roundtable discussion? I do appreciate that at least faction leaders will have the opportunity to discuss FW but will Russ and others in charge at PGI earnestly listen to their suggestions AND implement them in a timely fashion? (I.e. within 60-90 days, not 1-1.5 years from now)

[CK16]

Imo, FW should have a more Battlefield/ARMA feel to it, more objective based, anti deathballs terrain. Needs more immersion into Battletech while still remaining fairly arcade like.

Edited by CK16, 26 July 2016 - 06:42 AM.

[Bud Crue]

cazidin, on 26 July 2016 - 06:41 AM, said:

Am I the only one concerned about this roundtable discussion? I do appreciate that at least faction leaders will have the opportunity to discuss FW but will Russ and others in charge at PGI earnestly listen to their suggestions AND implement them in a timely fashion? (I.e. within 60-90 days, not 1-1.5 years from now)

I don't expect there to be any changes any time soon. From earlier in the thread:

Bombadil, on 25 July 2016 - 11:56 AM, said:

I think maybe you're misunderstanding the purpose of this Roundtable, and the format in which it will be held. This is not a podcast, and this is not even a Town Hall, where we usually relay community-submitted questions to Russ ourselves. This is going to be a panel of players, probably landing somewhere between 6 and 12 individuals, who will be speaking directly to Russ and the devs, asking questions, offering solutions, and having conversations about improving FP. My only role will be to moderate if necessary, and to keep things moving forward and on-topic. I'm gathering notes as a way to have those that cannot attend have a voice, if appropriate. For example, if someone says "How does the community feel about the Long Tom?", well I have a pretty clear picture of that, at least from the perspective of those who have posted to this thread. 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. But again, this isn't about me. If the players involved in this discussion want to make something a higher priority than I have suggested here, excellent!

Emphasis added

Edited by Bud Crue, 26 July 2016 - 06:45 AM.

[N0MAD]

dervishx5, on 26 July 2016 - 02:39 AM, said:

It would behoove the people in charge of this fun little meeting to include someone from the NBT team since they've spent literally over a decade recreating FW in a far more grand and long-lasting manner.

best idea yetm could you extend that to other league organisers?,
+1

[Tahawus]

Drop the requirement that invasion be 12 v 12. In lore, a single lance or star would frequently be sent to capture an objective.

Set a minimum team size of 4. Then rework the game initiation mechanic to drop as soon (or possibly a short delay to see if a larger match can be built) as teams of equal size can be built from the available players.

This should reduce wait times.

[dario03]

cazidin, on 26 July 2016 - 06:41 AM, said:

Am I the only one concerned about this roundtable discussion? I do appreciate that at least faction leaders will have the opportunity to discuss FW but will Russ and others in charge at PGI earnestly listen to their suggestions AND implement them in a timely fashion? (I.e. within 60-90 days, not 1-1.5 years from now)

And what are the people in the round table going to suggest? Will they agree on most things or have completely conflicting ideas? Who will PGI listen to? Will the suggestions actually help FP or will it just hurt it?

[cazidin]

dario03, on 26 July 2016 - 06:57 AM, said:

And what are the people in the round table going to suggest? Will they agree on most things or have completely conflicting ideas? Who will PGI listen to? Will the suggestions actually help FP or will it just hurt it?

Also very good points. I doubt everyone will be of the same mindset, and if they are players will find that incredibly suspect, won't they?

[Chaotic Clyde]

1. Bigger maps and more of them.
2. Make so it is 48 vs 48, Players will be more conservative with there play style and tactics will be more likely to be used. Repair and Refit units on the field so players can pay in cbills to have their mech repaired and ammo replenished.
3. Collectible salvage, armor, weapons, cbills, mc, and partial if not whole mechs.( player pays to restore mech to operational).
4. Jobs with in the factions maybe? Players decide who calls the shots, make it so the factions can call the shots on where to attack where to defend, which unit goes where, which mercenary unit to hire.
5. Get rid of free to play, it doesn't exist anyway.
6. Better anti cheat system? Banhammer needs to be seen.
I enjoy the game very much, but right now if you are not in some kind of unit FW is unplayable, and right now kinda of unfair with the top tier units picking 1 faction and wreaking havoc on the rest.

Edited by Chaotic Clyde, 26 July 2016 - 07:09 AM.

[cazidin]

Chaotic Clyde, on 26 July 2016 - 07:08 AM, said:

1. Bigger maps and more of them.
2. Make so it is 48 vs 48, Players will be more conservative with there play style and tactics will be more likely to be used. Repair and Refit units on the field so players can pay in cbills to have their mech repaired and ammo replenished.
3. Collectible salvage, armor, weapons, cbills, mc, and partial if not whole mechs.( player pays to restore mech to operational).
4. Jobs with in the factions maybe? Players decide who calls the shots, make it so the factions can call the shots on where to attack where to defend, which unit goes where, which mercenary unit to hire.
5. Get rid of free to play, it doesn't exist anyway.
6. Better anti cheat system? Banhammer needs to be seen.
I enjoy the game very much, but right now if you are not in some kind of unit FW is unplayable, and right now kinda of unfair with the top tier units picking 1 faction and wreaking havoc on the rest.

Half of those suggestions are medicore™

[iLLcapitan]

To make people come back short-termed, I think that's what needed, quick and simple:

- Pool the factions into 2: Clan and IS.
- Remove any other game-preventing mechanisms. If at any point 24 people want to play, they should be able to play. If not enough Clanners, then IS vs IS, etc.

- Introduce a group/single queue just like in QP.
Give us a lobby, or just a chat only for units, to arrange matches unit vs unit. There has to be a way to make CW more competitive. Or rank units using the leaderboard stats, to match em against each other.

- Reset the factiontree once a player completes it.

- Remove LT / replace it with smth else. Some people won't even bother playing CW as long as it's there. Make it an ECM which shuts mechs down for 10 sec, make it a fun mechanic that doesnt steal cbills from the participants.

- Make capturing a planet a weekly campaign, Units occupate sectors - not planets. Same rewards.

- New. Maps. Seriously.


Any other fancy idea can unfold from there, but first we need a self-sustaining game mode without game-preventing mechanics to provide quick matches.

Edited by iLLcapitan, 26 July 2016 - 11:31 PM.

[Chaotic Clyde]

cazidin, on 26 July 2016 - 06:41 AM, said:

Am I the only one concerned about this roundtable discussion? I do appreciate that at least faction leaders will have the opportunity to discuss FW but will Russ and others in charge at PGI earnestly listen to their suggestions AND implement them in a timely fashion? (I.e. within 60-90 days, not 1-1.5 years from now)

NO!

[Aeromaxout]

Add different map types. Right now we only have an orbital defense cannon to attack/defend. What could be used is other unique objectives. This could include palaces (More C-Bills to the side that owns these), mech factories (which could have an affect on faction tonnage for the planet), convoy defense/ambush (affected the rebuild time for recaptured bases), and possibly a capital which would be a final stand type of map (would love to see a 36 v 36 battle for this one).

AI tanks, infantry, helicopters, and jet fighters/bombers. Yes, a tall order, but could add a lot to how battles are fought. Maybe even have a repair crew to fix turrets between waves when defending a base.

Have space battles! Low G maps with zero G areas which would require JJ mechs to really work well. Also have the option to hop into fighter instead of your mech for these battles. The Jump Ship would be the prize of these battles.

-----------Scouting---------------
Make it so the scouting mechs actually have to set foot INSIDE the dropship for the match to be a win. This would add a level of immersion to the mode as well as thoroughgoing the proverbial boon to the defenders who could body-block the dropship doors.

[HumpingBunny]

Aeromaxout, on 26 July 2016 - 08:07 AM, said:

Add different map types. Right now we only have an orbital defense cannon to attack/defend. What could be used is other unique objectives. This could include palaces (More C-Bills to the side that owns these), mech factories (which could have an affect on faction tonnage for the planet), convoy defense/ambush (affected the rebuild time for recaptured bases), and possibly a capital which would be a final stand type of map (would love to see a 36 v 36 battle for this one).

Yes please!

Also, my suggestion is this:
In the real world (or galaxy, rather), advancing into enemy territory presents a specific challenge......logistics!! The deeper into enemy territory you push, the more difficult it will become to repair Mechs, refuel dropships, reload weapons, etc. So the problem becomes, do you allocate more tonnage to supplies in dropships (less available tonnage for Mechs) OR do you capture your enemy's supplies? I grant you, the fine tuning of such a system would take time and effort, however it would bring a very real aspect of war into faction play.

*Forgive me if this has already been mentioned, as I have not read through this very lengthy thread*

Edited by HumpingBunny, 26 July 2016 - 12:08 PM.