185 replies to this topic

[Jman5]

Community panelists for the upcoming Faction Play roundtable discussion are looking for input from you to address issues regarding Faction Play. Specifically they are looking for ideas to improve the overall FP experience. Included in this roundtable will be PGI President Russ Bullock, PGI Faction Play devs and members of the MWO Faction Play community who have been invited to participate.

The community panelists are holding a pre-meeting on Wed, July 27th, at 8pm EST, to brainstorm for ideas and to help formulate a list of recommended improvements to Faction Play. This pre-meeting will be streamed live on twitch at https://www.twitch.tv/sader325. We want to present these ideas in an organized manner during Thursday’s Round Table discussion with Russ Bullock, NGNG and the Devs.

We are looking for units and solo players who are focused on Faction Play and who would like to contribute to an organized, rational conversation about both the current state of Faction Play and suggested improvements for Faction Play. Both unit leaders and normal rank and file members are encouraged to attend and comment on the stream, and to present their own ideas for consideration.

Once again the pre-meeting is on Wed, July 27th, at 8pm EST, here.

The Round Table discussion with PGI will be held on Thursday 9pm EST and hosted by NGNG TV.

We hope to see you there.

[Sader325]

The panelists in this and the next discussion are reading through Bombadil's FP thread here: http://mwomercs.com/...40#entry5310826

So continue to post your FP suggestions there. I will intermittently be bumping this post until the Pre-Meeting on Wednesday.

[El Bandito]

I expressed my opinion/suggestion in that thread. Let's see how this one will turn out. Keeping expectations to an absolute minimum.

Edited by El Bandito, 25 July 2016 - 08:19 PM.

[AnTi90d]

I'll attend both, but I've just about run out of hope.

[Deathlike]

That's cool. I'm not sure I have enough in myself to show up to that though.

[Sader325]

Formally requesting that this thread be pinned until Thursday so I don't have to bump it.

[Davers]

Jman5, on 25 July 2016 - 08:01 PM, said:

Community panelists for the upcoming Faction Play roundtable discussion are looking for input from you to address issues regarding Faction Play. Specifically they are looking for ideas to improve the overall FP experience. Included in this roundtable will be PGI President Russ Bullock, PGI Faction Play devs and members of the MWO Faction Play community who have been invited to participate.

The community panelists are holding a pre-meeting on Wed, July 27th, at 8pm EST, to brainstorm for ideas and to help formulate a list of recommended improvements to Faction Play. This pre-meeting will be streamed live on twitch at https://www.twitch.tv/sader325. We want to present these ideas in an organized manner during Thursday’s Round Table discussion with Russ Bullock, NGNG and the Devs.

We are looking for units and solo players who are focused on Faction Play and who would like to contribute to an organized, rational conversation about both the current state of Faction Play and suggested improvements for Faction Play. Both unit leaders and normal rank and file members are encouraged to attend and comment on the stream, and to present their own ideas for consideration.

Once again the pre-meeting is on Wed, July 27th, at 8pm EST, here.

The Round Table discussion with PGI will be held on Thursday 9pm EST and hosted by NGNG TV.

We hope to see you there.

Is there any indication of the realistic level of changes PGI is willing to make? In Bombadil's thread you have everything from minor tweaks to completely rewriting all of FP. If I want to listen to players vent and and say "You know what would make FP great? If PGI did X" then I can just log onto Marik TS. Having a huge discussion that ends in a minor tonnage adjustment or something small just seems like a waste.

[Sader325]

Davers, on 25 July 2016 - 08:50 PM, said:

Is there any indication of the realistic level of changes PGI is willing to make? In Bombadil's thread you have everything from minor tweaks to completely rewriting all of FP. If I want to listen to players vent and and say "You know what would make FP great? If PGI did X" then I can just log onto Marik TS. Having a huge discussion that ends in a minor tonnage adjustment or something small just seems like a waste.

As far as I know there is no limits being put on the discussion except that it must relate to faction play, I would suggest operating under the assumption that everything is open for change, far reaching and otherwise.

[Wintersdark]

Davers, on 25 July 2016 - 08:50 PM, said:

Is there any indication of the realistic level of changes PGI is willing to make? In Bombadil's thread you have everything from minor tweaks to completely rewriting all of FP. If I want to listen to players vent and and say "You know what would make FP great? If PGI did X" then I can just log onto Marik TS. Having a huge discussion that ends in a minor tonnage adjustment or something small just seems like a waste.

This is a very good point, and is something I'd love to see PGI comment on before hand so we (well, those who will be actively discussing the matter) can limit things to ideas that have some reasonable chance of implementation.

With that said, even without PGI comment, I think one can reasonable expect that suggestions entailing a whole new game or full rewrite of Faction Play are off the table.

We're not going to see complex new systems added, so no economy, logistics, etc. Not just because PGI won't/can't, but because there are real time constraints here - I don't want to see bandaids, but FP needs to be salvaged in the near future, so a massive overhaul or what amounts to a whole new game is simply not feasible.

But, I'm a spectator here. I'm not going to be a panelist, or directly participate in the discussion, so it's not my decision to make.

I just hope people can put on their Practical Thinking Hats instead of their Wishes and Dreams thinking hats.

After all, the odds of this bearing edible fruit are low to start with, I'd hate to see it sabotaged by stupidity before it gets started.

[Scout Derek]

Sader325, on 25 July 2016 - 09:08 PM, said:

As far as I know there is no limits being put on the discussion except that it must relate to faction play, I would suggest operating under the assumption that everything is open for change, far reaching and otherwise.

This has been leaking my interest for many reasons, some of which I'd like to say... and others I cannot.

Can you give us a list of those that'll be talking mainly while your stream is going this upcoming Wednesday? (As in, who will be there talking amongst us mainly on a mic)

[AnTi90d]

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

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.

This right here pretty much killed any and all expectations I had of the roundtable.

It seems like they're just placating us while not intending to really do anything.

I'd love to be proven wrong.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Ill try to be there

[Scout Derek]

AnTi90d, on 25 July 2016 - 09:16 PM, said:

This right here pretty much killed any and all expectations I had of the roundtable.

It seems like they're just placating us while not intending to really do anything.

I'd love to be proven wrong.

The main goal is to stop telling them what not to do and start pushing for what they should do. If we do this at this round table it won't turn out well.

[Bombadil]

AnTi90d, on 25 July 2016 - 09:16 PM, said:

This right here pretty much killed any and all expectations I had of the roundtable.

It seems like they're just placating us while not intending to really do anything.

I'd love to be proven wrong.

But notice you've removed my last line from that quote? Here it is in context.

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!

[N0MAD]

Procurator Derek, on 25 July 2016 - 09:25 PM, said:

The main goal is to stop telling them what not to do and start pushing for what they should do. If we do this at this round table it won't turn out well.

im deeply confused with this statement...have i smoked to much??..

[N0MAD]

Bombadil, on 25 July 2016 - 09:37 PM, said:

But notice you've removed my last line from that quote? Here it is in context.

Hey brother come to my TS and have a conversation with a fanatic MW fan that played MW2 dos and on thru the MW series for 15 years, was Khan of SJ_ for many years thru many leagues and doesnt play MWO, yet visits these forums in the hope that some thing hapens that will allow me to play my beloved MW again..
Give you the addy any time youre interested..

[AnTi90d]

Bombadil, on 25 July 2016 - 09:37 PM, said:

But notice you've removed my last line from that quote?

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

If the players involved in this discussion want to make something a higher priority than I have suggested here, excellent!

OK, I honestly missed the last line.

1% of hope has been restored.

If we get alliances, we need alliance chat and alliance grouping. If we get alliances without chat or grouping, it'll look like PGI set it up to fail.. People will see it as a halfhearted effort like a lot of people thought the queue split was. (For the record, I was vehemently opposed to the queue split and was glad to see it die.. but that's how people saw it.)

[Scout Derek]

N0MAD, on 25 July 2016 - 09:38 PM, said:

im deeply confused with this statement...have i smoked to much??..

I should have provided examples;


Per say, we are having some say that the FP is broken, sure, we have people saying to fix it en masse now, but back then it was just a simple "oh this sucks" and not offer any advice on how to fix it. the same can be seen today.

"Remove Long Tom! That's it, it's wrong, so it shouldn't be here!"

But this statement of to "stop telling them what they're doing is wrong" only applies in this upcoming round table because we are Presenting Ideas , not telling them what IS wrong.

If we do this then no problems. Otherwise it's just another wasted effort by the community because we cannot set our priorities straight because of our poisoned pride and reckless rage that we have about this game.

[Davers]

Bombadil, on 25 July 2016 - 04:56 PM, said:
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

How can you talk about player population without talking about game modes, barriers to entry, rewards, and incentives? Do the people who are active in FP really know why other players aren't playing?

Isn't it funny how all the stuff people have been wanting to talk about for years (lobbies, the role of mercenaries, lore, PVE, game modes, maps) is being put off to a later, unspecified date?

I can see where this is going now. They will get these hand picked 'player representatives' to endorse a Clan vs IS only FP so they can just say they gave the players "what they wanted".

Hey PGI, player population is low because of the game modes, lack of lore, lack of incentive, and solo vs group play. Add in a healthy dose of "Those other guys are OP" too. Quite simply, there is no Battletech in your Inner Sphere. Many of the Founders wanted war, but this is just another game mode with a totally inconsequential map.

[Stormie]

Have they specified who the community nominees are yet?