73 replies to this topic

[Green Mamba]

WOW..its really bad if Rebas has pulled off all his White Knight Armor

Edited by Green Mamba, 27 July 2016 - 03:48 PM.

[Mystere]

First things first. What's the



?

[Mudhutwarrior]

MischiefSC, on 27 July 2016 - 02:58 PM, said:

Starts in about an hour. 8pm EST

No point in announcing as its been muted. So much for openness.

[Rebas Kradd]

Quote

There are numerous problems with FP, just to name a few:

1. The Long Tom.

2. Lack of population controls to prevent what is occurring now:

A. To many people following big units around.
B. No control over size of units in FP.
C. No control over faction populations.
D. PUGs experience is horrible.

3. Lack of good maps/game modes.

4. To many choke points, not enough open fields for MW style engagements (feels more like Modern Warfare than MechWarrior).

5. Lack of incentives for players.

6. Rewards suck more than game mode does.

I agree these are all problems, but I'd say we should identify which are the core problems and which are merely symptoms of those other core problems. #2, I'd say, is a symptom of people not enjoying FW (and thus leaving it with a low population) because of #1, #3, #4, #5, and #6.

Deathlike, on 27 July 2016 - 10:58 AM, said:

I don't have that kind of time trying to keep mentioning the same problem that goes unfixed...

But you have the time to make essays like that?

Green Mamba, on 27 July 2016 - 03:47 PM, said:

WOW..its really bad if Rebas has pulled off all his White Knight Armor

Offering constructive criticism isn't the same as withdrawing support. Some of you really need to learn the difference.

Mystere, on 27 July 2016 - 03:52 PM, said:

First things first. What's the



?

To start with, more open-ended gamemodes that reduce the repetition and maybe the deathballing. Immediately stimulate interest and population growth.

Then, natural incentives for playing. Economy, rewards that play back into combat (purchaseable assets, etc.), combined with lore and personality that provide intrinsic incentive.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 27 July 2016 - 07:19 PM.

[WANTED]

What OP said. I quit FW as of now. Finally realized after all these years it's not FW or CW ( Hell it changed names how many times??? ) It's basically elite unit teams doing hardcore mode and I ain't invited. Nothing against those hardcore elite unit teams but my type of skill is not allowed in the big kids pool. Also like it's been mentioned there just isn't any real depth. Other games I could take on roles to assist the team even if I wasn't top sharp shooter with elite twitch skills. This game has no role I can play in FW other than elite top skill guy to assist my team. So after all these years of playing, it finally clicked...Quick Play is for me and FW is not. I have no idea how PGI can or even if they want to fix that. Wish I had an answer.

[Deathlike]

Rebas Kradd, on 27 July 2016 - 07:21 PM, said:

But you have the time to make essays like that?

Like PGI, it's TL;DR AFAIK and since when have they demonstrated otherwise in the FW forums?

As long as you let bad ideas linger indefinitely, it grows into something else and it's not pretty.

It's not going to matter if PGI doesn't listen.

[N0MAD]

Adjustments to game mode, payouts etc etc may have a small chance to increase population for short periods of time, just as events have increases of pop when they are giving away free shiny things, then pop drops again.
You can try fix CW but thats going to take alot of time effort from the ideas ive heard in that player round table, in the meantime MWO is going to keep losing players.

Heres my take on the current events (Round tables).
Player numbers are declining steadily, steam charts seem to support this, PGI is at its wits end on stoping this, in an attempt to both quell the population and maybe find a solution they have instigated these round table meetings, it also buys them time, months and months of countless round tables.
Game needs something that can address Population issues quickly and with little resource, without delving into game mode mechanics, balance etc etc.
From listening to the guys in that round table it seems what they really want from CW is that half dozen leagues we had in MW2-3-4, listening to them they all wanted features that those leagues provided, really none that can be Incorporated into one grand CW experience..
MWO has been the hardest of all previous MW games to play Leagues easily, its community tools are just bad.

My quick fix..
Get PGI to announce a Zone type loby, copy it as far as you can.
The chat the ease of getting games the simplicity for leagues to communicate and play their games would bring back thousands and player retain ability would increase immediately.
Simple, cheap and nothing to do with fixing rest of game.
Tweaking the game at the moment isnt going to open the flood gates and pop grow quickly, they need a quick fix thats viable on its own and doesnt take months if not years of development.

[Cy Mitchell]

When I played FW, I played on a friends account who had quit playing MWO. I played on his Clan only account, with his fully Mastered drop deck and most of the games were with his faction Clan in 10-12 man drops. We were on the Strana Mechty TS server. I just listened and followed the drop commanders instructions. The few times I dropped solo was with the same account, same Mechs and at least a couple had some of us on TS.



For me, communication was not a problem. Having a drop deck was not a problem. Dropping as part of an organized unit was not a problem. The problems for me were:



1. I was never involved in a competitive game. All games were either stomp wins or stomp losses.

2. There was only one game mode. After doing pretty much the exact same thing 20+ times, on maps that were all pretty much the same. I began to lose interest and wanted more variety. I could not believe there were not more objectives.

3. After the initial excitement of the first few matches, I stopped having fun.



Based on my experience, I am not sure better communication or better rewards are going to be able to overcome the staleness of the singular game mode and restrictive map designs that make up Faction Play.



Now, I have Mastered and Elited Mechs on my account. I play QP exclusively but would be interested in giving an improved Faction Play another try. But it is going to take better modes and better maps to draw me in. Right now, what Quick Play offer is far superior. If the QP maps and modes were also in FP as part of the campaign then I would probably be there too.

[Mystere]

Rebas Kradd, on 27 July 2016 - 07:21 PM, said:

To start with, more open-ended gamemodes that reduce the repetition and maybe the deathballing. Immediately stimulate interest and population growth.

Then, natural incentives for playing. Economy, rewards that play back into combat (purchaseable assets, etc.), combined with lore and personality that provide intrinsic incentive.

I meant: What is PGI's vision? Without knowing that, everything suggested might just end up as wasted saliva.

[cazidin]

So, how'd the pre-meeting go?

[Mister Blastman]

Reason I do not play FW: DOTA style maps.

I dislike DOTA and all derivatives. I find the lane system boring and contrived.

Remove DOTA style maps and maybe I'll play. Add in advanced map gameplay like Spy's City from Mechwarrior 2: Mercs (a PLAYER made map) and I'll be even more interested.

Original Spy's City:


NBT Spy's City:


Appetite for Destruction:


And a more complicated one called Patience:



We had something like 50 - 100 multiplayer maps.

MW:LL has 40+, and none of the above game modes come close to the intensity you have in a proper MW:LL ticket-based respawn multipoint capture and defend game. MWO should have adopted the ticket system for FW. If they had, it would be my default game mode.

[Davers]

Rampage, on 27 July 2016 - 08:59 PM, said:

1. I was never involved in a competitive game. All games were either stomp wins or stomp losses.

2. There was only one game mode. After doing pretty much the exact same thing 20+ times, on maps that were all pretty much the same. I began to lose interest and wanted more variety. I could not believe there were not more objectives.

3. After the initial excitement of the first few matches, I stopped having fun.



Based on my experience, I am not sure better communication or better rewards are going to be able to overcome the staleness of the singular game mode and restrictive map designs that make up Faction Play.

This has been my experience as well, and I feel these are the issues that should be talked about. THIS is why people aren't playing CW.

[Jables McBarty]

Mister Blastman, on 28 July 2016 - 07:27 AM, said:

Reason I do not play FW: DOTA style maps.

I dislike DOTA and all derivatives. I find the lane system boring and contrived.

Remove DOTA style maps and maybe I'll play. Add in advanced map gameplay like Spy's City from Mechwarrior 2: Mercs (a PLAYER made map) and I'll be even more interested.

Lol, it's not even a good DOTA rip-off either! I love Dota, but in that game you have progressive objectives between your base and the enemy's base.

FW is like Dota where only one team has an ancient, and there are no creeps or towers, so predictably all the action (barring total stomps) happens in one corner of a massive map. And everybody brings a carry.

[Davers]

Jables McBarty, on 28 July 2016 - 08:56 AM, said:

Lol, it's not even a good DOTA rip-off either! I love Dota, but in that game you have progressive objectives between your base and the enemy's base.

FW is like Dota where only one team has an ancient, and there are no creeps or towers, so predictably all the action (barring total stomps) happens in one corner of a massive map. And everybody brings a carry.

I once described CW as League of Legends without the jungle or neutral objectives and only one lane.

[Davegt27]

what's DOTA?

[Rebas Kradd]

Davers, on 28 July 2016 - 09:23 AM, said:

I once described CW as League of Legends without the jungle or neutral objectives and only one lane.

I was gonna say, if CW were actually a decent representation of DOTA, it would be an improvement.

[Davers]

Davegt27, on 28 July 2016 - 09:39 AM, said:

what's DOTA?

One of the biggest games in the world.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I don't think FW will have the depth that players are seeking until several hurdles are passed:

Multiple iterations of each weapon to represent the various Faction economies.
Varying costs of Mechs based on your allegiance.
Open maps instead of attack funnels.
Objective raids with more than 4 players on team.
Scouting rewards that make sense (If you have a satellite sweep active, then you already have all the Intel needed to target enemy units with artillery).
Unit coffers that are good for more than just buying recruits.
Disolvation of the impossibly-large Merc Groups, or making them pay for their player count because they got around the fees needed to reach that size.

Aaaand it would be virtually impossible to have an economy that works like a Single Player Campaign with Repair and Rearm unless you are willing to concede that free players should not have as much access to expensive equipment as paying players (Pay to get an Advantage). Also I bet the large groups would strongly disagree with me on their size and the preferential treatment they received.

It's going to be hard to deliver what is "expected" by all ends of the playerbase spectrum.

[Mudhutwarrior]

Here is a couple of absolute facts. 1, most players never register on the forums to participate. 2. Most players stay in solo que for varied reasons. 3. FW has seen nothing but declining population since its inception and never captured but a small percentage of the population.

So were would you start to fix things if population is declining overall?

1. start at the place that has always suffered declining population and participation?
2. start were population and participation has been increasing since just lately according to published figures?

If you choose 1, you certainly have no business sense or common sense for that matter. FW has never been a draw for new players. Its complex and hard to understand and takes a great deal of effort to manage well. Fixing it will be just as complex.

If you choose 2. Your taking the path that with minimal change that always has seen the greatest rewards in participation.

This whole round table is a scam and you all know it. Its going the same way as the council did. Thing is both PGI and the self appointed expert monkeys will assure that it does. You just cannot fix stupid no matter how much common sense you throw at it.

[Davers]

Prosperity Park, on 28 July 2016 - 10:18 AM, said:

I don't think FW will have the depth that players are seeking until several hurdles are passed:

Multiple iterations of each weapon to represent the various Faction economies.
Varying costs of Mechs based on your allegiance.
Open maps instead of attack funnels.
Objective raids with more than 4 players on team.
Scouting rewards that make sense (If you have a satellite sweep active, then you already have all the Intel needed to target enemy units with artillery).
Unit coffers that are good for more than just buying recruits.
Disolvation of the impossibly-large Merc Groups, or making them pay for their player count because they got around the fees needed to reach that size.

Aaaand it would be virtually impossible to have an economy that works like a Single Player Campaign with Repair and Rearm unless you are willing to concede that free players should not have as much access to expensive equipment as paying players (Pay to get an Advantage). Also I bet the large groups would strongly disagree with me on their size and the preferential treatment they received.

It's going to be hard to deliver what is "expected" by all ends of the playerbase spectrum.

Before they add bells and whistles they need to create a fun FP that people want to play. Talking about unit coffers and variable mech costs is very premature.