151 replies to this topic

[Alteran]

So much to say, but it's all the same stuff that I and so many of us have been saying for the last 2 years since CW/FP was released.

What I will say is: FP/CW needs depth. Depth that requires CBills to be used for so many aspects.

Russ, wake up! Look back at the last 2 years of what people have been saying for CW/FP. That's all you need for a good idea of what needs to be done.

Edited by Alteran, 04 August 2016 - 07:34 PM.

[Peter2k]

Not to sound too negative

But ehh
They need 2 weeks (maybe more as ~ implies also maybe longer) to formulate a post; work out an idea that Russ seemingly had on his mind for a time
Buckets, Buckets, Buckets
And LT I guess, though Russ just loved how it is now I guess

It's not even the end all problems for FP
It's another band-aid
2 weeks?

Tsk
Given a good level editor a fan could've made a map that may be fun to play in the same time, in his private time after working

Not saying the map would have a lot of eye candy, but then neither does the mordor map

Edited by Peter2k, 04 August 2016 - 11:46 PM.

[MechPorn]

I am sure FP will die in it's current format and PGI will replace it with a queued system to form buckets of players so that they can stop hearing people whine about everything wrong with FP...though...this would only increase the player dissatisfaction.

[Baulven]

Peter2k, on 04 August 2016 - 11:44 PM, said:

Not to sound too negative

But ehh
They need 2 weeks (maybe more as ~ implies also maybe longer) to formulate a post; work out an idea that Russ seemingly had on his mind for a time
Buckets, Buckets, Buckets
And LT I guess, though Russ just loved how it is now I guess

It's not even the end all problems for FP
It's another band-aid
2 weeks?

Tsk
Given a good level editor a fan could've made a map that may be fun to play in the same time, in his private time after working

Not saying the map would have a lot of eye candy, but then neither does the mordor map

In all fairness ~ means approximately so it could be less than two weeks (I am not expecting that either but it could happen) and I do try to give the benefit of the doubt. I am just not going to give the benefit of optimism, instead taking a simple wait and see approach without actually looking forward to whatever is plopped down.

[Peter2k]

Baulven, on 05 August 2016 - 11:22 AM, said:

In all fairness ~ means approximately so it could be less than two weeks (I am not expecting that either but it could happen) and I do try to give the benefit of the doubt

While I certainly agree on ~ meaning maybe less, it's just not PGI's track record
every single thing they ever done has not been done in a faster/more efficient manner
They still need a hotfix for every patch
And features still get pushed back

Been giving way too much benefit of doubt over the years(though for free it's good enough)

It's just a small thing anyway, a band aid
It will not make FP more appealing to people who have left/don't want to play it as it is now
It's also an old idea, PGI just rebranded it as buckets

[Luerim]

There's basic issues I have with both QP and CW in that I have enough mechs (28-30 depending on where I am finishing up XP dumps) to create specialized builds for certain situations. Going blind into a map like the Grims with LRM boats is a waste of a mech. Similarly, a fast mech with flamers on any of the frozen maps is just stupid fun (flamers do **** damage and have miserable range, but mech shutdown lasts several seconds, and can turn a tide, especially if you can shut down two or three bunched up), but the reward system rewards damage done and kills above and beyond any other measure, so flamer heavy builds just don't measure up.

If there were a way to tailor drops available in my bay to a particular map and/or team (knowing their composition BEFORE dropping) especially for FP/CW and PUGS, I would play FP/CW more often. I think multiple drop sets are a preparation for this sort of functionality in the long run.

The scouting aspect of the FP/CW and it being lance vs. lance was a wonderfully interesting move in what, I feel, was the right direction, but has devolved quickly into a sitch where it's an auto clan-win if it's IS vs Clan.

A lot of naysayers in the last 7 pages comment on Russ and how he responded VERBALLY. Having worked at multiple jobs as a telephone CS person, and many more years in retail, I caught something very different. A) He sounded tired. (He even pointed out a 6 hour meeting in-house. Trust me, those suck, and I doubt he had an opportunity for a nap.) He's limited by what can be done in a 6 month window to turn things around.

I feel that an immediate patch for the main problems, with the available functionality, would be to turn off virtually all CW functionality and force PUGs, taking the power out of the players and leave the "powers that be" determine planet flipping based on success of matches. Basically, reset CW so that it's like QP, but allowing the 4 mech drops per player. Beats turning off CW alltogether while things are given a major overhaul.

Luerim

[Baulven]

Luerim, on 05 August 2016 - 01:03 PM, said:

There's basic issues I have with both QP and CW in that I have enough mechs (28-30 depending on where I am finishing up XP dumps) to create specialized builds for certain situations. Going blind into a map like the Grims with LRM boats is a waste of a mech. Similarly, a fast mech with flamers on any of the frozen maps is just stupid fun (flamers do **** damage and have miserable range, but mech shutdown lasts several seconds, and can turn a tide, especially if you can shut down two or three bunched up), but the reward system rewards damage done and kills above and beyond any other measure, so flamer heavy builds just don't measure up.

If there were a way to tailor drops available in my bay to a particular map and/or team (knowing their composition BEFORE dropping) especially for FP/CW and PUGS, I would play FP/CW more often. I think multiple drop sets are a preparation for this sort of functionality in the long run.

The scouting aspect of the FP/CW and it being lance vs. lance was a wonderfully interesting move in what, I feel, was the right direction, but has devolved quickly into a sitch where it's an auto clan-win if it's IS vs Clan.

A lot of naysayers in the last 7 pages comment on Russ and how he responded VERBALLY. Having worked at multiple jobs as a telephone CS person, and many more years in retail, I caught something very different. A) He sounded tired. (He even pointed out a 6 hour meeting in-house. Trust me, those suck, and I doubt he had an opportunity for a nap.) He's limited by what can be done in a 6 month window to turn things around.

I feel that an immediate patch for the main problems, with the available functionality, would be to turn off virtually all CW functionality and force PUGs, taking the power out of the players and leave the "powers that be" determine planet flipping based on success of matches. Basically, reset CW so that it's like QP, but allowing the 4 mech drops per player. Beats turning off CW alltogether while things are given a major overhaul.

Luerim

Clan vs IS isn't an auto win on scouting. Even if they bring the dreaded stream crows IS has two immediate options: AC20s that focus fire or actually playing the mode and ignoring mechs to scout. Yea I know that the second option isn't popular but that's how I always run rather since my objective is to win, not kill mechs, since that isn't what the mode is about. The only limiting factor is streaks make it harder for the last second dive into extraction for IS, but so do AC20s.

[MischiefSC]

Ac20s have to aim.

That's the issue. Group v group it's pretty close. Problem is pugs. Pug v pug the "don't have to aim, do 48 pts" is problematic.

[AnTi90d]

Luerim, on 05 August 2016 - 01:03 PM, said:

Going blind into a map like the Grims with LRM boats is a waste of a mech. Similarly, a fast mech with flamers on any of the frozen maps is just stupid fun

If you do play before FP is touched, again.. here's a guide that shows which map slice is which map and that map's affect on your heat scale.

[Baulven]

MischiefSC, on 05 August 2016 - 04:09 PM, said:

Ac20s have to aim.

That's the issue. Group v group it's pretty close. Problem is pugs. Pug v pug the "don't have to aim, do 48 pts" is problematic.

Yea but that's spread everywhere. And if it's pugs vs pugs it's very unlikely it's 4 streak grows so mediums still will push it's face in. Also ECM makes stream crows really, really terrible.

[Pat Kell]

Baulven, on 05 August 2016 - 09:20 PM, said:

Yea but that's spread everywhere. And if it's pugs vs pugs it's very unlikely it's 4 streak grows so mediums still will push it's face in. Also ECM makes stream crows really, really terrible.

Not for nothin, but I don't know that I have ever seen IS with long tom....I know I have never fought against it. I am sure they have but from my experience a vast majority of the time, clans are the ones who have scouted to long tom which suggests some sort of imbalance towards the clan side of things.

You could spend all day arguing over what is causing that but PGI is the ones with all the raw data and I hope that they are spending some time reviewing that data and seeing if there is a way to even that out some. Maybe going down to 50 tons...maybe reducing clan streak range to match IS ranges on streaks...several good options out there to test out.

Edited by Pat Kell, 05 August 2016 - 11:55 PM.

[diablo595]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 07 August 2016 - 11:46 AM.
inappropriate, toxic

[Pat Kell]

diablo595, on 05 August 2016 - 11:45 PM, said:

[Redacted]

Personally, not a fan of liberals but this guy has been making some pretty rational arguments (with a bit of snarky personal attacks as well ). Making assumptions about some ones beliefs based on some manufactured label seems to be the irrational and condescending thing to do. Not saying that his arguments couldn't have been toned down a bit and hence been better received maybe but you are doing exactly what he is claiming people are doing, which is to make personal attacks based purely on your own personal experience that have no relevance to the argument at hand. Just because he's a liberal (an assumption in and of itself, I don't care for Donald Trump at all and I am about as far from being a liberal as is possible) doesn't mean his arguments aren't valid or at least worthy of consideration and being answered in a way that isn't resorting to name calling, personal attacks and wild assumptions. You can do better than this.

Edited by draiocht, 07 August 2016 - 11:47 AM.
Quote Clean-Up

[Baulven]

Pat Kell, on 05 August 2016 - 11:38 PM, said:

Not for nothin, but I don't know that I have ever seen IS with long tom....I know I have never fought against it. I am sure they have but from my experience a vast majority of the time, clans are the ones who have scouted to long tom which suggests some sort of imbalance towards the clan side of things.

You could spend all day arguing over what is causing that but PGI is the ones with all the raw data and I hope that they are spending some time reviewing that data and seeing if there is a way to even that out some. Maybe going down to 50 tons...maybe reducing clan streak range to match IS ranges on streaks...several good options out there to test out.

FRR was receiving long tom frequently before we started fielding coordinated groups to counter even for fighting pugs in ghost bear. We stopped them by playing the game mode split up and running from the rest of the group when found by their brawl force (always fun to be a rabbit), or by focusing fire at knife range. Hell I sold my crows because I was always focused even when I brought my laser knife fight option because people were always agitated that they were fielded.

The big problem is no one wants to play the game mode, because playing the mode gives you ****** rewards. If the rewards were increased for winning vs inflicting damage it would lead to better play.

[Lomak]

Edited by Lomak, 06 August 2016 - 04:20 AM.

[Kyrie]

Yes, FP could indeed be described as reclassified to "living impaired".

What is dead may never die. :-)

[Void Angel]

diablo595, on 05 August 2016 - 11:45 PM, said:

[Redacted]

Pat Kell, on 06 August 2016 - 12:02 AM, said:

Personally, not a fan of liberals but this guy has been making some pretty rational arguments (with a bit of snarky personal attacks as well ). Making assumptions about some ones beliefs based on some manufactured label seems to be the irrational and condescending thing to do. Not saying that his arguments couldn't have been toned down a bit and hence been better received maybe but you are doing exactly what he is claiming people are doing, which is to make personal attacks based purely on your own personal experience that have no relevance to the argument at hand. Just because he's a liberal (an assumption in and of itself, I don't care for Donald Trump at all and I am about as far from being a liberal as is possible) doesn't mean his arguments aren't valid or at least worthy of consideration and being answered in a way that isn't resorting to name calling, personal attacks and wild assumptions. You can do better than this.

No, no! Don't disturb it! Quite aside from the fact that I'm a card carrying conservative (in both political jargon and the popular sense,) the irony contained in that short statement was perfect - a shining moment in time.

In my defense, however, while I certainly have been mean to arguments, I have not stooped to personal attacks in making them. My comments have been directed at the reasoning processes and arguments employed against me, not directed at the people themselves. Many of my opponents have not been so kind - but I don't really mind it.

I've been ramping up the intensity, to be sure - but I've done that because it's obvious that the people I'm arguing with aren't really interested in the truth. Since they've allowed their dissatisfaction with PGI's past decisions to become a basis for evaluating new decisions, I'll never convince them - their worldview doesn't respond to facts logically any more. So putting more pressure on them with a more aggressive argumentative approach pushes them to show bystanders how they really feel and think.

Edited by draiocht, 07 August 2016 - 11:47 AM.
Quote Clean-Up

[Surn]

The availability of iic mechs to clan or is needs to be based upon planets occupied. So if plaNet x is clan controlled, the orion iic is considered clan in the entire game...

[DaFrog]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 07 August 2016 - 10:53 AM.
nonconstructive, picking a fight

[Livewyr]

FW has about as much depth as quickplay.