16 replies to this topic

[AWOL 01]

To start off, I'd like to say that I enjoy playing this game. It's far from perfect or where I'd like it to be but it's one of, if not the only, place I can get my stompy robot fix. I personally was happy to see the changes planned for the coming months. It's a little sparse... but there wasn't anything I didn't like about it.

However, the overwhelming majority of responses to the roadmap were negative, and I have to say it's understandable, and after being on the forums for a while now, I've grown very concerned for the game in the last few months (around Phase 3). So I decided I'd put in my 2 cents on what I'd do if I were heading up this project. I'm obviously not, and I'm not qualified to, so this is basically a layman's opinion, but I'm going to try to stay as realistic as possible (ie no "fix FP by August patch").

Here it goes:

Spoiler

August, September, October: Maps and Game Modes

Priority 1 is adding new maps and game modes for QP. The majority of the community is playing QP, and it's (what I believe) is one of the main things keeping the population from vanishing. The players want new content so for these 3 months I would be adding using the assets from FP maps to make similarly themed QP maps (Grim Portico - Grim Plexus). This would add 4 maps that are similar to Boreal Vault, Emerald Taiga, Hellebore Springs, and Vitric Forge. I'd also push for adding the urban map that the community has been pushing for for months. For game modes, I would work on adding the most-requested by the players; ones that have been suggested for years like VIP/Convoy Escort, Rescue missions, as well as working on making the current modes more MechWarrior-esque.

November, December, January: Old Mechs and Gameplay

After getting some new maps and game modes out, I'd try to keep maps coming out every 2-3 months to keep players satisfied. The focus during this time would be cleaning up gameplay and general QoL things, along with fixing things that have been taken out due to bugs/performance/etc. This would include:
Inverse Kinematics
Collisions/Knockdowns
Melee/DFA
Jump Jet Thrust
CoF or other system to prevent pinpoint damage
Weapon Balance (PPCs, MGs, etc.)
In-game Chat
Stock/3025 Queues
4v4/8v8/12v12 Queues
These (or other ideas) would be added in order of importance to the community. During this time, there would be no new mech packs. Instead, all old chassis would have all available variants added, along with a sale and rebalance to hitboxes, quirks, maybe even hardpoints, whether these are buffs or nerfs, to bring mechs to the same general viability in relation to its weight class.

February, March, April: Faction Play

These 3 months would focus on bringing Faction Play to the forefront of MWO on the following ways:
4v4 Scouting for Light Mechs
8v8 QP-style matches for Mediums and Lights
12v12 Invasion following Rebas Kradd's suggestions
Lore-based changes like mech availability bonuses...
Map revamps to get rid of limited attack lanes
Improve rewards to equal/greater than QP
If the playerbase has grown enough the suggested bucket fixes may not be needed, but if not those would be implemented also, again depending on the community's requests.
At this time, I would also be promoting HBS's BattleTech game and playing off their hype to get more people into the BT universe.

Going Forward:
Continue adding maps and game modes and finish off timeline-appropriate mechs. Once everything is running smoothly, and the game is sitting on Four Pillars, move the timeline forward and add new mechs and weapons. Also add a Clan Invasion mode along with Stock and 3025 mode options.

These are just general ideas but the TL;DR version is:
August/September/October: Add maps and modes to stop the decrease of population in the game.
November/December/January: Improve gameplay to restore the Four Pillars and increase the player population.
February/March/April: Fix Faction Play to make it the focal point of the game.
After: Timeline jump (new mechs & weapons).

What would your Roadmap look like? Please keep it relatively constructive.

Disclaimer: The timeline may be wrong on this, but I feel the priorities listed are in the right place.

[Lily from animove]

why more maps, people choose 90% of the time the same 3 maps anyways. (at least felt like 90% of the time)

also with your existing crew you will msotlikely not get serveral maps per month because not everyone can make maps in your team you have various people for various jobs and they should do whats within their skills.

your roadmap is extremely unbalanced in actually providing proper work for all the different skilled people in a dev team.

[cazidin]

Personally, I'd dedicate an entire PTS session to Weapon Balance Phase II. If I lacked the resources, or the authority to request a PTS session, I would simply hope for the best.

[Mawai]

My Roadmap?

- Skill revamp ... charge MC for respecs ... instant revenue stream
- new maps - integrate FW maps into QP and QP maps into FW ... why they have two completely distinct sets of map assets ... I have no idea ... such a waste ... perhaps add customizations to the maps for use in each role so they are some distinctions but they should make use of them
- FW - remove long Tom ... try to come up with better capture/win mechanics ... have additional scenarios like destroy an enemy drop ship ... capture manufacturing facilities ... eliminate defending mechs ... the addition of scouting missions was a great idea but the mechanic of running around capturing individual "info" canisters sounds like an arcade game ... scouting missions could range from recovering intel, rescuing downed mech warriors, destroying a major communications array ... consider all the kinds of scenarios you have seen in previous PVE mechwarrior titles and then put real players on both sides with specific goals they have to achieve ... that may be different from mission to mission ... make FW something almost everyone wants to play ... maybe integrate the QP queues as a factor in FW (lots of design thought needed there though).
- fix more QoL items ... have someone tasked to collect and colate feedback from the community on what irks them most with the interface .. consider options and fix them (they are already doing some good work here)
- GH2.0 or whatever .. mechanic needs to be reasonable and intuitive
- continuous and ongoing weapon balance tweaks ... make small changes to the XML to improve overall balance ... these would only be small changes and data mining results should be used as the basis to support either making changes or not making changes
- improved communication ... take a page from other developers out there ... the impression I have at the moment is that PGI might be a bit distracted from MWO ... which makes you wonder what they might be working on in-house on the side.

[Consider the brevity of the 3 month roadmap update ... the generally small amount of content (though some good ones) ... the fact that the update was a week late ... even with a small shop like PGI ... it seems to me that the roadmap is only accounting for 50% and possibly as little as 25% of the available artist and developer time ... which makes you wonder where the rest is going]

Edited by Mawai, 09 August 2016 - 07:17 AM.

[AWOL 01]

Lily from animove, on 09 August 2016 - 06:52 AM, said:

why more maps, people choose 90% of the time the same 3 maps anyways. (at least felt like 90% of the time)

also with your existing crew you will msotlikely not get serveral maps per month because not everyone can make maps in your team you have various people for various jobs and they should do whats within their skills.

your roadmap is extremely unbalanced in actually providing proper work for all the different skilled people in a dev team.

People play the same maps because those play the best, so aspects from those maps would be reused to make maps people enjoy playing. A lot of people have been asking for new maps instead of new mech packs every month, so I figured it would be a good place to start.

In my roadmap there would be 4 (maybe 5) maps added in 4 months (assuming work began before the quarter) which seems doable since 3 new map designers were hired recently.

The other members of the dev team would be working on the game modes, so I wouldn't say it's "extremely unbalanced," and like I said, this is just a general idea.

[Kael Posavatz]

Some of these suggestions assume PGI has CIG's staffing.

[AWOL 01]

Mawai, on 09 August 2016 - 07:16 AM, said:

My Roadmap?

Spoiler

- Skill revamp ... charge MC for respecs ... instant revenue stream
- new maps - integrate FW maps into QP and QP maps into FW ... why they have two completely distinct sets of map assets ... I have no idea ... such a waste ... perhaps add customizations to the maps for use in each role so they are some distinctions but they should make use of them
- FW - remove long Tom ... try to come up with better capture/win mechanics ... have additional scenarios like destroy an enemy drop ship ... capture manufacturing facilities ... eliminate defending mechs ... the addition of scouting missions was a great idea but the mechanic of running around capturing individual "info" canisters sounds like an arcade game ... scouting missions could range from recovering intel, rescuing downed mech warriors, destroying a major communications array ... consider all the kinds of scenarios you have seen in previous PVE mechwarrior titles and then put real players on both sides with specific goals they have to achieve ... that may be different from mission to mission ... make FW something almost everyone wants to play ... maybe integrate the QP queues as a factor in FW (lots of design thought needed there though).
- fix more QoL items ... have someone tasked to collect and colate feedback from the community on what irks them most with the interface .. consider options and fix them (they are already doing some good work here)
- GH2.0 or whatever .. mechanic needs to be reasonable and intuitive
- continuous and ongoing weapon balance tweaks ... make small changes to the XML to improve overall balance ... these would only be small changes and data mining results should be used as the basis to support either making changes or not making changes
- improved communication ... take a page from other developers out there ... the impression I have at the moment is that PGI might be a bit distracted from MWO ... which makes you wonder what they might be working on in-house on the side.

[Consider the brevity of the 3 month roadmap update ... the generally small amount of content (though some good ones) ... the fact that the update was a week late ... even with a small shop like PGI ... it seems to me that the roadmap is only accounting for 50% and possibly as little as 25% of the available artist and developer time ... which makes you wonder where the rest is going]

I completely agree. Integrating maps into FP and QP, additional scenarios, QoL... Glad to see other people on the same page.

I've also been wondering about the workload distribution at PGI and if they have a side project going on possibly. Kinda hope not...

[fastspec2]

I love it, You ask an open ended question about what others PERSONAL roadmaps would be and instead of people answering them you get your idea stomped. "Your idea sucks, there isn't the resources, the devs do not have the time".

"So if you won the lottery what would your dream car be? I would really like a Ford gt."
"Thats stuipid! Ford doesnt make enough of them, you can't afford the insurance or the gas, and it only fits 2 people! PFF!!!!!"


My roadmap? Or at least my wandering trail of ideas.
Cancel the twitter account. Its stupid and undermines the game.
I really like the previous guys PTS idea. Id either use the PTS or for a month strait, I'd change weapon balance every week live. You could learn alot with those changes i think. At the end, go through your notes and tweak from there. maybe once a month?

I'd like to see the mech train stop for a bit and concentrate on game dev.
I'd love to see a dedicated city map. One that doesn't have a 300meter view range anywhere. One without a stupid anything directly in the middle. Seems there is either a hole or a mountain in the middle of every map.

Things I would like to try. Either pts or live and see how it goes
I'd love to see some real dedication put into non combat class balance. Role warfare and the payout for sure.
Things like making lights harder to detect, with better view ranges then there assault counterparts, I'd like assaults to see some solid structure buffs. Maybe not armor, but at least structure.
Payout increases for non combat roles. spotting, payout for haveing the same mech targeted as your team or better yet lance mate while damage is done, countdown speed increase on domination for the number of mechs in the circle (your team rushes the circle with all 12, the other team with 3, your team still gets a count down, no more ACH in the radar dish while everyone else on the other team stands back and snipes at you) Domination was supposed to encourage brawling (at least I think it was) Its a blender, lets put it on liquify. I think its worth a try.
Cap countdown speed based on mech weight. You fought through the entire enemy team with your assault lance, it should count down faster then a few lights capping. They are after all ASSAULT mechs.
I'd like to try los LRMS work like SRM's or something like it. I see him, no arc required, fast travel time.
Maybe its just me, but i struggle with ppc's. I'd love to see an iconic game weapon be more relevant.
I'd definitely redo the skill tree. Its a mess that makes no sense.

If i had keys to the castle, id like to see a contest that involves the players and how they would balance weapons. Let the players mod the weapons spread sheet for a few drops, we all play, we vote on how it worked we use what we learned to effect the game play.
Maybe do the same with mech quirks to a certain degree.
Involving the player base in the game dev is important IMHO. And in all fairness, it seems like other then the art guy, all pgi does is fuss with spreadsheet files and calls it "balance" and while i know next to nothing about spreadsheets, it seams that alot of you do and for the most part I trust your judgment at least as much as PGI's

Edited by fastspec2, 09 August 2016 - 07:53 AM.

[AWOL 01]

fastspec2, on 09 August 2016 - 07:50 AM, said:

I love it, You ask an open ended question about what others PERSONAL roadmaps would be and instead of people answering them you get your idea stomped. "Your idea sucks, there isn't the resources, the devs do not have the time".

"So if you won the lottery what would your dream car be? I would really like a Ford gt."
"Thats stuipid! Ford doesnt make enough of them, you can't afford the insurance or the gas, and it only fits 2 people! PFF!!!!!"


My roadmap? Or at least my wandering trail of ideas.
Cancel the twitter account. Its stupid and undermines the game.
I really like the previous guys PTS idea. Id either use the PTS or for a month strait, I'd change weapon balance every week live. You could learn alot with those changes i think. At the end, go through your notes and tweak from there. maybe once a month?

I'd like to see the mech train stop for a bit and concentrate on game dev.
I'd love to see a dedicated city map. One that doesn't have a 300meter view range anywhere. One without a stupid anything directly in the middle. Seems there is either a hole or a mountain in the middle of every map.

Things I would like to try. Either pts or live and see how it goes
I'd love to see some real dedication put into non combat class balance. Role warfare and the payout for sure.
Things like making lights harder to detect, with better view ranges then there assault counterparts, I'd like assaults to see some solid structure buffs. Maybe not armor, but at least structure.
Payout increases for non combat roles. spotting, payout for haveing the same mech targeted as your team or better yet lance mate while damage is done, countdown speed increase on domination for the number of mechs in the circle (your team rushes the circle with all 12, the other team with 3, your team still gets a count down, no more ACH in the radar dish while everyone else on the other team stands back and snipes at you) Domination was supposed to encourage brawling (at least I think it was) Its a blender, lets put it on liquify. I think its worth a try.
Cap countdown speed based on mech weight. You fought through the entire enemy team with your assault lance, it should count down faster then a few lights capping. They are after all ASSAULT mechs.
I'd like to try los LRMS work like SRM's or something like it. I see him, no arc required, fast travel time.
Maybe its just me, but i struggle with ppc's. I'd love to see an iconic game weapon be more relevant.
I'd definitely redo the skill tree. Its a mess that makes no sense.

If i had keys to the castle, id like to see a contest that involves the players and how they would balance weapons. Let the players mod the weapons spread sheet for a few drops, we all play, we vote on how it worked we use what we learned to effect the game play.
Maybe do the same with mech quirks to a certain degree.
Involving the player base in the game dev is important IMHO. And in all fairness, it seems like other then the art guy, all pgi does is fuss with spreadsheet files and calls it "balance" and while i know next to nothing about spreadsheets, it seams that alot of you do and for the most part I trust your judgment at least as much as PGI's

Yeah it kinda sucks but I try not to take it to heart. It's just a symptom of the game showing up on the forums.

I get the Twitter account and how it's probably a lot easier, but I agree it is mainly a distraction and you can't get much substance from so few characters. PTS could be used WAY more than it is currently. Things should be tested their constantly - weapon balance, quirks, new mechs that are being released (they did it with Clan mechs, do they still do it?). It should be a thing that excites players because of the new and different things showing up there.

I'd really like to see lore-based percentages of weight classes implemented, whether it's limiting access to assaults and heavies, or forcing the matchmaker to limit assaults and heavies, but lights and mediums should make up the majority of the company, and losing an assault or heavy should be devastating. FP drop weight should be 200 tons instead of 240 or whatever, so that the average weight is 50 tons (medium) instead of 60 (heavy).

This means lights need more incentive to be played. Base scoring on how well you played your mech's role (scout, light hunter, brawler...) instead of just damage.

Countdown speed based on tonnage +1

It would be cool to be able to modify the game and experiment with armor, structure, quirks, weapons, jumpjets, etc. and play with friends. Even if PGI didn't use your changes, it would be a lot of fun when/if you get bored to be able to have a separate game install (like PTS) that players can mess with.

[Tyler Valentine]

Excellent and we'll thought out post OP. I wish PGI would actually read this and take your suggestions to heart.

[Kael Posavatz]

AWOL 01, on 09 August 2016 - 07:29 AM, said:

I've also been wondering about the workload distribution at PGI and if they have a side project going on possibly. Kinda hope not...

Frankly it depends on what it is. Having a single revenue stream is always a problem, especially for game producer. A second game also means being able to share costs that have nothing to do with MWO (rent, power, water, management staff, etc.) get split between multiple revenue streams.

I was pretty happy when PGI announced they were doing a second game.

I was...how can I put this politely... I was not happy when they decided to try entering into competition with Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen.

[Kirkland Langue]

Lily from animove, on 09 August 2016 - 06:52 AM, said:

why more maps, people choose 90% of the time the same 3 maps anyways. (at least felt like 90% of the time)

PGI actually exacerbates this problem because not all maps are offered at equal rates. Mordor shows up about 5% of the time, maybe less; as an example. I'm sure PGI justifies this by saying that maps show up more frequently if they are picked more frequently (to reflect what players want to play), but that just reinforces the bias of players to pick certain maps.

But, putting that aside, more maps in rotation would increase variety simply because those overplayed maps would be less likely to show up in the vote. Not to mention that new maps are pretty much always going to get swamped with votes as players want to see the new map. If every month a new map is added to the mix - the game would remain vibrant far far longer.

[AWOL 01]

Tyler Valentine, on 09 August 2016 - 01:43 PM, said:

Excellent and we'll thought out post OP. I wish PGI would actually read this and take your suggestions to heart.

Thank you, I honestly just want to see the game succeed.

Kael Posavatz, on 09 August 2016 - 01:48 PM, said:

Frankly it depends on what it is. Having a single revenue stream is always a problem, especially for game producer. A second game also means being able to share costs that have nothing to do with MWO (rent, power, water, management staff, etc.) get split between multiple revenue streams.

I was pretty happy when PGI announced they were doing a second game.

I was...how can I put this politely... I was not happy when they decided to try entering into competition with Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen.

I never thought of it that way. I agree that I wasn't enthused by PGI's other attempt, and if they are currently making a second game I hope it's similar to MWO with mechs/tanks/etc. so they at least have the same base.

[Kirkland Langue]

PGI stated that MWO was "feature complete" when they announced Transverse.
But, I miss the Transverse forums almost as much as I miss any girlfriend I've ever had.

The level of negativity aimed at PGI was a work of art.

[Tarl Cabot]

Even on the existing maps, they could expand the entire map in a way where they build up on in some areas and cut off in others, to make each sectional map similar but not identical to the others.. Or to put it in another way, a very large map divided up into sections where each a piece of a section would overlay another one, if laid out on top of each other.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 09 August 2016 - 04:11 PM.

[Elizander]

Tarl Cabot, on 09 August 2016 - 04:10 PM, said:

Even on the existing maps, they could expand the entire map in a way where they build up on in some areas and cut off in others, to make each sectional map similar but not identical to the others.. Or to put it in another way, a very large map divided up into sections where each a piece of a section would overlay another one, if laid out on top of each other.

A large map turned into sections that make it seem like you're advancing or making progress on a victory would be nice.

[AWOL 01]

Tarl Cabot, on 09 August 2016 - 04:10 PM, said:

Even on the existing maps, they could expand the entire map in a way where they build up on in some areas and cut off in others, to make each sectional map similar but not identical to the others.. Or to put it in another way, a very large map divided up into sections where each a piece of a section would overlay another one, if laid out on top of each other.

Elizander, on 09 August 2016 - 06:05 PM, said:

A large map turned into sections that make it seem like you're advancing or making progress on a victory would be nice.

That's actually just recently been proposed in the following thread after the FP Round Table.
http://mwomercs.com/...well-ever-need/

What I'd like to see (and I posted this in the thread) is:
"1. Current 4v4 Scouting mode (with some polishing) with a 35-40 ton drop limit to emphasise the use of Light mechs, which were most common in Battletech lore.
2. This gamemode with 8 players on each side, with 2-4 respawns and a 110 ton drop limit to emphasise the use of Medium and Light mechs, again because they were most common.
3. A final 12v12 push to take the planet using Rebas Kradd's suggested Invasion gamemode, which would emphasise the use of Heavies and Assaults.

This way, the invasion of a planet could be done in phases. The first phase would be the initial spearhead to establish a landing zone on the planet. Once enough Scouting matches are won, the Rush matches would begin to take points of interest on the planet. Finally, when a certain number of Rush matches are won, Invasion matches take place to capture the enemy bases on the planet and, if successful, transfer control of the planet to the attacking team. Or, the attacking team could keep Scouting or Rushing to gain support (artillery, satellites, etc.) for the final push."

Also, if there was both a FP and QP map for each theme/environment, the maps could be combined to form one massive map, even if only part of it is used for the game mode you're playing.

For example, Viridian Big could be used for Scouting matches, but then add 2 large corridors to each end for the Rush mode proposed above, with one of these leading to a Viridian Bog-themed Invasion map. Use Out of Bounds borders to separate the sections depending on the game mode you're in and voilá. I'm thinking this might be a little more hard on lower-end computers though, but I'm not sure...