17 replies to this topic

[Alistair Winter]

Bear with me. This is just another academic discussion with no real impact on the actual game. Incidentally, that's kind of a general theme for all my threads. And this whole forum, if we're being honest. (Heh, jokes)

Ok, so right now, we've got QP and FP. QP is just one queue with a matchmaker, FP is divided into buckets and two different game modes (Invasion and Scouting) with no matchmaker.

It is my personal opinion that MWO should never have been organized like this, because it kind of splits what I consider the two major sub-groups of MWO fans (the esport crowd who enjoy competitive gaming at the highest level possible versus the hardcore Battletech crowd who complain that MWO isn't really a Battletech experience) across both QP and FP, with neither place feeling like home for either group.

Furthermore, it does seem like we're going to get Solaris at some point, with Russ talking about Solaris as both free-for-all (with Leaderboards for individual players) or 8v8 deathmatches (with Leaderboards for best teams) and Paul working on 1v1, 2v2 and 4v4 competitive maps, while basically saying outright that they will be used for Solaris. Whatever that means.

So how do you combine QP, FP and Solaris, and is that even PGI's intention? Also, with a lot of people asking for something like QP with respawn, so you can enjoy short queues and jump straight into action and have longer matches with respawn, instead of constantly disconnecting and finding new matches, how would you incorporate such an option, if at all?

Here's an example, to show what an answer might look like.

Spoiler

• Replace QP and FP with Solaris and Galactic Warfare.
  
• Solaris works basically like QP, except there are only 2 queues. One is Solo queue, with standard deathmatches. 16 players, one survivor per match. The other is group queue with 8v8 skirmish matches.
  
• Solaris would only use Solaris arena maps only, and they would all be fairly symmetrical in at least one axis, to ensure balanced 8v8 matches.
  
• Galactic Warfare would have 2 options for players to choose from: Frontline and Invasion.
  
• Frontline: This is essentially like QP, using current QP maps (Frozen City, Forest Colony, etc) without a specific location on the galaxy map. It represents the most important battles in the galaxy. If you join this queue, you're put on either a Clan or a Inner Sphere team, fighting either a Clan or an Inner Sphere team. It's basically just like the QP we have right now, except everybody gets put on either a Clan or Inner Sphere team, and you get loyalty points for representing your faction. In short: Quick Play with a tiny touch of Battletech. Unlike Solaris and QP, however, you use a drop deck. So you get to play up to 4 mechs in every match, unless someone wins the match early. If you die, you get redeployed via dropship.
  
• In Frontline, players would vote for Game mode same as current QP. Conquest, Assault, Skirmish or <shudder> Domination. But Conquest and Domination would need drastic improvements, just like PGI is doing for Assault, in order to make this the objective-based warfare people have been asking for. Turrets, bases, destructible walls, the whole nine yards.
  
• Invasion: Since PGI already put so much time into Invasion and some people seem to enjoy it, may as well leave it as an option for the people who are interested. 12-man invasion mode on Invasion maps. They would need to do something drastic to reduce "buckets". I don't care about this, because I hate Invasion mode, but it makes no sense to remove it from the game, because you'll lose a couple of hundred players who really like it.
  
• You could probably remove 4-man Scouting from MWO, to be honest. About 7 people would be upset, I think.

Another answer might be to keep things exactly how they are, and add Solaris as a third alternative to QP and FP, if you think things are great as they are.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 26 August 2016 - 01:55 PM.

[XtremWarrior]

This is not the first time this idea shows up.

I like your version but would change a few thing:

- Give a bigger pool of zones to conquer on planets, QP (Frontline) launches you into a random contested planet on the galactic map (from your faction or a friendly one). No respawn though, the usual QP.
- Every match count as Invasion games right now concerning the planet ownership.
- Invasion game mode stay as is, but give a greater reward than the shorter QP (Frontline) game toward planetary control (say 5 times the Frontline reward).

- I would also give Solaris some kind of a Challenge League: 1 vs 1 games with increased reward for each consecutive wins and a leaderboard for the players with the longest win-streak.
I know not every one wants to play Uber 1337 Mech Shooter Online but i think it'd be cool if there was a way to get full "My Mech is biggerstronger than your"!
Because...
Lore!
of course

Edited by XtremWarrior, 26 August 2016 - 03:28 PM.

[Hunka Junk]

Quote

Another answer might be to keep things exactly how they are, and add Solaris as a third alternative to QP and FP, if you think things are great as they are.

^That is the simple reality. Basically, what we have here is a mech design business that is a subsidiary of big floopsy flopsy other business. One has schedules, short and long term planning, clear goals, hard deadlines, and is profitable. The other business outside of the mech design team has no deadlines, vague goals, skeletal planning, and is funded by the fruits of the mech design team's labor. Were the mech design team reassigned to handle some combining of game modes, there might be more possibilities. Instead, it is this other part of the business that would handle such a thing, and this is not the kind of thing you want handled floopsy-flopsily.

Edited by Hunka Junk, 26 August 2016 - 03:39 PM.

[XtremWarrior]

Waitwhut?

Hunka Junk, on 26 August 2016 - 03:38 PM, said:

Were the mech design team reassigned to handle some combining of game modes, there might be more possibilities.

I must be wrong but what i read here is: make Alex (the artist behind MWO's look), the 3d modelers, the camos and textures artists all be assigned to create game-modes? You know it's like asking them to do a whole other job, don't you?

[Hunka Junk]

XtremWarrior, on 27 August 2016 - 01:00 AM, said:

Waitwhut?



I must be wrong but what i read here is: make Alex (the artist behind MWO's look), the 3d modelers, the camos and textures artists all be assigned to create game-modes? You know it's like asking them to do a whole other job, don't you?

I understand that. It was just my way of saying Alex's team functions like a mature, experienced dev team should while the rest is not held to the same standards of consistent quality output in a consistent timeframe.

It's my way of saying one division of this outfit is held to far higher standards and expectations than the other divisions. In turn, the community is far more positive in its understanding of what the mech dev team does and their reception of its product.

It's true that some people feel that there are many who think that fewer mechs would be better in favor of other new content, but this is a testament to how the mech development team regularly and drastically outperforms the rest of the company. The whole "Wanna buy a mech?" meme that permeates these forums boils down to Alex and his team doing what the other divisions cannot.

No, his team is probably not best suited to developing new maps and such, but maybe we'd have new maps and such if there was a publicly laid out plan to add X new maps per year and a concrete deadline for finishing this work. IOW, maybe they're not the best for the task, but their business model/operating procedures could and should be applied elsewhere in MWO product development.

[Alistair Winter]

XtremWarrior, on 27 August 2016 - 01:00 AM, said:

Waitwhut?
I must be wrong but what i read here is: make Alex (the artist behind MWO's look), the 3d modelers, the camos and textures artists all be assigned to create game-modes? You know it's like asking them to do a whole other job, don't you?

I think he's saying that the art department has better management, and they're operating with deadlines and better planning, whereas other departments in PGI aren't doing that. However, I think he's underestimating the number of surprises and unexpected problems in other departments, such as balancing and coding, in a small and relatively inexperienced company like PGI. Not to mention that some of their staff in other departments may not be the world's leading experts in their field. For example, I don't think PGI has the best map designers in the world.

But problems and unexpected delays are more likely to happen with technical issues and balancing issues. "Wait, we can't seem to get Infotech quirks balanced right" or "Wait, we can't get those cockpit monitors working without seriously reducing FPS". Those kind of delays aren't likely to happen in the art department. It's not like Alex is going to say "Oh wait, I can't figure out what leg design looks best on the Night Gyr! We have to delay this mech for another 3 weeks while I figure this out!" It's a more predictable process. 2D design - 3D design - Animation and textures.

[Hunka Junk]

Balancing may be different. Maps aren't.

[Clownwarlord]

OK I have an idea and a lot probably are not going to like it. BUT this will help buckets and balancing.

First get rid of solo and group cue. Next allow a max group of 4 players (no mech restrictions). After that no more than 1 group of 4 per team and build you match maker off of tonnage not psr (psr was working but now it is not).

Second Faction Warfare needs a match maker built that groups face groups and then psr or something better gets used to fill in. Sadly Faction Warfare still needs more work than that; corridor warfare, long tom, but at least this way groups are less likely to stomp solo players which will hopefully increase the player base for Faction Warfare some what. By also creating a match making system it is not creating anymore buckets, but there is a possible down side ... with a lower player count the longer then match maker will take just like solo and group cue do now. Although long wait times in Faction Warfare are not unheard of ... *remembers back to waiting 50 minutes for a match one time while I played Halo on my old xbox*.

[Johnny Z]

Good topic, it will be interesting to see how it all comes together.

[Johnny Z]

Alistair Winter, on 27 August 2016 - 01:42 AM, said:

I think he's saying that the art department has better management, and they're operating with deadlines and better planning, whereas other departments in PGI aren't doing that. However, I think he's underestimating the number of surprises and unexpected problems in other departments, such as balancing and coding, in a small and relatively inexperienced company like PGI. Not to mention that some of their staff in other departments may not be the world's leading experts in their field. For example, I don't think PGI has the best map designers in the world.

But problems and unexpected delays are more likely to happen with technical issues and balancing issues. &quot;Wait, we can't seem to get Infotech quirks balanced right&quot; or &quot;Wait, we can't get those cockpit monitors working without seriously reducing FPS&quot;. Those kind of delays aren't likely to happen in the art department. It's not like Alex is going to say &quot;Oh wait, I can't figure out what leg design looks best on the Night Gyr! We have to delay this mech for another 3 weeks while I figure this out!&quot; It's a more predictable process. 2D design - 3D design - Animation and textures.

I think the finished maps are very well done. Quite a few of them are not finished yet and when all are done and taken as a whole, and new maps are added, it looks really good.

[Metus regem]

I'd rename quick play Solaris and make one of the modes FFA and call it a day on that end. For Faction Play, I'd switch it up and have Clan Front and IS Front for que modes, this would make use of the multiple drop decks we now have... If you have one set Clan (Scouts and Battle) and one set IS, you are matched to what ever side has the biggest need of players, and use the appropriate drop deck.... I'd also change scouting to a weight limit of 45t, 'cause you know scouting.

[Alistair Winter]

Hunka Junk, on 27 August 2016 - 04:09 AM, said:

Balancing may be different. Maps aren't.

I agree.

Captain Luffy, on 27 August 2016 - 04:52 AM, said:

OK I have an idea and a lot probably are not going to like it. BUT this will help buckets and balancing.
First get rid of solo and group cue. Next allow a max group of 4 players (no mech restrictions). After that no more than 1 group of 4 per team and build you match maker off of tonnage not psr (psr was working but now it is not).
Second Faction Warfare needs a match maker built that groups face groups and then psr or something better gets used to fill in. Sadly Faction Warfare still needs more work than that; corridor warfare, long tom, but at least this way groups are less likely to stomp solo players which will hopefully increase the player base for Faction Warfare some what. By also creating a match making system it is not creating anymore buckets, but there is a possible down side ... with a lower player count the longer then match maker will take just like solo and group cue do now. Although long wait times in Faction Warfare are not unheard of ... *remembers back to waiting 50 minutes for a match one time while I played Halo on my old xbox*.

Ironically, it's necessary to reduce buckets in FP, which kind of defeats the purpose of FP to begin with. After all, the whole premise is to fight over systems in the Inner Sphere. And the Clans are trying to reach Terra. But with fewer buckets, players have less control over where the fighting takes place. So I don't know what the right call is.

Johnny Z, on 27 August 2016 - 06:12 AM, said:

I think the finished maps are very well done. Quite a few of them are not finished yet and when all are done and taken as a whole, and new maps are added, it looks really good.

They all look great, for the most part. I don't like what they did with Caustic Valley, I thought that map looked better in 2012. Much better. But for the most part, the maps look great.

They're not well designed though, in terms of making all the matches as balanced as possible and creating as many different situations as possible. Most maps lead to very predictable and simplistic gameplay, which is a cardinal sin for map making.

Metus regem, on 27 August 2016 - 06:15 AM, said:

I'd rename quick play Solaris and make one of the modes FFA and call it a day on that end.

Fortunately, I don't think they would do that. But if they did, I would never spend another dime on MWO ever again. That would be the biggest disappointment since MWO "launched".

[Metus regem]

Alistair Winter, on 27 August 2016 - 06:20 AM, said:

Fortunately, I don't think they would do that. But if they did, I would never spend another dime on MWO ever again. That would be the biggest disappointment since MWO &quot;launched&quot;.

We more or less have Solaris right now, just in a team format. Quick Play has no point, it does not effect the galaxy, just like Solaris.

[Alistair Winter]

Metus regem, on 27 August 2016 - 06:25 AM, said:

We more or less have Solaris right now, just in a team format. Quick Play has no point, it does not effect the galaxy, just like Solaris.

Again, I completely disagree with this statement. I mean, it's true that QP has no point, but that doesn't mean it's Solaris.

Solaris is supposed to take place in arenas, in front of crowds, for the purpose of entertainment. It's supposed to have commentators. Also, its most famous arenas are described and named in lore.

PGI has a history of promising big things, then delivering smaller versions of those things and saying "Well, it's basically the same thing". I really hope they don't go that route with Solaris, like they did with CW, information warfare and role warfare.

[Metus regem]

Alistair Winter, on 27 August 2016 - 06:38 AM, said:

Again, I completely disagree with this statement. I mean, it's true that QP has no point, but that doesn't mean it's Solaris.

Solaris is supposed to take place in arenas, in front of crowds, for the purpose of entertainment. It's supposed to have commentators. Also, its most famous arenas are described and named in lore.

I don't disagree, but I also think having civilians close to an active combat arena is asking for trouble. Not to mention a lack of room for the mechs to maneuver around.... I think a better bet is to look at the quick play maps as the arenas, with the out of bounds area as the force fields that are meant to keep the shots in the arena. While the crowds and announcers tucked away in hardened bunkers somewhere safely watching the matches on screens.

[Idealsuspect]

Too big for this game ...

[Mycrus]

I've always wondered why they didn't build QP to at least somehow affect FW... some point counter at least to tie the community together... but hey, they take to hear the the 'minimum' in mvp...

[El Bandito]

Metus regem, on 27 August 2016 - 07:01 AM, said:

I don't disagree, but I also think having civilians close to an active combat arena is asking for trouble. Not to mention a lack of room for the mechs to maneuver around.... I think a better bet is to look at the quick play maps as the arenas, with the out of bounds area as the force fields that are meant to keep the shots in the arena. While the crowds and announcers tucked away in hardened bunkers somewhere safely watching the matches on screens.

While most of the arenas in Solaris use cameras, the Colosseum at least has force fields to dissipate shots which allows the viewers to watch the matches through their own eyes.