71 replies to this topic

[Vellron2005]

If you ask me, here's how PVE should be done in this game:

1) First of all, add A.I or PVE to FW. In terms of if not enough players sign up withing 5 minutes, the match launches with PVE mechs filling in the ranks on both sides.

2) Full PVE campaign.

Make a 15-20 mission campaign with full story and lore of the clan invasion. Charge MC for it, OR cbills - no more than 25 million. Make it re-playable, but allow all the rewards like mechs only once.

3) PVE Raids - make short, 3-5 mission campaigns with PVE enemies and a short story. Launch for MC or cbills - no more than 10 million. Award rewards like mechs only once.

Focus on strong immersion and rich lore. Make campaings playable as solo or co-op, play with faction loyalties, mercenary units, and famous lore moments.

Keep the PVE stuff free to play (by buy-in with cbills), but award additional stuff if you buy-in with MC. (like a hero mech instead of a champion variant, warhorn+standing item instead of just a warhorn, and such).

[a gaijin]

TheArisen, on 08 November 2016 - 11:05 PM, said:

My main issue with this is I'd like to be able to play through the campaign even after the servers go dark & Pgi moves on.

I agree that is a good goal as well.
But it shouldn't be too hard to serve/host a game and have friends join to participate as "A.I." I would think.

[a gaijin]

DiabetesOverlord Wilford Brimley, on 08 November 2016 - 09:54 PM, said:

Worst idea ever! That's why pvp sucks is because of its players. I'll even go as far as saying that normal AI is better than the average potato in MWO. Also you need population for that which is why CW failed. AI is the only way to go and I want a offline PVE experience so when pvp is finally dead I still can play stompy robots.

I do not know what single-player games you play, but I have not in over 20 years of gaming found a game that has an A.I that amazed me or made me think the game is challenging. First Playthru's always on Medium skill and every play through afterwards is whatever the "Hard/Very Difficult" skill setting is.
The "closest" games get to "good" A.I. is the workaround to have the A.I. weapon accuracy at 100%. And that's not really impressive.
That's why I like online PVP. Real people tend to be more creative and/or spontaneous than any artificial intelligence which is very interesting and usually challenging.
And generally single player games are for people who want to feel "like a hero." Online PVP keeps perspective real whether you like it or not.
That's why I would not mind a campaign mode that uses real people in place of AI. If I'm in the mood to feel like a hero I'll play Falldown 4 or some other single player game.

[DiabetesOverlord Wilford Brimley]

Star Commander Horse, on 09 November 2016 - 02:29 AM, said:

I do not know what single-player games you play, but I have not in over 20 years of gaming found a game that has an A.I that amazed me or made me think the game is challenging. First Playthru's always on Medium skill and every play through afterwards is whatever the "Hard/Very Difficult" skill setting is.
The "closest" games get to "good" A.I. is the workaround to have the A.I. weapon accuracy at 100%. And that's not really impressive.
That's why I like online PVP. Real people tend to be more creative and/or spontaneous than any artificial intelligence which is very interesting and usually challenging.
And generally single player games are for people who want to feel "like a hero." Online PVP keeps perspective real whether you like it or not.
That's why I would not mind a campaign mode that uses real people in place of AI. If I'm in the mood to feel like a hero I'll play Falldown 4 or some other single player game.

Not true of the general population of MWO... have you ever seen Tier 5? My god that was an eye opener how bad people can be. I get the same reaction from pvp everyone deathballs going left. Units (meta teams) just camp choke points and trade damage. So once you know the choke points and identify team NASCAR. It becomes repetitive and within 30 seconds of a match you're able to call a win or loss depending on where your randoms start to move. It's extremely fun...

Sure AI is "hero" mode but t's wayyy better than knowing you're going to fail when you see the dreaded. LRM Boars head hereplease hold locks...

For the record I win more than I lose but playing captain carry hard isn't fun.

[Peter2k]

TheArisen, on 08 November 2016 - 11:05 PM, said:

My main issue with this is I'd like to be able to play through the campaign even after the servers go dark & Pgi moves on.

I don't think PGI could come up with a narrative interesting enough
And some of the stuff posted above sounds nice like fronts that go back and forth and engaging campaigns

However it seems that PGI's coding ability is rather thin

Way better to do a HD remake of all the old Mechwarrior titles
Hell include mech commander as well

It would play to what PGI can do
Map making (well sort of do, kinda slow), art assets, mech models

They don't even need to come up with unique maps
Just redo them

If copyright is an issue then change enough things around story wise

Do them in seasons/waves

What could be fun is to tie it somewhat to the online part
Owning mechs in MWO unlocks them for single player and as enemy's (old looting system in place)
Especially newer mechs, ones getting released after the first campaign pack got released

Same idea with preordering mechs, buying MC
Getting them sooner in single player part
Want them for free to show up in single player?
Buy them in the online part with C-Bills

Could be fun and giving an incentive to keep on buying mechs (keeping the lights on at PGI's office) and still playing online

[Buster Machine 0]

PGI! You see what your customers and community want!

[Lily from animove]

No emchwarrior ever had a proper AI, and I doubt one cna make a proper entertaining AI for MWO, all the game will turn into is a few people in possible coop sztomping over hordes of AI mechs a la MW3 wave mode. And in MWO maps are even a lOT more complex than MW3's mostly open maps, so AI would even fail more or fial to handle the map complexity.

DiabetesOverlord Wilford Brimley, on 09 November 2016 - 12:10 AM, said:

You're half right. Metal Gear did allow you to make your character and GTA 5 online does too. I subject matter is preference. As for doing single players correctly they were engaging and done well (if you like the subject matter)

Yes I want pilot creation and customization
I want to own my own planet, cruiser, drop ship, and customizable mech hangers in each.
Yes I want to story lines and experiences to go through. DLC lore expansions where you're just a mech pilot watching history unfold in the different timelines.
Ultimately I'd want an open world endgame like GTA 5 that allows private rooms, or even kinda destiny like but with obviously more content
And obviously a new engine since cryengine has all of its programmers working for Chris Roberts.

Only thing missing in Titanfall was you wished it was the BR universe;)

you won't get open world engame in MWO ever the concept of speed and stuff simply doesn't works for such setups. And with the "demand" of people in graphics there won't be proper maps in the size of MW:LL as this is the minimum of what would be needed to exist.

also character creation of gta 5 is horrible and broing. Bad at all tbh. Just a few facesliders n some preset mix faces with horrible clothings to choose.

in fact if MWO ever your make a socialising feature it would have to be based around the mech hangar otherwise more complex character design is simply a waste of effort as you never see more of your pilot than parts of ot's body in your cockpit.

but to continue MWO, PGI does need other concepts to generate money. Because once they are done with all the available mechs, and the core fanbase has bought them the only thing they do have left is:

p2w features (which kills most games quickly for a short high profit)
customisation of mechs and pilots (custom geometry was something they did spoke about)
non mech related content, such as socialsiing features.
PvE content to sell compains and stuff.

Keeping the game alive is the most important part, as humans grow up and start gaming and therefore you have regrowing gamers you can sell all your previously done content. But this really requires keping old gamers who will just see less new content while dragging new players to the game.

unfortunately we don't have big boobed half naked elfs and winged girls to run around in our Lore so it's harder to lure in people with the usual MMO advertisements.

Edited by Lily from animove, 09 November 2016 - 04:55 AM.

[jss78]

Star Commander Horse, on 09 November 2016 - 02:29 AM, said:

I do not know what single-player games you play, but I have not in over 20 years of gaming found a game that has an A.I that amazed me or made me think the game is challenging. First Playthru's always on Medium skill and every play through afterwards is whatever the "Hard/Very Difficult" skill setting is.
The "closest" games get to "good" A.I. is the workaround to have the A.I. weapon accuracy at 100%. And that's not really impressive.
That's why I like online PVP. Real people tend to be more creative and/or spontaneous than any artificial intelligence which is very interesting and usually challenging.
And generally single player games are for people who want to feel "like a hero." Online PVP keeps perspective real whether you like it or not.
That's why I would not mind a campaign mode that uses real people in place of AI. If I'm in the mood to feel like a hero I'll play Falldown 4 or some other single player game.

Question -- how good was the 'mech AI in earlier MW games? (I didn't play any of them, skipped straight from tabletop to MWO).

The reason I ask -- thinking about AI coding, it appears to me that coding a good AI for a battlemech might be rather difficult. In WoWS the AI is semi-braindead, but there the coding task is vastly easier: the ship goes on a 2D surface, with some "don't go here/don't shoot through this" areas, i.e. land. Yet the WoWS AI is horrible. Here we'd have variable terrain, obstacles, jump jets, torso twisting, very complex weaponry with various optimal firing ranges, heat concerns, need to consider heat/weaponry/range in the enemy, etc....

Hence why I think the most promising application of AI might be as combined-arms elements and occasional 'mechs, augmenting mainly human-piloted 'mech lances in PvP games. Relatively low impact on games, but would add gameplay diversity and lore flavour.

Edited by jss78, 09 November 2016 - 04:52 AM.

[Scyther]

Given that PGI doesn't have a lot of resources in the Storyline, AI Combat, or "depth of strategic gameplay" departments, any realistic PvE goal is going to have to start small, use existing assets, and be monetizable at least in the not-too-far future.

General design would be to use existing FP assets, 4 man missions for quick start, potential that if timer takes over 60 seconds you get a selection "Fill Team / Quick Drop". Fill Team gives you AI wingmen, Quick Drop drops you with the current # of queued players. As soon as at least 2 players choose either option that option goes ahead with whoever has selected it (or the 4-man fills). 15 minute timers for each mission.

I can see them starting small with say a 3 mission PvE testing ground:

1) Assault: Breach a walled defense, get past AI defenders, take out a space cannon. Basically like current FW except with AI defenders.

2) Beachhead: Dropship lands 4 mechs, who have to defeat a few AI defenders/turrets and then hold off an incoming defense force until 2nd dropship lands reinforcements.

3) Smash and Grab: using the current Scout mode as base, 4 players penetrate a defense line, do a data download, get back to dropship. It could possibly be that the 'hacker' mech is an NPC (needs to be escorted/defended) or that player who gets the data becomes primary target and needs to be defended back to the dropship.

If the missions and maps are designed properly, these missions could be brute-forced, speed/JJ maneuvered, sniped, possibly even ECM'd/LRM'd to allow for a variety of approaches to objective (ie, there shouldn't be only one way to resolve the mission).

I can easily make about a dozen simple missions of this sort, and of course for 'real storyline' missions there is no shortage of material in BattleTech. However they need a very simple entry point both for the F2P crowd and to test if they can make PvE work at all.

If they get that far, then I will be happy to elaborate on sellable Faction Packs, Planetary Missions, FW tie-ins, etc etc.

Edited by MadBadger, 09 November 2016 - 06:04 AM.

[Besh]

How to to PvE ?

Not a new thought, just one I agree with:

Make the Game moddable . Meaning, give "the community" access to anything they need to create content of any sort . Maps, Tanks, Aero, Gamemodes, Weapons of different manufacturers etc .

To try and be sure, you could go so far and make any community created content submission based . Needs to get submitted and approved to get implemented . Maybe even go so far and do the really cool thing : somehow pay/reward people for their efforts, if their stuff is good/a success .

I am pretty sure MW:O would thrive. In every aspect . I would not be amazed if the community would be able to come up with a somewhat working CW groundwork which would be expandable into the immersive Game so many want . Heck, people have offered to add "fluff" ( like meaningfull planetary decripstions and history text ) for FREE .

Honestly, how stupid is it to NOT tap into that HUGE resource of a TON of passionate people who would love to be able/allowed to contribute to make this game better ?

Edited by Besh, 09 November 2016 - 06:43 AM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Star Commander Horse, on 09 November 2016 - 02:29 AM, said:

I do not know what single-player games you play, but I have not in over 20 years of gaming found a game that has an A.I that amazed me or made me think the game is challenging. First Playthru's always on Medium skill and every play through afterwards is whatever the "Hard/Very Difficult" skill setting is.
The "closest" games get to "good" A.I. is the workaround to have the A.I. weapon accuracy at 100%. And that's not really impressive.
That's why I like online PVP. Real people tend to be more creative and/or spontaneous than any artificial intelligence which is very interesting and usually challenging.
And generally single player games are for people who want to feel "like a hero." Online PVP keeps perspective real whether you like it or not.
That's why I would not mind a campaign mode that uses real people in place of AI. If I'm in the mood to feel like a hero I'll play Falldown 4 or some other single player game.

the most AI is better as the Human Tier 4/5 Pilots in MWO ...better Play with Lvl 8 MW4Merc Bots as with Many mates in T4/5 by eventtime

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 09 November 2016 - 11:40 AM.

[GenghisJr]

Im not in the slightest interested in PvE. Playing a computer game against a computer is so 80's.

[TheArisen]

I would love it if they remastered all the old mechwarrior games. They could even add a the hero mechs to the campaigns to put a more personal touch.

[Johnny Z]

Star Commander Horse, on 09 November 2016 - 02:29 AM, said:

I do not know what single-player games you play, but I have not in over 20 years of gaming found a game that has an A.I that amazed me or made me think the game is challenging. First Playthru's always on Medium skill and every play through afterwards is whatever the "Hard/Very Difficult" skill setting is.
The "closest" games get to "good" A.I. is the workaround to have the A.I. weapon accuracy at 100%. And that's not really impressive.
That's why I like online PVP. Real people tend to be more creative and/or spontaneous than any artificial intelligence which is very interesting and usually challenging.
And generally single player games are for people who want to feel "like a hero." Online PVP keeps perspective real whether you like it or not.
That's why I would not mind a campaign mode that uses real people in place of AI. If I'm in the mood to feel like a hero I'll play Falldown 4 or some other single player game.

But single player is the best for a story or narrative.

[TheArisen]

Don't forget to vote in the poll.
http://mwomercs.com/...pve-story-mode/

[a gaijin]

jss78, on 09 November 2016 - 04:51 AM, said:

Question -- how good was the 'mech AI in earlier MW games? (I didn't play any of them, skipped straight from tabletop to MWO).

The reason I ask -- thinking about AI coding, it appears to me that coding a good AI for a battlemech might be rather difficult. In WoWS the AI is semi-braindead, but there the coding task is vastly easier: the ship goes on a 2D surface, with some "don't go here/don't shoot through this" areas, i.e. land. Yet the WoWS AI is horrible. Here we'd have variable terrain, obstacles, jump jets, torso twisting, very complex weaponry with various optimal firing ranges, heat concerns, need to consider heat/weaponry/range in the enemy, etc....

Hence why I think the most promising application of AI might be as combined-arms elements and occasional 'mechs, augmenting mainly human-piloted 'mech lances in PvP games. Relatively low impact on games, but would add gameplay diversity and lore flavour.

To be blunt, the AI was pretty bad. Mechs would detect you and run straight at you shooting and when they got close they would start run in a slightly random direction while shooting, sometimes turning in a random direction while shooting and repeat.
Yes, a half a I and half human enemy mix would be interesting in my opinion. I'm all for it

[a gaijin]

Johnny Z, on 09 November 2016 - 02:49 PM, said:

But single player is the best for a story or narrative.

I agree with you 100% on that.
That is why if a single player game is going to be made using MWO then I think just redoing MW2 series in MWO would be good. All the story, mission content, etc is already made.
And the reason I keep on referring to MW2 series instead of later titles is because it falls right in our current MWO timeline. Well, MW2 Mercenaries is actually a little bit earlier but definitely close enough.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

TheArisen, on 09 November 2016 - 03:17 PM, said:

Don't forget to vote in the poll.
http://mwomercs.com/...pve-story-mode/

Not Pay for Gamebasics in a Game playing in a Universe and ignored it ...wheels on a Car not specials for extra paying...no Gamebasics , no player , no profit -you will pay ,you will extra pay to seeing Star Destroyer as Background in a Star wars Fighter Game?

[TheArisen]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 09 November 2016 - 08:55 PM, said:

Not Pay for Gamebasics in a Game playing in a Universe and ignored it ...wheels on a Car not specials for extra paying...no Gamebasics , no player , no profit -you will pay ,you will extra pay to seeing Star Destroyer as Background in a Star wars Fighter Game?

I don't even know what you're trying to say...

[MW Waldorf Statler]

sorry for my Bad english ;-)Pve is only a gameMode with basic Game-elements like the most other Games ...thats Groundbasics for a Game ...not pay for Basics ,seeing what have make EA with SW Battlefront, ...take away all thats , what the SW Battlefront Games have before, and pay it over the Time als DLCs ..
Im will play Coop missions with all Friends, not only with Guys thats it buy...going to Mc Donalds ,and for the Full price , you become only the Meat ...and buy extra a Onion DLC, a Tomatoe DLC.

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 10 November 2016 - 03:22 AM.