395 replies to this topic

[Wibbledtodeath]

WarHippy, on 06 December 2016 - 02:32 PM, said:

Change for the sake of change is not a good thing. Change is not inherently good or inherently bad, however it can be good or bad. Throwing every crackpot idea onto the live server just because you can and because it is different(WOO change) is probably the worst thing any game developer could do. Under no circumstances should anyone take your advice as it is flat out bad advice.



(A lot of really delusional people in this thread. Its fine to be excited or hopeful, but the sycophants are getting ridiculous.)

Wow, what a jerk. I am no Not a sycophant, nor delusional. Read the entire post, don't think I ever suggested throwing "every crackpot idea"- rather having a staged test group so that less developed ideas don't generate change rage and get thrown out without a chance. I mean, seriously, some people are even raging about the intro of a new game mode FFS. Russ and co are conservative at the best of times, and are gun shy around adding anything due to inevitable with this community blind hate reaction. This promotes slower devt and work being poured into false starts.

So many people are so afraid of change in this community, maybe PGI should just suspend devt on MWO beyond more mechpacks- let people enjoy their stale never changing game and concentrate on MW5 Mercs for the rest of us. But if that isn't the plan, then faster addition of content is not a bad thing.

Edited by Wibbledtodeath, 07 December 2016 - 11:55 PM.

[Hanky Spam]

Ed Steele, on 07 December 2016 - 05:59 PM, said:

Has anything been said about whether MW5 will be DRM free and playable offline or not?

It has been stated that MW5 will be available on Steam.
Question answered?

[Roach]

MovinTarget, on 07 December 2016 - 03:47 PM, said:

There would be some challenges in balancing this, but would love to see it. It may need its own tier system(as loathe as i am to use that term) so that certain people in certain mechs would face others that are comparable, but the lower/casual players wouldn't have to bite the pillow every single game.

The nightmare scenario would be when the top players all have a gentlemen's agreement to farm off the noobs before facing off against each other... Ideally in ffa, everyone has a fighting chance(caveated out the wazoo)...

So this is how I imagined it considering some factors that can f*ck up the general free-for-all concept:
Map:
- We need an arena map big enough to host like 15 mechs with least 200-250 meters distance at start.
- We need some obstacles here or there to let players hide from PPC vomits and LRM boats.
- Generally the old MW4 arenas would be nice bases for these...

Players:
- 15 players, as I said or can be a "smaller edition" with 9 players.
- Every players would have to select 3 mechs from their collection in various tiers. You cannot bring 2 assaults just one.
- The matchmaker would select one of your mechs randomly or considering the firepower of the selected mechs. I don't know that yet...
- The fight would last for like 10 minutes. Ranking of the players would be based on their time of death, so the last one standing wins the round. Though matchscore would be based on the normal way with a little addition: how it is distributed currently in MWO (taking into consideration the damage, kills, other performance, etc) + the bonus for staying alive longer.
- If someone just tries to avoid fighting and deals no damage in a minut gets penalty in matchscore. This way we can seriously punish afk players but giving them 0 matchscore.
- The whole would be tournament like thing: fights would be in rotation, so the second round would start with your second selected mech and so on.
- At the end of the 3 matches, de most gathered matchscore win.

Extras:
- There can be in game challenges during a fight randomly assigned to random players:
- Destroy a component in 10 seconds.
- Deal damage to 3 enemy players within 30 seconds.
- etc.

Matchscore distribution:
- Even if you did not deal the most damage in your round but you survived you would get some bonus matchsore, as winning that round. Generally a light mech cannot deal that amount of damage that an assault can. But if the little fella survives she/he deserves the bonus.
- Bonus matchsore should be given if the extra challenges are performed.

So this is it in a nutshell. I thought if through yesterday evening. I have posted this post in this other thread also... If you guys have something to add to it, les not spam this thread...

http://mwomercs.com/...e-free-for-all/

[MovinTarget]

An FFA of more than 1v1 should probably have:

10 ton swing *max* - so all mechs must be within 10 tons of each other

When you drop, only one other mech is near you initially to mitigate "pile on" manuevers by sync droppers. I know this isn't true FFA to some, but it feels like it gives people a bit more of a chance to get their bearings. Every minute or so, you get an indication where the remaining mechs are on the field.

Needs a scoring system that allows the really good players to bubble up to the top and face other good players, the middle players to face equivalent players and 'taters to 'taters. Scoring should take into consideration the user's success in the variant they are driving. Scoring should consider both seasonal average performance and "streaking" (avg performance last 10 matches?) to determine the Pilot/Variant <insert word here that means tier but not to be confused with QP Tier>.

Prevent players from dropping in mechs lacking a certain level of skills in the new skill system. Last thing we need is people complaining about not being able to level their mechs in an FFA environment. Do that in QP... or <shiver> in FP please...


It would take some work, but I don't think it would be horribly unreasonable to implement.

[ADI84000]

here`s how i see the new skill tree , each mech can have strenghts and weaknesses based on this , make each mech recieve more x% per skill point on different stuff like some light will recieve 5% per skill point in mobility compared to lets say an assault who recieves like 2.5% in mobility , this is just an example not actual numbers, or this mech is ppc specialist so it recieves 5-10% in skill point on ppc velocity , or this mech needs cooldown and duration being how it plays lets say a locust u get -5% laser duration per skill point and -7% laser cooldown per skill point, so in this way they can ballance the mechs.... by fine tunning these unique mech skill trees in the ptr and afterwards micro tunning also ,
new skills could be added at the end of the skill tree lets say skill mastery if u max out all the nodes in lets say SRMs , at the end u put a point in SRM MASTERY wich gives u a X% increase to all SRM SKILLs in that tree. or even lets say a x% bonus damage to that weapon because u invested so much in it like 30 points almost half ure skill points... while sacrificing mobility and armor or structure .... also u can add the same to defense lets say u get all defense points u want to be tanky u get a defense mastery wich gives u x% to all defense skills because u sacrifice 30 or something points and dont have much bonus to ure firepower
also new skill like weapon overload at the end of that weapons skill tree where once every lets say 1 minute u can fire the same weapon again while its on cooldown , because u invested to be a ppc specialist and ure dps isnt much.... and ure in a mid-short range fight and need one extra hit....
or even skill synergy 1 point in for example ppc cooldown adds x% to ppc range and adds x% to ppc velocity in this way choices synergize and spending allot of points in one place adds bonuses to each other even if minor small bonuses like 1-2% but it adds up
and it all makes sense this new skill tree from the lore perspective , each mech is uniquely costumized in the mech lab each inch each weapon component tweeked by the mechanics in accordance to the style and view of the pilot

[Righter8]

InnerSphereNews, on 03 December 2016 - 09:24 PM, said:

All-new Skill Tree

The Skill Tree revamp is set for release in early 2017. This is going to be a significant change for 'Mech performance customization and specialization, providing you with greater control over the performance-focus of your individual 'Mechs.

All past Module purchases will be refunded to you in whole, and all GXP and 'Mech XP spent on Skill or Module unlocks will be carried over as 'Legacy GXP', to be used at-will for unlocking new nodes in the revamped Skill Tree system for any variant.

I am of the mind to wait and see what actual effects changes create. Most times, the predicted changes might never occur or if they do, and are found to be detrimental, they are rolled back.
However, concerning modules being refunded, I must ask: What about those of us who received them via pre-orders such as the Marauder IIC being released next week, or from prior purchases with real money? I notice that none of the mechs announced after the MAD IIC offered modules, so I assume this change was known prior to those pre-order offers. I hope PGI has considered this already and have a reasonable response? Can I, as well as other players, expect to see comparable compensation for the modules which were offered and then will be revoked at some unspecified date?

If this was already addressed, I apologize. I haven't had the time yet to read the 300+ posts submitted so far.

[WarHippy]

Wibbledtodeath, on 07 December 2016 - 11:52 PM, said:

Wow, what a jerk. I am no Not a sycophant, nor delusional. Read the entire post, don't think I ever suggested throwing "every crackpot idea"- rather having a staged test group so that less developed ideas don't generate change rage and get thrown out without a chance. I mean, seriously, some people are even raging about the intro of a new game mode FFS. Russ and co are conservative at the best of times, and are gun shy around adding anything due to inevitable with this community blind hate reaction. This promotes slower devt and work being poured into false starts.

The sycophant and delusional comment was not solely directed at you, but at a lot of people here in general. That being said, when you make comments like "In fact, don't even bother with PTU- it just generates unreasonable fear in the dinosaur brained portion of the community which makes design more conservative. Just give us more content fast as you can." you are quite literally saying they shouldn't bother testing and just give it to us as fast as they can. That is just plain stupidity of the highest order. Adding at the end that maybe if they feel like they could have a select group of special people test things(we already do have a group that does or did do that by the way) hardly makes up for it. Things need to be discussed and they need to be tested by as many people as possible. A small group of devs/players are not going to think of every possible pitfall that can occur when the players at large become involved. Time and time again across countless games this has been and will continue to be the case. As I said before change for the sake of change is not a good thing.

Wibbledtodeath, on 07 December 2016 - 11:52 PM, said:

So many people are so afraid of change in this community, maybe PGI should just suspend devt on MWO beyond more mechpacks- let people enjoy their stale never changing game and concentrate on MW5 Mercs for the rest of us. But if that isn't the plan, then faster addition of content is not a bad thing.

Nobody ever said that faster addition of content is a bad thing. In fact I think everyone wants more content, but they also want it to be good content. Development of content in this game is glacial. PGI is made up of humans that make mistakes and do not always think of potential consequences of changes they come up with. That is precisely why it needs to be discussed and tested heavily before it ever touches the live servers. People are not afraid of change they are afraid of bad change.

[MovinTarget]

WarHippy, on 08 December 2016 - 11:00 AM, said:

PGI is made up of humans that make mistakes.

As opposed all other humans?

I get what you are saying. You may have legit contentions with PGI, my beef is with the people that expect this game to fit their particular vision and rage when it does not. Mistakes have been make, but a lot of rage here comes from people that look at things like this roadmap and their imagination runs wild and then the salt flows because they are disappointed.

If they promised something and then fault on the precise details of that promise, that's on them.

The pace may seem glacial but that is a matter of perspective.

[xEdSteelex]

ladiesman712, on 08 December 2016 - 12:07 AM, said:

It has been stated that MW5 will be available on Steam.
Question answered?

Yeah, so not playable without an internet connection, at least when you launch the game. This kind of sucks, but not a deal breaker.

[WarHippy]

MovinTarget, on 08 December 2016 - 11:23 AM, said:

As opposed all other humans?

I get what you are saying. You may have legit contentions with PGI, my beef is with the people that expect this game to fit their particular vision and rage when it does not. Mistakes have been make, but a lot of rage here comes from people that look at things like this roadmap and their imagination runs wild and then the salt flows because they are disappointed.

If they promised something and then fault on the precise details of that promise, that's on them.

The pace may seem glacial but that is a matter of perspective.

A lot of that can be fixed or avoided with simple communication. That is something that at best occurs in small spurts once or twice a year. Imagination runs wild when we are treated to silence, and expectations grow when things we are told are going to happen don't happen the way it was described or don't happen at all. Lack of communication above all else is PGI's Achilles heel.

I agree that the pace is a matter of perspective, but the slow pace here is a very widely held perspective for good reason.

xEdSteelex, on 08 December 2016 - 11:32 AM, said:

Yeah, so not playable without an internet connection, at least when you launch the game. This kind of sucks, but not a deal breaker.

Does it really answer the question? With Steam you can play games in offline mode without logging into Steam. The Steam client itself has an option for offline mode. What we don't know is if the game itself will require a authentication "hand shake" when you start it up.

Edited by WarHippy, 08 December 2016 - 11:41 AM.

[Mad Dog Morgan]

This game needs new weapons. It's almost 3054 for Kerensky's sake!

[Slambot]

The trolls haven't managed to say anything solid in any post. Really guys, just cool your jets....This is a small game for a small community. What's amazing is how dedicated the trolls seem to be for a game they spend 15 hours plus per week playing....

[mikerso]

ladiesman712, on 08 December 2016 - 12:07 AM, said:

It has been stated that MW5 will be available on Steam.
Question answered?

Russ stated it will be a one and done type purchase. Like older mechwarrior games.

[Wibbledtodeath]

WarHippy, on 08 December 2016 - 11:00 AM, said:

The sycophant and delusional comment was not solely directed at you, but at a lot of people here in general. That being said, when you make comments like "In fact, don't even bother with PTU- it just generates unreasonable fear in the dinosaur brained portion of the community which makes design more conservative. Just give us more content fast as you can." you are quite literally saying they shouldn't bother testing and just give it to us as fast as they can. That is just plain stupidity of the highest order. Adding at the end that maybe if they feel like they could have a select group of special people test things(we already do have a group that does or did do that by the way) hardly makes up for it. Things need to be discussed and they need to be tested by as many people as possible. A small group of devs/players are not going to think of every possible pitfall that can occur when the players at large become involved. Time and time again across countless games this has been and will continue to be the case. As I said before change for the sake of change is not a good thing.

Nobody ever said that faster addition of content is a bad thing. In fact I think everyone wants more content, but they also want it to be good content. Development of content in this game is glacial. PGI is made up of humans that make mistakes and do not always think of potential consequences of changes they come up with. That is precisely why it needs to be discussed and tested heavily before it ever touches the live servers. People are not afraid of change they are afraid of bad change.

Sorry, you can't accuse others of "'stupidity of the highest order", complain about devt being glacial and THEN say that changes must be "discussed and tested heavily before it ever touches the live servers". This is an especially poor idea when the community you test with can't agree on just about anything. Community wide testing and discussion are appropriate for iterations of maybe 1-2 ideas per year, and if that's done before coding to determine direction for a few flagship projects that's fine, but when content hits the PTU most the coding work has gone into it already- PTU should be used for tweaking easily modifiable variables and looking for hidden bugs for code/ideas that ARE going to go live, not for determining if an idea will work before going live. I understand your concern, and thank you for helping refine my thoughts/arguments on this matter. PGI (by their own admission) have made lots of missteps, but PTU should be about bug catching and balancing, not a democratic process.
Other than possible need for an engine upgrade MWO has fine bones, and with skill tree changes (hopefully done well) and removal of 'Ghost' type mechanics (heat, magical flamer duration) IK and a few minor refinements it is actually looking like a pretty solid game. But it needs lots more content (i.e. additional missions and maps- and not just changing what we already have) and that content (as opposed to fundamental game changes) should be made live ASAP...frankly I would be happy playing new game modes that are a bit broken for a month (till next patch cycle) than playing still more of the same.

Edited by Wibbledtodeath, 08 December 2016 - 01:10 PM.

[Grimrawr]

Hi, quick Q: Under the new skill tree system, what will become of unspent GXP and Mech XP? Wanting to know if we need to spend them beforehand for their "preservation." Thank you.

EDIT: Thanks for the responses. Second question: Under the new system, does "unlocking" count toward a variant, or toward each physical mech (even the same variant)? Thanks again.

Edited by Grimrawr, 08 December 2016 - 02:26 PM.

[WarHippy]

Wibbledtodeath, on 08 December 2016 - 12:51 PM, said:

Sorry, you can't accuse others of "'stupidity of the highest order", complain about devt being glacial and THEN say that changes must be "discussed and tested heavily before it ever touches the live servers". This is an especially poor idea when the community you test with can't agree on just about anything. Community wide testing and discussion are appropriate for iterations of maybe 1-2 ideas per year, and if that's done before coding to determine direction for a few flagship projects that's fine, but when content hits the PTU most the coding work has gone into it already- PTU should be used for tweaking easily modifiable variables and looking for hidden bugs for code/ideas that ARE going to go live, not for determining if an idea will work before going live. I understand your concern, and thank you for helping refine my thoughts/arguments on this matter. PGI (by their own admission) have made lots of missteps, but PTU should be about bug catching and balancing, not a democratic process.
Other than possible need for an engine upgrade MWO has fine bones, and with skill tree changes (hopefully done well) and removal of 'Ghost' type mechanics (heat, magical flamer duration) IK and a few minor refinements it is actually looking like a pretty solid game. But it needs lots more content (i.e. additional missions and maps- and not just changing what we already have) and that content (as opposed to fundamental game changes) should be made live ASAP...frankly I would be happy playing new game modes that are a bit broken for a month (till next patch cycle) than playing still more of the same.

I think we are on the same page with regard for the need for more content, and you are right maps probably don't need much if any testing. However, massive mechanic changes absolutely do need a lot of discussion and testing. Even new game modes need to be tested first to find exploits and other problems first. You might be okay with playing broken content until it is fixed, but others are not, and new players coming into the game for the first time are really not going to be okay with it. Player retention suffers if your first impression is broken and/or glitchy. You don't often get a chance to redeem yourself which is why it is important to get it right the first time.

As for the slow development time vs testing/discussing part you are off base because they are not mutually exclusive ideas. Discussing and testing may mean the final product takes a little longer to hit live, but at least it is working content. Of course throwing whatever you come up with on the live servers untested gets it out the door faster, but it also slows down future development because you are now in a situation where you have to drop everything to fix your live product when problems inevitably occur. Wanting faster development does not preclude someone from wanting that content to be good quality. Like I keep saying change for the sake of change is not good. It needs to be done for a good reason. New content should be a priority and is should be done ASAP, but ASAP should include necessary testing.

Grimrawr, on 08 December 2016 - 01:10 PM, said:

Hi, quick Q: Under the new skill tree system, what will become of unspent GXP and Mech XP? Wanting to know if we need to spend them beforehand for their "preservation." Thank you.

Everything is being rolled over into the new system. You will get a refund of all c-bills and XP spent on modules and module skills.

[MovinTarget]

According to the video...



You keep all GXP and XP and can use it for the new system

Edited by MovinTarget, 08 December 2016 - 02:02 PM.

[Tamerlin]

MovinTarget, on 07 December 2016 - 04:28 PM, said:

Good thing i stopped selling mechs years ago...

361 mechs here. Come at me, mechBro

[Cuah Temoc]

There's a lot of uneasiness about the changes to the game, which is understandable. I for one am thrilled with the new assault mode coming soon! And the Marauder IIC looks beautiful! Hoping for the best in the months to come.

[Pihoqahiak]

MovinTarget, on 08 December 2016 - 01:56 PM, said:

You keep all GXP and XP and can use it for the new system

You keep all your unspent GXP and all XP spent on your pilot skills (mech and module unlocks) as "Legacy GXP". Unfortunately, the skill tree trailer video does not specify what happens to the unspent XP that you may have accumulated on your mech variants.

Edit: What I would like to see them do with that unspent mech variant XP is have it retained as "Legacy XP" for the variant it was earned for. That Legacy XP would be able to be spent on any mech you own of that variant.

Edited by Pihoqahiak, 08 December 2016 - 07:52 PM.