85 replies to this topic

[Imperius]

I'm seeing people literally still complaining about things when MechCon pretty much nailed everything.

So why are you not happy? (Please be specific "this game sucks" is not specific for the record)
What would you have done differently?

Try not to fight peoples views or points and keep this a clean feedback thread please.

[Lupis Volk]

I can answer your question very easily.

Human nature.

[naterist]

i wish a little more thought had gone into the communications system while out of game. im not unhappy, but i wish that had been touched on for faction warfare's sake,

and i wish something was being done about removing gen rushes as a viable strategy in invasion-attack/defend mode.

and while i am defending the new mech in many threads, and i feel it could be a great thing and it has many pros on its side, i do fear for the precedent it set and that it might represent an unwillingness to advance the tech tree, because it seems from my research on sarna that they are slowly wearing through the number of mechs that carry the same tech in universe and in game, and i fear new mechs is their solution to that problem as opposed to the creation of new tech, though i stand by my previous defenses of the roughneck as long as my fears aren't founded in fact yet.

outside of that, I'm just peachy

Edited by naterist, 05 December 2016 - 01:27 AM.

[NoiseCrypt]

Skilltree concept is awesome. But the current values are a deal breaker for me. I really hope that they respond with some clarification soon.

[Imperius]

NoiseCrypt, on 05 December 2016 - 01:27 AM, said:

Skilltree concept is awesome. But the current values are a deal breaker for me. I really hope that they respond with some clarification soon.

Remember it will go through a PTS first and none of us really know how much "invested cred" we have for the new trees once we get our refund.

[El Bandito]

Imperius, on 05 December 2016 - 01:19 AM, said:

So why are you not happy? (Please be specific "this game sucks" is not specific for the record)

1. Skill tree now requiring C-Bills and XP, which will further pull apart those who are new to the game and those who have been playing thousands of matches. And before you say that it is good for matchmaking, remember that MWO has such a low player base even T1 player can be matched with T5 player.

2. I'll be selling a lot of mechs I do not normally use cause it is simply not worth leveling them up again. Especially since the XP required now is gonna be far steeper than XP earned with those mechs. Which makes me unhappy cause that would have freed up dozens of mechbays, and I bulk bought tons of mechbays during the sale like an idiot. PGI had also suspiciously kept the whole skill tree values under wraps until mechbay sale was over.

3. I am suspecting that the reason features such as Assault mode rework, Inverse Kinematics, and CW4 rework have been pushed back to 2017 is due to PGI dividing their resources towards MW5--no matter what they say in contrary. Now I'd love me some SP campaign game, but keeping the current game stale is almost too steep a price.

Edited by El Bandito, 05 December 2016 - 01:38 AM.

[Karl Marlow]

The question for me isn't weather what was said made me unhappy. The real question is was it enough to make me come back. I left when they started hunting at combining is and clan factions into one big faction. Part of me wants to come back as evidenced by my occasional lurking in the forums since then. So was mechcon enough? Not really.

1. Roughneck. I was disappointed with this reveal. I would say that it isn't about them doing a new mech but it kinda is. I will say that making it an industrial mech souped up for Solaris was a good way to handle it. Mechs like that don't become common until the dark ages. It's just out of place. There are lot of mechs on people's wishlist that are doable right now. Dervish and Crusader are two that immediately come to mind. There was no need to invent a new one. Part of it is disappointment with the hype.

2 MW5. Cool. Not related to MWO as far as I can tell. Seeing as how it's being made on a different engine I don't know how much crossover there would be.

3. New game modes. I've not looked at these that closely which means the announcement didnt wow me enough to investigate. We've been hearing new game modes are coming for a while.

4. Skill tree. This was long overdue. I kinda think it will promote mech specialization. You can devote a lot of time to mad out your favorite mechs and potentially become known for piloting those mechs. Quirk and module removal is nice but is basically just getting rolled into the skill trees. If there is truth to the removal of the 3 mech rule then that is the best news I've heard from MWO in a long time.

I'm still in a wait and see more. In the past mechs have kinda brought me back but I've already passed on the Bushwaker and Assassin. TDM does not interest me much. FW remains a mess and there is nothing new mechanics wise, such a melee or a stock queue, that would make me want to put up with TDM.

Edited by Karl Marlow, 05 December 2016 - 02:05 AM.

[NoiseCrypt]

Imperius, on 05 December 2016 - 01:30 AM, said:

Remember it will go through a PTS first and none of us really know how much "invested cred" we have for the new trees once we get our refund.

https://mwomercs.com...-roadmap-beyond

"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."

That sounds like a 1:1 refund to me.

The question is. How much xp/time will it take to get a mech back to its current "elited" power level. Or whatever ends up being the "optimal" performance level, when considering time invested.
If that grind is more than a month, then I'm probably done.

I left EVE for the same reason. If the only end-game is to have fun by being better than everyone else, on the basis of time invested, then i will be looking for another game. Again.

Edited by NoiseCrypt, 05 December 2016 - 02:12 AM.

[Kinski Orlawisch]

PvE was intendet to get implanted to MWO.

[Bradigus]

1) MW5:Mercs puts a dampener on MWO's life cycle. People asked for two separate things; single player missions (in order to ease people into the game and provide a retention and longevity boost), and an engine upgrade (in order to get a graphical upgrade as well as a mechanical one). PGI decided to kill two birds with one stone, and unfortunately it's at the cost of MWO's lifespan (as it's even less likely that they're going to upgrade MWO to a newer version of CryEngine now).

2) Skill tree revamp: Removal of pointless 3-mech mastery system and non-functional skills like pin point (which could have served a purpose had they bothered to introduce a mechanic or multiple that would benefit from it) only to introduce real potential grind and hang older, more hardpoint starved mechs out to dry (chassis like Dragons, Orions and Commandos are going to have a tough time being nothing more than c-bill pinatas and mothballs with this proposed system thanks to PGI's hardpoint inflation power creep earlier this year).

So in short, skill tree revamp is a system similar to League of Legends supplanted into MWO with potential to create a distinct gap between unmastered and mastered mechs. MW5:Mercs is the result of a monkeys paw wish. We get both a graphical upgrade AND single player, but at the cost of the lifespan of MWO. Once MWO no longer has a large enough playerbase to support it, it's gone and that's it. Not even single player for people to go back to and play to reminisce about the game, flawed as it is.

[Hunka Junk]

1. The underlying message of the big announcement is that MWO is a done deal. I don't buy any BS about how they're still going to develop it when they haven't been developing it. I was fully planning to wait and see until the end of January. Now that MWO is a done deal, I don't really care.

2. I don't want to poo poo people being elated about PVE, but people didn't get PVE. People got promises. People got hype. We've had that here before. We've heard that all before.

[PhoenixFire55]

I can counter you OP and ask what exactly are we supposed to be happy about? ...

That money people spend on this game will go towards the new game rather than the further development of this Minimally Viable Product^TM?
Or about the new moneygrab with mechs that never existed?
Or about yet another "improvements" from our clueless balance overlords?
Or about yet another attempt to save a horse that is dead for two years (hello CW/FP 4.0)?
New game modes? ... LOL! Don't even start ...

This game has "A BattleTech Game" in its logo, yet almost nothing to actually do with BT.
So, what is actually supposed to make me happy?

[Navid A1]

I'm happy about what I saw in Mechcon

Yet unhappy because I realized that CryEngine (the PGI build) is lacking in areas that can help MWO greatly.

[Van Hoven]

Long overdue replacement of the !placeholder! mech mastery system is hardly breaking news.

No new maps besides a 1on1 map for private lobbys.

Revamp of Assault mode - sure, nice to get. Nothing stellar though.

Rework of FW without giving much of information how they are going to do it.



Soo... yeah... after a year of getting almost nothing done we get: The same.

What would have excited me was sth like... new map every 2 month, new game mode, concrete informations about future of cw, hit registration rework, a hint of engine update to ue4 before/after release of mw5:m. Who would want to play this game after seeing the nice grafiks in the new game? Well, some people I guess.

[Juodas Varnas]

I STILL DON'T HAVE A SCORPION!

[Valhallan]

Aside from all the still outstanding FP/CW issues and slowed development mentioned by others, Because its been so long and there is still no sign of any incoming MELEE FUN in the game. I want a TSM Atlas with a hatchet!

(yes i know the canon version of what i want is the berserker, but a melee monster (40dmg hatchet) must have a skullface )

Edited by Valhallan, 05 December 2016 - 03:22 AM.

[Sjorpha]

Imperius, on 05 December 2016 - 01:19 AM, said:

I'm seeing people literally still complaining about things when MechCon pretty much nailed everything.

So why are you not happy? (Please be specific "this game sucks" is not specific for the record)
What would you have done differently?

Try not to fight peoples views or points and keep this a clean feedback thread please.

1. Skill tree being used for balancing. This is a bad idea because it means unskilled mechs will not be balanced against each other out of the gate, this especially bad for clan vs IS, newbies and trial mechs. I also don't like RPG leveling type elements in PvP arena shooters. My design philosophy is that competitive games should only have sidegrades and choices, not strict upgrades, for example I think endo steel should not be strictly better than standard structure and so on. PGI is now moving in the opposite direction from what I see as good design for online competitive games.

2. Community warfare not planned to fulfill the original vision. The interesting thing with community warfare for me was the prospect of player driven grand strategy on the galactic map, where different strategic moves on the map would have different implications and where it would be possible to achieve long term strategic goals and finally win the wars you are fighting. The plan now goes in the complete opposite direction with Community warfare being made into a glorified quickplay queue, there will be no player driven narratives but instead a "war" orchestrated by PGI. This also puts the nail in the coffin for logistics, unit ownership of strategic assets, NPC factions and a dynamic economy simulation. All things that were promised in the initial pitch for Community warfare. So this is really really really horrible news.

The new game modes and MW5 are good news, if they turn out well. I also approve of PGI designing their own mechs.

[CycKath]

Don't object to PGI designing their own 'Mechs, just that I see it as a slot another known tabletop design could have been released in.

[Tristan Winter]

Being happy about MW5 is kind of like giving Obama the Nobel's peace prize before he had actually done anything at all. (Thanks a lot, Norway!)

As for MWO, here are some things I'm not happy about:

• In 2012, Russ talked about 4 Pillars. Mech warfare, community warfare, role warfare and information warfare. In my opinion, only Mech warfare has been delivered to a satisfying degree.
  
• Community warfare is still not fixed and the series of roundtables ended after the first attempt, from the looks of it. PGI avoided the questions about maps and game modes and focused on buckets.
  
• Role warfare is still incomplete. In 2012, Russ explained their goal of making every class of mech instrumental and essential to victory. There was talk of synergy from different mechs with different roles working together. In 2016, I am fairly certain that every team in the World Championship would bring 8 KDK-3s if they could. No one would voluntarily bring 2-2-2-2. There are very few clear roles in MWO.
  
• Information warfare is still incomplete. The best information warfare we have seen was carried out in a public test early last year, and then abandoned. Now we get "diet information warfare", without many of the best aspects of Infotech, such as making certain mechs harder to detect with radar on account of their size and role, or making certain mechs particularly good or bad at sharing targeting data with other mechs. Information warfare still boils down to whether you have target decay and radar depravation modules, most of the time.
  
• Most MWO maps and game modes are terrible. Probably the worst I have seen in a FPS. Although mech warfare is so incredibly fun and rewarding that the game is still pretty great.

There's a lot of stuff I like about MWO, but PGI doesn't actually fix the bad things so much as compensate by adding more good things to the game.

[Karl Streiger]

NoiseCrypt, on 05 December 2016 - 02:06 AM, said:

"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."

what about the GXP I convertet from XP using MC? Do I get a MC refund too?

the quirkening while missguided had the ability to keep overpowered Mechs in check, after the revamp they need to tweak stuff again with weapon balancing (what is good) - but weapon balancing was never a serious issue as long as you keept the number of weapons per mech low.

So you really have to kill every ballistc weapon in the game to "catch" the KDK3 or Mauler. Even now single weapons of a kind is a waste of tonnage. They really need to deliver a concept there.