150 replies to this topic

[Violent Nick]

S C A R, on 15 December 2016 - 02:34 PM, said:

Guys and PGI, before you read this topic, I'd like to point out that this is my view and view of my team mates. It may vary to views of other people and units. I am not saying that it is a right or wrong view and I am not saying that some of the solutions I offer are the way to move forward I am basically expressing my opinion. This is how we feel based on the last 3 days of game play. Although PGI has attempted to resolve a FP “dilema” by brining QP maps into FP and reducing buckets (I am glad that they are trying at least) I am afraid those changes have been enough/successful at resolving the key issues with FP. 1)PUGs stomping: From our experience playing for last several days (cumulatively unit players played over 30 Invasion games. This is not counting QP matches) we met units only 3 times. When I am talkinga bout units I really mean one unit MJ12. That’s it. All other games were against absolute novices (most of them didn’t even have unit tags). Those guys did on average between 20 to 300 damage. We had a whole banch of games with the score 48-4, 48-5, 48-3. This is boring for us. Pugs don’t want to play like this and they quit FP. Possible solution: I know many people didn’t like the idea of quee splitting but I believe this is one way of resolving an issue. Split Groups vs Groups and Pugs vs Pugs. Prohibit one man units dropping into group quee. Provide adequate revards for the “pug” quee. Allow loaylist to put contracts for mercs to defend or attack specific planets. If a contract is achieved a unit gets additional cbills and loyalty points (without having to become loyalists). 2)Clans vs IS: There is absolutely no incentive for teams to go to IS. IS is getting destroyed. Just in 2 days IS lost already close to 20 planets (or so). IS mechs are loosing badely on trades. There in no enough range or structure buffs to close the distance to clans for the brawling range. Tonnage buff, although was a nice addition, is not enough. Too many new players join IS because clan mechs are expensive to buy and new players opt for IS mechs. Trial mechs in FP MUST be BANNED! Most of the builds are terrible (based around “lore”), equipped with “lurms”, have way too little armor at the front and cooling so bad that they are practically unplayable even by experienced pilots. Probation period. New players MUST not be allowed into FP unless they play 50, 75 or 100 games. Players need to have some experience to understand the flow of game a little bit. 3)Rewards for playing FP: Most of players (long-term) who play FP are millioners or billioners. C-bills provide little to no incentives playing FP. A lack of competition is another massive turn-off for units. MC rewards are so small that they don’t provide any incentives at all. Let’s look at a medium unit with 30 to 50 player base. A unit receives 15 MC per cycle per planet. Which means that a team earns 45 MC per day or less than 1 MC per player if a unit size is over 40 players. What is 1 MC per day? Guys, come one. Just to sum up everything. There is a big disbalance between Clans and IS. Teams are getting tired of playing vs pugs and pugs are getting tired of getting farmed. Whilst “tag of war system” made FP a bit more diverse and exciting this is not enough to keep FP population interested. Regretably, I am afraid the new system failed to address the core issues with FP…

SPOT ON..
The only thing I would say in addition is that the ban on trial mechs, some kind of performance/experience barrier and DEFINITELY splitting groups and pugs should be tried before anything else like a tonnage change for example. Once the Pugstomp imbalance is removed, then we can look at real balance. If PGI do not do this, they lose players by the day because no one wants to get pugstomped, but they do want to FP. PGI, there is a hole in your bucket... and there has been for a long time. Thankyou SCAR for writing this. I can't believe PGI haven't done something about this long ago, but heyho.. keep believing..

xx

[Starbomber109]

Count Zero 74, on 16 December 2016 - 09:47 PM, said:

Trial Mechs OP!!

Dude, this made my day

[Anatidaephobia]

Let me give some input as a solo queue player;

I am sick and tired of getting destroyed by massive groups of premades in almost every FW match I play, it's just absolutely ridiculous, if you're complaining that it's too easy, atleast you're stilling winning and advancing something, even getting some loot. The sole reason why I'm even still playing is because of the faction advantages such as mech bays to unlock, but I've had not a single Invasion win [RIP the stocking event on that part] and only narrowly scraping by a scout win every 5-6 matches.

Yes, I'm not the best of players, but I often [try to] manage to pull my weight in a match that's required but there's absolutely no point. Scouting for intel as Clan always ends up the same way : the IS forms a deathball of Griffins, Hunchbacks and all other crap, somehow always manages to find you or the drop zone and then hunts you down one by one.

I can hear you say it already "But Anatidaephobia, your group is also supposed to be sticking toget-" Nope. 95% of the time, the people in my pug refuse to communicate and just run off to get killed one by one. I've tried winning by objective timers, too bad that it either takes a decade to appear in the middle of nowhere while you're being hunted OR it just happens to be in the middle of the group of enemies. Oh boy, I sure love to try and get into a square zone where 4 55-ton mechs are setup and ready to shoot my legs off.

Then when we do "Protect Intel", the premades don't even gather intel, they run around in their deathball and make it a glorified skirmish, the longer the dropship takes to arrive, the more they can hunt for kills anyway, and they have the tonnage advantage! For now all I can do is that I take my Nova, cripple all of their legs and hope the dropship is far enough away so they can't make it in time, what a fun and interactive experience!

Then onto Invasion, I like playing Invasion as a mode, it allows me to utilise multiple of my mechs and i just feels like a big warfare match, plus usually you'd expect some sort of teamwork to be there, right?
Wrong. The only teamwork you're getting is when you end up in the middle of a currently Clan-ing group of 8-11 and from my experience lately, all the big teams seems to be working on the IS side. The new gamemodes and stuff? Hey, I like it, I like the change and the difference it makes to not make every match the same, BUT HALF OF THE PUG-FORMED TEAMS DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW DOMINATION WORKS! Hello guys, I'm in the zone, solo, could I get some backup? .... Guys? .... Okay, I'm dead now, and the counter is going down, somebody needs to get into the circle! Anyone? Oh, right. Keep on shooting your LRMs from 2150 meters away, good going!

For Skirmish, If we get even up to 24 kills total, I'd call it a success. I have yet to win a single match of Invasion since the 4.1 update went live, every single game is just a complete blowout where a premade group forms a wrecking ball, goes to one of our lance spawns and then cleans up house, then moving onto the next. There's just nothing you can do when you have people who refuse to get organised or decide bring in 4 LRM boats and keep on asking for "locks" while each enemy lance has atleast one ECM covering them.

PUG vs PUG is something I've never seen happen before, I really do want to respond to the "Call to arms" but what's the point? I'm just sticking to scouting because atleast I have some chance to win even if it's a premade on the other side.



Oh and when you do get someone on a microphone, they blast constant negativity and insults at you because you were unlucky enough to get headshot by two mechs on the first engagement. Fun and joy for everyone!



Sorry if this seemed rant-ish, it's just an annoying situation to deal with when you're on the other side while trying to advance and play a game you genuinely enjoy.



Edit : And for the IS people complaining about Clan-premades, why don't I ever meet these Clan groups? Why can't these premades just face eachother? I don't remember when the last time I was grouped in a clan premade, but every match is an IS premade.

Edited by Anatidaephobia, 01 January 2017 - 11:50 AM.

[Naelbis]

I find it hilarious that EVIL is here admitting there is a tech imbalance while they sit in game telling us there is no tech issue and they switched to clan because its harder....

[MischiefSC]

I would say that I built complete Clan drop decks in both my Clan alts only playing CW and pugging alongside EVIL and KCom every chance I got. Trials are... what they are but without them you're adding weeks and months to the QP time required to get into FW.

Honestly? I don't want people to learn how to play in QP. That's a big part of the problem. QP teaches you to play like an idiot 9 times out of 10. I'd *rather* people are able to get into FW, learn to play in FW from good FW players and then hopefully only play QP to try out new builds and just derp around.

[Sedmeister]

SCAR, thanks for your passion for the game and your ideas.

My thoughts:

Leave clan tech as OP as per lore.

Scrap dropdeck tonnage balancing.

Introduce Stars versus Lance's (10 clan v 12 IS).

Split the queues (PUG V PUG and Team V Team) BUT give Team V Team a 5 clan V 6 IS option (that is not scout) to reduce wait times due to diminishing pool of FW players. These smaller teams are then given the QP maps in FW.

Introduce probation unit member category/ system so:

Pugs can join a unit without the unit having to pay huge amounts to add the pug to the unit,

Pug doesn't need to commit long term to a unit,

Pug doesn't pay penalties for breaking loyalty/contracts etc.

This allows units to take on pugs as apprentices, taking time to train the pugs, advise them on skills, strategy, builds, drop deck composition etc.

[Vxheous]

Sedmeister, on 01 January 2017 - 03:21 PM, said:

SCAR, thanks for your passion for the game and your ideas.

My thoughts:

Leave clan tech as OP as per lore.

Scrap dropdeck tonnage balancing.

Introduce Stars versus Lance's (10 clan v 12 IS).

Split the queues (PUG V PUG and Team V Team) BUT give Team V Team a 5 clan V 6 IS option (that is not scout) to reduce wait times due to diminishing pool of FW players. These smaller teams are then given the QP maps in FW.

Introduce probation unit member category/ system so:

Pugs can join a unit without the unit having to pay huge amounts to add the pug to the unit,

Pug doesn't need to commit long term to a unit,

Pug doesn't pay penalties for breaking loyalty/contracts etc.

This allows units to take on pugs as apprentices, taking time to train the pugs, advise them on skills, strategy, builds, drop deck composition etc.

10vs12 has been suggested multiple times and multiple times it has been shown it won't work:

1. OP clan mech for 10vs 12 breaks Quick play completely

2. In a PvP game, people are going to gravitate to being in the best equipment vs being more numerous. No one wants to play the russian conscript of WWII standing in the face of Ironman

[Czarr]

If a player is dropping in a group of 4 or more players they should be in a group queue while their should also be a pug queue for the solo players. That would fix a lot of issues, but also IS mechs need more quirks or better quirks causes its amazing the difference between clan mechs and IS mechs, my merc unit recently switched to clan and we have been doing very well as oppose to IS where we struggled...even against pugs

Edited by Czarr, 01 January 2017 - 04:23 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Vxheous Kerensky, on 01 January 2017 - 03:39 PM, said:

10vs12 has been suggested multiple times and multiple times it has been shown it won't work:

1. OP clan mech for 10vs 12 breaks Quick play completely

2. In a PvP game, people are going to gravitate to being in the best equipment vs being more numerous. No one wants to play the russian conscript of WWII standing in the face of Ironman

Beyond which '10 v 12' isn't somehow more balanced than 12 v 12. 10 v 12 is even less balanced; bad mechs are more negative and OP mech more OP because each one is having to carry significantly more. We would have to completely rebalance weapons and equipment to try and make it work, from scratch -

which is more effort than just finishing up the holes in 12 v 12 balance.

There is absolutely no good reason at all to try for '10 v 12' balance. Even tabletop BT abandoned the idea. There is no good reason to repeat the mistakes in BTs development as a game and we should instead focus on getting to where it ended up. 1 to 1.

[Nightbird]

I suggest changing Mercs to be non-faction aligned. When you are queuing, you need to select a valid clan and IS dropdeck and the matchmaker can put you on either side of the tug-of-war. This will prevent merc stacking on one side or the other and make for closer tug of war matches.

[Lily from animove]

lots of broken ideas, that simply and only sound good on the firts glimpse but are still bad on the second.

lets talk about trial mechs,

go and see the average failpugger in CW, they don't bring trials, they bring badly build own mechs. erasing trials won't fix that. in fact it will only make alot people new to the game quickly buy 4 mechs (and guess by price that this will be IS mechs) whihc then end up with 4 low cost bad eqipped and optimised mechs in the IS.

The problem of people like you is that you come try to see the problem, and rease the problem and call it solution. But you never go the step ahead and think about how the affected people will react to your solution. And thats why most of your "solutions" are just causing the next issue. Thats a great tactic if you get paid for solving issues because it makes sure you get paid to solve the next surely upcoming issue. But it is not a true solution if it just shifts the problems from one to another. And unfortuntaley this is the nature of omost people making suggestions here andwhen PGI listens to them they don't fix anything and then everyone blames PGI again. But oyu can't make them responsible for this.



p.s. trialmechs aren't based around lore anymore, they were made by player suggestions and aren't stock mechs anymore as they once used to be. From which year did you got those informations? Wasn't that even a late 2015 early 2016 thing when this was changed?
But you see it turned out to involve Xl crabs, so much to the skill of people to suggest them and PGI to select them.

Edited by Lily from animove, 03 January 2017 - 03:45 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Lily from animove, on 02 January 2017 - 06:49 AM, said:

lots of broken ideas, that simply and only sound good on the firts glimpse but are still bad on the second.

lets talk about trial mechs,

go and see the average failpugger in CW, they don't bring trials, they bring badly build own mechs. erasing trials won't fix that. in fact it will only make alot people new to the game quickly buy 4 mechs (and guess by price that this will be IS mechs) whihc then end up with 4 low cost bad eqipped and optimised mechs in the IS.

The problem of people like you is that you come try to see the problem, and rease the problem and call it solution. But you never go the step ahead and think about how the affected people will react to your solution. And thats why most of your "solutions" are just causing the next issue. Thats a great tactic if you get paid for solving issues because it makes sure you get paid to solve the next surely upcoming issue. But it is not a true solution if it just shifts the problems from one to another. And unfortuntaley this is the nature of omost people making suggestions here andwhen PGI listens to them they don't fix anything and then everyone blames PGI again. But oyu can't make them responsible for this.



p.s. trialmechs aren't based around lore anymore, they were made by player suggestions and aren't stoc mehcs anymore as they once used to be. From which year did you got those informations? Wasn't that even a late 2015 early 2016 thing when this was changed?
But you see it turned out to involve Xl crabs, so much to the skill of people to suggest them and PGI to select them.

Trials should be good CW mechs. Solid ones. Wubberbolt, UAC Jag, LPL BLR 2C. These are mechs that can be used reasonably well even with minimal skill and that teach really good habits. Keep Simple, Kill Secured.

Having Trial Mechs be a near ideal dropdeck would be the smartest possible approach.

Again:

The smart approach is actually making it very easy for new players to get into FP and very easy for players to create groups while in match. What we really want is for new players to learn to play in FP, where they learn communication, coordination and good mech design from experienced players. One of the biggest mistakes we're making is expecting players to 'learn to play' in the s**t show that is QP, build good mechs with no direct help and then switch to FP and magically learn to communicate and coordinate.

Make FP the starting point. Make it easy to bring people into groups and let us freaking copy/paste into in game chat between matches to share TS info and such. The benefits this would have to the FW population can not be over stated.

[Dark Path]

This just highlights that the pretenders playing Clan are no true Clanners. The clan always held a superiority of firepower for honor they would bid to see who could commit the fewest resources and manpower possible to win. It was for honor, not just pure conquest.

For a novel idea to force parity in FW -
Perhaps if Clans are committing equal resources against IS then there should be no bounty or prize for winning, and it should scale up based on weight inequity.

[50 50]

Dark Path, on 02 January 2017 - 12:18 PM, said:

This just highlights that the pretenders playing Clan are no true Clanners. The clan always held a superiority of firepower for honor they would bid to see who could commit the fewest resources and manpower possible to win. It was for honor, not just pure conquest.

For a novel idea to force parity in FW -
Perhaps if Clans are committing equal resources against IS then there should be no bounty or prize for winning, and it should scale up based on weight inequity.

That's because there is no option to take less mechs and as it is with all the attempts to make IS mechs and equipment on par with the Clan equivalents, why would we?
But it is that very point you raise that prompt the question: "Why can't we take less than 4 mechs in the drop deck?"
If we think about the structure of the drops in Faction Play then it's 12 players with 4 mechs each for a total of 48 mechs.
While it seems that on a one to one basis we need to be able to value an IS mech vs a Clan mech to work out the performance difference in tonnage, could it be that removing the minimum restrictions for a drop deck in terms of number of mechs and minimum tonnage will help with this situation?

The other aspect of Faction Play is the organised units vs the solo's. A co-ordinated and experienced group will always trump the other. While separating the queues is one option and was tried (albeit incorrectly implemented in my mind) I don't believe it is the answer. If anything, I would suggest that no more than 4 solo players are allowed into a match on each side under the current system. This would mean limiting groups to 4 / 8 players in size, but I still don't believe this is the best answer as many units and payers can pull together a full company or more and will want to drop together.
Introducing a match maker and using PSRs etc will only work if the population playing FW is significant enough for it to work reliably, but I also don't believe this is the way to go for this mode.

Faction Play is meant to be the big epic battle we fight and tells our story of how we fought on a planet and participated in the battle. Currently, I believe the introduction of the quick play modes has been a very good move. Would we agree that the longer game times and having more mechs to use has made these quick play maps and modes feel more war like?
Based on my observations and experiences so far, I would say that having these different objectives, increasing the length of the matches and using the drop decks has increased the appeal ten fold.

So the next obvious step, following this line of thinking, is to open the system up and really turn it into the epic battle we want.

• Make a single battle zone an ongoing conflict that is open for players to drop in and out of for the duration of the attack phase. (8 hours).
  
• Combine all the modes (Assault, Conquest, Domination, Invasion and Scouting) into a single mode on a single map for a single zone.

This means making some BIG maps but because there are multiple objectives to capture and re-capture, we bring the tug of war into the battle and have to divide our focus between taking new objectives, holding existing ones and re-capturing those that are lost. While a co-ordinated team will obviously be better at doing this, it does allow more space for solo players to not be completely overrun as they are in a single objective scenario.

• Ease the minimum restrictions on the drop decks so players can bring in a single mech if they so choose.

Many players just have time for a quick skirmish and can't spend the time needed to really make a big contribution to the invasion effort but they would still like to participate. By allowing players to join with a single mech, they can join in, do some scouting, raid an objective point, skirmish with some mechs and then leave. They can still contribute, still enjoy the mode and they are rotated out of the battle allowing another player to come in once they leave.

• We need to accept that it does not have to be all about the taking of the planet.

Many people are after missions and more of a story, we need only make our own if the system allows it. It should be possible for a single player to initiate an attack on a planet with no opposition. This single player may not be able to do much, scout around a little, have a quick go at one of the objectives, but we have to be ok with allowing this scenario not escalating beyond this point. It might be that a single lance drops onto the planet to try and take some resource points and take off again with their loot. This needs to be accepted as ok! The mentality that the mode must only be 12 v 12 and only about taking the planet is something we need to get away from. It should be perfectly acceptable if we have a thousand little conflicts waged along the various borders that amount to little more than some scouting, skirmishing and raiding. It's these actions by small groups and solo players that can setup the zone for later invasion by a large group as they have gathered some intel and captured some objectives that make the zone more appealing for an invasion.

• With an open scenario we can allow larger groups of perhaps 36 vs 36 because we can use the drop decks and the queues as a way to rotate players through.

Just as important as making the game accessible to the solo player is setting the scene for major conflicts. This is the other side of the coin and the deep end of the pool. Groups and large units want that want that big epic scale warfare should be able to stack in multiple waves. If the system includes all the objectives and we have some BIG maps then we can create these epic scenarios where units can fight back and forth over the territory.

• Make this information visible to the players.

It should be that when we select a conflict to join, we can see how much intel has been gathered for it, how many objectives have been taken and how many players and which units from our faction is involved. Live intel on the opposition can also be displayed as well as details of the zone being contested. If we have the information up front, then we can make our own choice about whether to deploy to that battle and the risks we will likely face.

• Make greater use of the drop decks for repair/rearm and logistics features.

These are two features that have been asked for over and over again and it's pretty simple to implement in basic format.
Total number of mechs * total tonnage * c-bill cost = logistics cost for committing your mechs to a battle. Pretty easy.
Capturing conquest points = collecting resource points on your drop deck. Spend these points to repair your mechs... or keep the points as loot raided from the opposition. Once again, should be pretty easy.
But importantly this allows two additional options for us. It gives us two other ways to implement balance between Clan and IS by making it cost more or less. Secondly, it allows us to look at future items to implement such as bases, dropships and NPCs that can affect these costs giving us more investment in the universe as players and with our units. We begin to live in the Battletech universe.

That was probably waaaay to much to devote to this post, but hey, there you go.

[Ogvai Ogvai Helmschrott]

S C A R, on 15 December 2016 - 02:34 PM, said:

Guys and PGI, before you read this topic, I'd like to point out that this is my view and view of my team mates. It may vary to views of other people and units. I am not saying that it is a right or wrong view and I am not saying that some of the solutions I offer are the way to move forward I am basically expressing my opinion. This is how we feel based on the last 3 days of game play.



Although PGI has attempted to resolve a FP “dilema” by brining QP maps into FP and reducing buckets (I am glad that they are trying at least) I am afraid those changes have been enough/successful at resolving the key issues with FP.



1)PUGs stomping:


From our experience playing for last several days (cumulatively unit players played over 30 Invasion games. This is not counting QP matches) we met units only 3 times. When I am talkinga bout units I really mean one unit MJ12. That’s it. All other games were against absolute novices (most of them didn’t even have unit tags). Those guys did on average between 20 to 300 damage. We had a whole banch of games with the score 48-4, 48-5, 48-3.



This is boring for us. Pugs don’t want to play like this and they quit FP.



Possible solution:



I know many people didn’t like the idea of quee splitting but I believe this is one way of resolving an issue. Split Groups vs Groups and Pugs vs Pugs. Prohibit one man units dropping into group quee. Provide adequate revards for the “pug” quee. Allow loaylist to put contracts for mercs to defend or attack specific planets. If a contract is achieved a unit gets additional cbills and loyalty points (without having to become loyalists).



2)Clans vs IS:


There is absolutely no incentive for teams to go to IS. IS is getting destroyed. Just in 2 days IS lost already close to 20 planets (or so). IS mechs are loosing badely on trades. There in no enough range or structure buffs to close the distance to clans for the brawling range.



Tonnage buff, although was a nice addition, is not enough. Too many new players join IS because clan mechs are expensive to buy and new players opt for IS mechs.


Trial mechs in FP MUST be BANNED! Most of the builds are terrible (based around “lore”), equipped with “lurms”, have way too little armor at the front and cooling so bad that they are practically unplayable even by experienced pilots.



Probation period. New players MUST not be allowed into FP unless they play 50, 75 or 100 games. Players need to have some experience to understand the flow of game a little bit.



3)Rewards for playing FP:


Most of players (long-term) who play FP are millioners or billioners. C-bills provide little to no incentives playing FP. A lack of competition is another massive turn-off for units. MC rewards are so small that they don’t provide any incentives at all. Let’s look at a medium unit with 30 to 50 player base. A unit receives 15 MC per cycle per planet. Which means that a team earns 45 MC per day or less than 1 MC per player if a unit size is over 40 players. What is 1 MC per day? Guys, come one.


Just to sum up everything. There is a big disbalance between Clans and IS. Teams are getting tired of playing vs pugs and pugs are getting tired of getting farmed. Whilst “tag of war system” made FP a bit more diverse and exciting this is not enough to keep FP population interested. Regretably, I am afraid the new system failed to address the core issues with FP…

dont get me wrong, clann mechs are OP As ****, and we should probably have reversed engineered clan tech for is right now...BUT....Are you not the ******* that was posting these tweets?

https://twitter.com/...l1/with_replies

Quote

@russ_bullock[color=#292F33] Russ, EVIL is going to destroy FP. We are going stop and farm everyone every day until they quit the game. This is all ur[/color]

@russ_bullock[color=#292F33] fault for breaking FP. We spent so much money and effort on this BS. IF u screw us we screw u back. Merry Christmas[/color]

If you're not that ******* so be it, BUT if you are, thats no way to go about anything, it just shows that A Evil have a ******* trying to do PR(because thats what it is...frankly) and B..well **** son, really? way to lower any form of respect and anything i had for EVIL in that case AND i shouldnt even have to call you a ******* you should know this yourself, saying your gonna farm people into the ground and kill the game you so much want to improve...Yeah cause thats the way to do it...Reminds me of ISIS in away..."if you dont do as we say we gonna bomb you"..... Also Yes this is just a game, and ISIS kill real people but lets boil it down, your trying to basically get a person to do what you want them to do, via threats......let that sink in..


And yes Teamwork will suffice over weight and tonage anyday, given you all work in a cohheasive manner and are well coordinated, Which is why Clanners worked in STAR's, it was 10v12, not 12v12.

And the tech really should be available to IS now, **** the timeline, literally, its worthless to PGI on balance, the sheer number of clan mechs i personally have killed and survived from, the mechs would have been picked clean, down to the burnt cloth of the seat lining and im 100% sure EVERYONE would do the same....

[Nosiwosi]

Sorry if I didn't read everything. But I was wondering on the point of the PUGs or newbies buying IS mechs because they're cheaper. If I buy an IS mech, I would most likely still have to spend for a proper engine, DHS, and Endo, Ferro not so much. Compared to buying a Clan mech which would I think (I don't own any) most likely have DHS and Endo and a "decent" Engine built in. So the price is actually pretty much the same, but new guys don't know that persay. If these guys knew that in the end was the same, they wouldn't opt to just rush on the IS side maybe? Yes, I agree the IS has more flexibility, so maybe the store should showcase that a little more. Like if it was shown like buying a custom car, where you'd buy the base chassis, then customize it yourself from there, it could save people time and the mistake of buying a mech for this amount expecting it will work only to find out they need this amount more to optimize the mech, and we're not even talking about the weapons yet.

Dunno, lack of sleep and random thoughts while reading part of this thread got me to this random ramble.

[Peter2k]

ironnightbird, on 01 January 2017 - 07:04 PM, said:

I suggest changing Mercs to be non-faction aligned. When you are queuing, you need to select a valid clan and IS dropdeck and the matchmaker can put you on either side of the tug-of-war. This will prevent merc stacking on one side or the other and make for closer tug of war matches.

That might be kinda fun

I'm not staying with one side since lore just isn't a big enough grip for me
Just looking for the pay ;-)

Also I enjoy playing them both

As long as I get the number of dropdecks I have for both sides (actually bought a third)

[The Basilisk]

Well I've read most of the thread and got a, pretty sad, general idea what most of the people in this thread think and want to express.

Most of you make fault isolation and folowing solutions based on false asumptions caused by confirmation bias.
I call it the "specialists" patting each others back syndrom.

-- You complain about ppl bringing "bad builds" or trial mechs.
-> Your solution is to "teach" people playing and building mechs based on your idea how it should work.

-- You complain about ppl building up bad habits in QP (or what ever hillrious idea comes to mind)
-> Again your notion is that the people you perceive to be bad player need to learn how it works your way because you think its the right way.

-- You complain about the imbalance between Clans and IS technologie
(wich is the very reason and the basis for this game since its main theme is the Claninvasion)

-> Your solution is to negate this by balancing and denieing any notion how this could be implemented in a way that would make it work. And your reason is again the notion that ppl would naturely think the competetive way (your way) wanting nothing but minmaxing their loadouts always going for the "stronger" side.
Any ppl playing IS and lore like builds anyway are either newbs, potatoes or just stupid.

Well...you're so very wrong.

Do you know why you are meeting so many "bad" players ?
Because its the bulk of the ppl playing this game.

Do you know why they seem unable to learn ?
Because they don't give a sh.. about what you are saying or thinking or wanting.

Do you know why there are so many "bad builds" out there ?
Because most of the guys and girls are sick and tired of the minmaxed cookie cutter tryhard builds out there.

Well surprise not the bad players and potatoes and lore nerds are a problem.
They all together are the majority.
The elitists, the comps and pros...they are the problem.
You herd the sheep and hunt the predators.

Edited by The Basilisk, 03 January 2017 - 01:54 AM.

[Stormie]

The Basilisk, on 03 January 2017 - 01:50 AM, said:

Well I've read most of the thread and got a, pretty sad, general idea what most of the people in this thread think and want to express.

Most of you make fault isolation and folowing solutions based on false asumptions caused by confirmation bias.
I call it the "specialists" patting each others back syndrom.

-- You complain about ppl bringing "bad builds" or trial mechs.
-> Your solution is to "teach" people playing and building mechs based on your idea how it should work.

-- You complain about ppl building up bad habits in QP (or what ever hillrious idea comes to mind)
-> Again your notion is that the people you perceive to be bad player need to learn how it works your way because you think its the right way.

-- You complain about the imbalance between Clans and IS technologie
(wich is the very reason and the basis for this game since its main theme is the Claninvasion)

-> Your solution is to negate this by balancing and denieing any notion how this could be implemented in a way that would make it work. And your reason is again the notion that ppl would naturely think the competetive way (your way) wanting nothing but minmaxing their loadouts always going for the "stronger" side.
Any ppl playing IS and lore like builds anyway are either newbs, potatoes or just stupid.

Well...you're so very wrong.

Do you know why you are meeting so many "bad" players ?
Because its the bulk of the ppl playing this game.

Do you know why they seem unable to learn ?
Because they don't give a sh.. about what you are saying or thinking or wanting.

Do you know why there are so many "bad builds" out there ?
Because most of the guys and girls are sick and tired of the minmaxed cookie cutter tryhard builds out there.

Well surprise not the bad players and potatoes and lore nerds are a problem.
They all together are the majority.
The elitists, the comps and pros...they are the problem.
You herd the sheep and hunt the predators.

which is all fine to be honest, nothing wrong with playing lore/spud build and playing with a non-competitive mindset. however be aware by doing so you lose your right to ***** and moan 'x/y is OP'

[Lily from animove]

MischiefSC, on 02 January 2017 - 11:31 AM, said:

Trials should be good CW mechs. Solid ones. Wubberbolt, UAC Jag, LPL BLR 2C. These are mechs that can be used reasonably well even with minimal skill and that teach really good habits. Keep Simple, Kill Secured.

Having Trial Mechs be a near ideal dropdeck would be the smartest possible approach.

Again:

The smart approach is actually making it very easy for new players to get into FP and very easy for players to create groups while in match. What we really want is for new players to learn to play in FP, where they learn communication, coordination and good mech design from experienced players. One of the biggest mistakes we're making is expecting players to 'learn to play' in the s**t show that is QP, build good mechs with no direct help and then switch to FP and magically learn to communicate and coordinate.

Make FP the starting point. Make it easy to bring people into groups and let us freaking copy/paste into in game chat between matches to share TS info and such. The benefits this would have to the FW population can not be over stated.

yes a proper chatsystem would be good, we still have some very very crappy one.