52 replies to this topic

[Rebas Kradd]

Bud Crue, on 21 December 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

I think for a lot of the roles that folks want, particularly scouting, you are correct. But I don't think this is the players fault or the modes, or even the size of the maps. I think this limitation is one created by the stagnant nature of the maps and the lack of any random variables other than (initial day night cycle). I mean once you play a map a few times you know exactly where the enemy is starting from. As such you can also make a good guess of where they are going (Nascar!), and where they are likely to be in a reasonable amount of time. In that environment the only way I can think of to provide any perceived use for scouting is if they made at least the drop zones/starting positions randomized (within reason) or came up with a way to have a random map generator. Without such randomization (or a shi7ton of maps) "scouting" such as it is just about coming up with a conceptual reason to have light mechs in the game as opposed actually giving them a purpose.

I don't think players would like that, either. The howl of "UNBALANCED" would echo across the stars.

Much better to come up with gamemodes that require each team to hold multiple objectives simultaneously. Conquest is a good example, and it's our most interesting mode. But the fact that lights can cap as easily as assaults, the speed of capping, and the circular arrangement of the points all make it weird.

Plus, conquest is unpopular.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 21 December 2016 - 11:55 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Rebas Kradd, on 21 December 2016 - 11:54 AM, said:

I don't think players would like that, either. The howl of "UNBALANCED" would echo across the stars.

You may be right. But to scout implies a role where you are looking out for something. Why bother looking when you already know -to a pretty good degree of certainty- where what you are looking for is at? Only way I think that such a role is necessary is if we didn't already know the terrain and don't automatically know where the enemy is at.

[Tristan Winter]

Rebas Kradd, on 21 December 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

That's because a lot of the players don't want the design elements necessary to do it.

In most games, the enemy is revealed within the first thirty seconds of a match and remains both clumped up and well-spotted for the entire match, removing the need for scouts. Maps are nice and wide open, so any old Banshee pilot can scout as well as a Locust. And commanders? Their role is either folded into Teamspeak communication or handed to players (arty/air/UAV) via modules, and with the enemy clumped up due to having a single objective to pursue, there's nothing for a commander to do anyway.

But players don't want to hear this. Give them a map the size of Alpine Peaks that actually requires scouting and they complain about "walking simulator". Give them a map dense enough to make information warfare real and they hate Viridian Bog.

I think we have to face the fact that role warfare just isn't compatible with the quick-drop style of MWO, and the players don't want it to be.

I've suggested a gamemode that might be able to bridge the gap, but PGI's design team keeps listening to the simplistic kiddie ideas like King of the Hill and Escort instead.

I agree. Unfortunately, all of PGI's placeholder stuff, like Assault mode quick play on tiny maps, lasted so long that it determined which players left and which stuck around. Many of those who would appreciate the things you mentioned have left. I think it's too late to fix many of those issues, for multiple reasons.

[Johnny Z]

The game needs light fusion engine and Aerotech and to put the warrior in MechWarrior and Overlord dropships and jumpships and capital ships and repair and rearm and mechbay mechanics and first person mechbay.

Also a desert map and metropolis map and tunne/cave map and also a meaningful galactic war and aliens.

And 200 ton multi player quads and space fortresses and mine layers and tanks and battlefield gunships and close battlefield capital ship support and orbital strikes and Natasha Kerensky and Sting and Wasp and Crusader and Solaris and first person mech dealerships/scrap yards and pilots quarters and aliens and NPC's and Comstar and capital world defense.

Edited by Johnny Z, 21 December 2016 - 12:46 PM.

[dario03]

What the game needs....is new weapons. All these new mechs are basically just different skins, where as new weapons could really update the gameplay.

Oh and new light mechs and light mech buffs would be nice too. Not just quirks either, get rid of the 40kph limit, and give more boost to jump jets.

[DAYLEET]

RestosIII, on 21 December 2016 - 09:29 AM, said:

All of you are fools of the highest caliber. What we really need is a custom radio station for you to listen to while playing the game. I want to be able to pipe this through the speakers in my cockpit while playing for maximum Clan Diamond Shark immersion!

I actually have a GTA V, SA, IV, Vice, playlist i listen to while playing MWO. Channel X, Radio X, Los Santos Rock Radio, Liberty Rock, V-Rock. All Youtube rip because the comments are as important as the songs themselves. Yes, im much more likely to die in a blaze of fire way too early with Channel X while screaming AMOEBA! than i am when Los Santos is playing Round About of YES. Nothing like punk and Light mech! to get you killed, but it's beautiful.

[Rebas Kradd]

Bud Crue, on 21 December 2016 - 11:59 AM, said:

You may be right. But to scout implies a role where you are looking out for something. Why bother looking when you already know -to a pretty good degree of certainty- where what you are looking for is at? Only way I think that such a role is necessary is if we didn't already know the terrain and don't automatically know where the enemy is at.

You can know the terrain without knowing where the enemy is at. If you have a large enough map, with sight lines occluded enough (by rolling terrain, vegetation, atmospheric effects, etc.) to block easy spotting, then you'd be pretty reliant on your scouts.

[Johnny Z]

Did anyone mention Aerotech yet?

[Johnny Z]

What about scary aliens?

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Johnny Z, on 22 December 2016 - 02:09 AM, said:

What about scary aliens?

scary alien animals ?Star Wars Animals to unrealistic for the more "realistic" SF Universe of BT ...landlived giants Animals thats greater as Dinosaurs ? for it you must have Worlds with less Gravity ...and Dinosaursized Animals ..a T.rex have the Height of the Warhammer Hip ,a Brachiosaur has the Hight of the Warhammer ..and AlienCultures ?! only very primitives like the "Avatar" Natives for the BT Universe

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 22 December 2016 - 03:24 AM.

[adamts01]

Rebas Kradd, on 21 December 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

But players don't want to hear this. Give them a map the size of Alpine Peaks that actually requires scouting and they complain about "walking simulator". Give them a map dense enough to make information warfare real and they hate Viridian Bog.

I think we have to face the fact that role warfare just isn't compatible with the quick-drop style of MWO, and the players don't want it to be.

That's why the game needs two modes, and two modes only. Quickplay, and Group. Group is hard mode simulator with big maps and scouting, a revised CW, and quickplay is "bring whatever you want and troll away." They can go so far as to remove heat and ammo for quickplay, I'm sure it would be a hit.

dario03, on 21 December 2016 - 12:33 PM, said:

Oh and new light mechs and light mech buffs would be nice too. Not just quirks either, get rid of the 40kph limit, and give more boost to jump jets.

A big yes on jump jets. But more powerful lights gets back to how the game should be balanced. #TonnageMatters or #EveryMechIsEqual?

[Johnny Z]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 22 December 2016 - 03:24 AM, said:

scary alien animals ?Star Wars Animals to unrealistic for the more "realistic" SF Universe of BT ...landlived giants Animals thats greater as Dinosaurs ? for it you must have Worlds with less Gravity ...and Dinosaursized Animals ..a T.rex have the Height of the Warhammer Hip ,a Brachiosaur has the Hight of the Warhammer ..and AlienCultures ?! only very primitives like the "Avatar" Natives for the BT Universe

I see a space sci-fi without giant scary aliens as being unrealistic.

I am still trying to get over the fact that Mass Effect stole my original idea of an all female race of blue aliens.

Edited by Johnny Z, 22 December 2016 - 08:28 AM.

[xTrident]

I don't disagree with most in what this game needs. But I wanted to add to two things I saw as I read through the comments. First is the match maker/PSR. Ever since the match maker has been ignoring the tier system on who to team people against my quality of matches has gone through the roof. I'm doing more damage, getting more kills, actually winning matches. It actually feels fair out there now. I fully believe I was being teamed against players above my skill level and it was killing the game for me. I still have those wins and losses of 2 - 12 stomps but for the most part they're all much closer, much better. One match I thought our team did a terrible job on every front. As bad as it was going early on I just assumed a 2 -12 loss at best. Wound up 7 - 12. I'll take a match like that when it feels terrible right from the start. Matter a fact I think that match was pretty balanced.

At this point I say forget a match maker "trying" to make it balanced. It didn't work and actually made it terrible for me. And it was even worse when playing with friends in a group. I'd rather the match maker just group players together and risk who you're going to fight with/against. Before it wasn't uncommon that I'd lose five matches in a row pugging. Ten matches in a row in group queue. Now it seems to be pretty damn close to 1:1 win/loss pugging, maybe 1.3:1 while group queue is about a 0.8:1. And trust me, 0.8 to 1 is much, much better than losing ten in a row.

The second thing I want to quickly address is the problems some have with lights. I honestly don't see it. I understand lights blocking assaults and that being an issue, and I can also understand wanting to knock them down after they've been hit by something massive. Beyond that I don't think they're OP at all. I've been killed with one shot in Oxide. I've had a side torso shot off in one shot in my Arctic Cheetah which limited my speed and destroyed half of my weapons. I think there's probably two things going on when people shoot at lights. Either 1) They're not actually hitting them as well as they think. 2) PGI's hit detection sucks. I think it's a little bit of both as I've seen videos of people blasting a light with a large alpha and nothing happens to them. As if they're not even getting shot and the players cross hairs were dead center on the light. I also believe many players actually think they're better than they are. So I don't think the lights are a real problem other than the fact that they don't actually have the gameplay characteristics of a light - Such as stopping assaults or not being knocked down etc.

Edited by xTrident, 22 December 2016 - 09:45 AM.

[Rebas Kradd]

Tristan Winter, on 21 December 2016 - 12:19 PM, said:

I agree. Unfortunately, all of PGI's placeholder stuff, like Assault mode quick play on tiny maps, lasted so long that it determined which players left and which stuck around. Many of those who would appreciate the things you mentioned have left. I think it's too late to fix many of those issues, for multiple reasons.

Those players are always around the corner. It costs them nothing to pick the game back up and try again. That's why I don't want to give up so easily.

[Tristan Winter]

Rebas Kradd, on 22 December 2016 - 10:33 AM, said:

Those players are always around the corner. It costs them nothing to pick the game back up and try again. That's why I don't want to give up so easily.

I hope you're right, and in some ways I agree with you. I think there will definitely be a lot of disgruntled ex-MWO players who will be willing to pay for MW5:Mercs, for example. As for returning to MWO, it certainly happens, but the people on my Friends-list from 2013 and 2014 have been offline for an awfully long time.

[dario03]

adamts01, on 22 December 2016 - 03:56 AM, said:

A big yes on jump jets. But more powerful lights gets back to how the game should be balanced. #TonnageMatters or #EveryMechIsEqual?

As the game is now it should be #EveryMechIsEqual.
If they changed it so every mode was you get a set amount of tonnage bring as many mechs as you want until they reach that tonnage then it could be #TonnageMatters.

And #EveryMechIsEqual doesn't mean all mechs are as combat viable. But since combat is basically all there is, they should be closer.

[Davers]

There are so many terrible suggestions in this thread. Thank goodness PGI doesn't read the forums.

[adamts01]

Davers, on 22 December 2016 - 02:41 PM, said:

There are so many terrible suggestions in this thread. Thank goodness PGI doesn't read the forums.

Because they're clearly doing such a bang up job on their own....

[RestosIII]

Davers, on 22 December 2016 - 02:41 PM, said:

There are so many terrible suggestions in this thread. Thank goodness PGI doesn't read the forums.

Wait, so you don't like my idea of a custom radio station?!? How can you deny me the ability to listen to this ingame without Chrome running in the background!?!

[Vellron2005]

Alan Davion, on 21 December 2016 - 06:29 AM, said:

1, 3 and 7 sort of tie into each other in my eyes. Big problem with this is it would probably require the re-introduction of the "repair and rearm" system, and apparently a lot of people were not happy with the R&R system back when the game still had it.

2, yeah I agree there, but the maps would need to be, at minimum, probably about 5 or 10 kilometers long on one side or another in order to make the map big enough that it would take more than a minute or so for both sides to start blasting away at each other. This would probably also require the games to take at least 20 minutes, or remove the timer altogether if the maps got to be so big. Don't really see that happening either.

4, I agree it's nice to see the skill sets being reworked into actual skill trees, however, a character driven progression system is likely too much to ask for in what's essentially the CoD multiplayer portion of the game. Such a system is more likely to show up in MW5:M when it comes out in a couple years.

5, absolutely never going to happen. PGI tried the 12 IS vs 10 Clan shortly after the Clans were introduced and it completely and utterly f***ed the Match Maker system, giving you 12v4, 12v6, 12v8 or 12v12, never the 12v10. The best we could ever hope for would be a completely top to bottom mech/weapon/tech stat reset where they introduce an actual BV system where everything from AMS to XL engines determines a mechs point cost like in Table Top. The BV system could then be implemented in CW/FW where each side or drop deck has a set BV pool.

Game goes "Oh, you want to bring in your fully optimized laser vomit Timber Wolf? Okay, you just spent 5000 of your BV points, you now have X number of points left to spend." This would likely force people into bringing some less than optimal builds into the game in order to save for the 1 or 2 fully optimized builds they really want.

That would probably be as close as you'd get to a balanced system.

6, every Inner Sphere Successor House or Invading Clan already has their own TS servers thanks to the players.

8, kind of goes back to what I said in point 5. PGI would need to completely start from scratch as everything is so screwed up at this point due to the constant sweeping changes from one side to the other. I don't think they've ever incrementally buffed or nerfed something in the entire games life.

9, we're heading that way with some of the recent 1v1 and 4v4 arena maps they showcased a while back.

10, absolutely agree. I've only ever once seen a MWO TV commercial, and that was back in 2011/2012 or something. Problem is that's a lot of effort for not a lot of return.

I didn't actually expect most of that to get implemented, since the original premise of the topic is "wild wishes".. But you make some good points.

Not everything that I stated could be implemented into the game without complete feature redesigns.. and that's one of the core problems of this game - it was designed with key features and design logic missing from the start.. too hard to fix it now..

In my humble opinion, I hope they make all those mistakes better in MW5 or if they ever dare to make MWO2..

And by then.. a boy can make wild wishes of the game that should have been..

I know why I didn't like the original R&R system.. bad pricing.. you could not make enough money to fix your mechs and have money left over..

If they tweak the pricing, R&R would be good..

P.S.

I think the Battle Value system from Table Top would be a good thing.. probably alot more balanced than what we have now..

Edited by Vellron2005, 23 December 2016 - 02:28 AM.