348 replies to this topic

[BWS2K]

Great stream. Z0eff has all my questions but shout-out to Paul for finally giving me some answers about data stuff. When's the stream on how to help people admit their inner love of the Mist Lynx? There's so many non-believers around here... they just need to accept their inner Lynx pilot. <3

Edit: I do want to weigh in on the perks for factions and such - I think it's an excellent idea... BUT we run the risk of legitimizing lore which only feeds the flames of that issue (does MWO adhere to lore or not, or just sometimes when they can - there's no official stance on this that I'm aware of). It would have to be done purely for the sake of balance in MWO, meaning the perks don't necessarily parallel something in canon/lore.

Edited by BWS2K, 27 January 2017 - 08:17 PM.

[naterist]

this is my post on the twitch stream, ill be updating it as i watch it.

qued dropship respawn is fine

dont remove the walls, however we need like, and exit arow or something on there.

you could label a team after a lore unit based on what planet theyre on, instead of calling them 'your team' and 'enemy team'

prior to a contract wipe, give units a chance 5 days in advance to select what contract or loyalist loyalty they want after the wipe, so the people who arent active wont see the warning and switch to be prepared, but people who play alot are fine cause they log in, see it, and have 5 days to respond.

voip in the prematch lobbby for improved coordination with pugs, as typing is insufficient.

for fw, some factions can have different amounts of mix tech, like combine rasalhague and frr and make them open to all mechs, steiner can have 50% clan as they have wolf in exile, kurita too with nova cats enclaves, and davion and liao and kurita get IS only, but higher dropdeck weight, same with the hardcore clans like falcon and wolf.

nerf poptarting to something only doable at mid range, like laser vomit.

groups can bid down in their group lobby for a cbill bonus. carry this over to quickplay group que as well and it could fix the issues with tonnage you currently have been trying to adress with your recent tonnage changes.

make the skirmish part of the line voting like xavier suggests, and label that the batchall section(it sounds like a batchall to me, especially combined with groups bidding down tonnage), and then the sides are locked in like the winners of the batchall are clearing all resistance (think op seperent after taking huntress) an equally balanced tech and pop should keep it in that middle which has the most variety for the longest.

[-Ramrod-]

I don't touch FP with a ten foot pole. Resolution exploiters/Cheaters/Glitch users/100% pure meta and nothing else. What incentive is there to play when you have to deal with all that? I'd love an update on the cheating issue. I guess PGI kinda swept that issue under the rug. Now that many of them have been rewarded.

[Tryh4rd3r]

I am going to repeat this again so that it is not missed. The number 1 issue that was not discussed tonight is the issue of premades getting matched against pug groups. It happens constantly in FW and it creates a situation that 1. Drives away new players and 2. Is not fun for either side.

I am not saying that I have a magic solution for the issue but if we just keep avoiding it the long term health of the game will suffer. If this game is going to grow it needs new players and it needs to retain those players; and that will not happen if new players expierence with the games signature mode is just continually getting stomped over and over.


FW needs 1. some sort of a gating mechanism so that brand new players are not just jumping in with full trial drop decks and 2. some sort of match making logic that at least attempts to create balanced matches. This needs to be a priority issue not something to maybe be addressed at some point.

[Jarl Dane]

Tryh4rd3r, on 27 January 2017 - 08:16 PM, said:

I am going to repeat this again so that it is not missed. The number 1 issue that was not discussed tonight is the issue of premades getting matched against pug groups. It happens constantly in FW and it creates a situation that 1. Drives away new players and 2. Is not fun for either side.

Yeah, sorry. This, along with phases being too long, was something I wanted to address. But I ran out of time at the end and didn't make it. =(

Edited by Mech The Dane, 27 January 2017 - 08:22 PM.

[Cy Mitchell]

Peiper, on 27 January 2017 - 06:14 PM, said:

Okay, got through four pages and kept reading the same thing, which basically says: let's think inside the box. XL engines, balance stuff, and feel good reward adjustments.

I disagree with all of that. Balance will happen anyway over time, and is not necessarily a CW thing, but just a game thing. XL engines. More trivial stuff that gets sorted out in balancing. Rewards? The game should be fun to play with or without extra stuff. What is the use of extra stuff if you're doing the same thing all the time and not actually affecting the MAP.

What we need, in a nutshell, is:

Supply lines. The further from a capitol planet you are, the less you get paid. Every week, faction loyalists get to vote to change that planet. However, the larger the empire, it means that the front lines may be very far away from the capitol. This has the effect of the larger the empire, the less they pay their mercs/harder to supply their front lines = less cbills.

Raiding: a game mode that represents guerrilla warfare and partisan attacks behind the front lines. These raids have the effect of reducing supply (cash) to the front lines. If a faction doesn't defend against them, the front line guys don't get paid. The raids should be 6 v 6 or 8 v 8 filling in the blanks in our drop options and helping smaller units to build up from scouting matches to bigger groups.

I like most of the ideas you presented but for these two that I quoted I would suggest that the proper downside of having long supply lines or having your supply lines raided would not be a reduction in pay. Instead it would be a reduction in drop tonnage which would represent lack of reinforcements and inadequate equipment maintenance and repair ability.

[Jarl Dane]

Morticia Mellian, on 27 January 2017 - 08:08 PM, said:

At present, way to slanted to Merc and IS. Serious lack of Clan representation.

Everything clanner loyalists asked me to ask; I did.

[Cy Mitchell]

Mech The Dane, on 27 January 2017 - 08:22 PM, said:

Yeah, sorry. This, along with phases being too long, was something I wanted to address. But I ran out of time at the end and didn't make it. =(

You did good but the problem with the length of the phases is a big deal when a unit can devote 4-6 hours a night to win a bunch of battles but still fail to secure a planet. There are not many people or units that can devote 8 hours a night to just playing a video game non-stop.

[Eidolon 29]

For faction warfare events I think the rewards should be tied to the players loyalty rank in the faction.

For example: Rank 1 reward = 1,000 c-bills where as rank 20 = 20,000 c-bills.

I figure it would be a nice way to give being a loyalist more incentive to... well stay loyal. In addition I would like to see bigger penalties for breaking loyalties. Instead of losing 25% of your loyalty points with the faction you're leaving, you lose 25% or more with all factions. Lore wise all traitors are generally disliked by all, not just the people they betrayed. If people want to hop around factions they should do it as mercs or freelancers.

This way if people want to become a loyalist for a week to take part in a faction specific event and get rewards they can, but the true loyalist will get a reward that rewards loyalty.

[Ranger Dave]

Lets improve the experience for new players. New players don't enjoy getting stomped, especially when they don't even understand what they have to do. Experienced players get frustrated when they are lumped with pugs who don't understand how to even open a gate.

• Make FW modes/maps available for private lobbies. This way people can train to be better without frustrating actual games.
  
• Add game modes to testing grounds including FW modes. For the same reasons as above.
  Give an option to enable the standing mechs to pivot and shoot back and enable turrets.
  
• Make it more clear to new players that FW is not soft. Maybe put them through a test, such as clearing a FW testing ground map with shooting enabled before they can enter FW for the first time.

[Eidolon 29]

For the topic of faction specific perks, they don't have to be gameplay performance ones. Just a +5% loyalty point gain for dropping a mech heavily used or associated with the faction would be nice. Or the option to give all your mechs your factions paint job when dropping in faction play. These are some perks that could be implemented without making more balance problems.

[Tarogato]

Peiper, on 27 January 2017 - 06:14 PM, said:

Spoiler

Okay, got through four pages and kept reading the same thing, which basically says: let's think inside the box. XL engines, balance stuff, and feel good reward adjustments.

I disagree with all of that. Balance will happen anyway over time, and is not necessarily a CW thing, but just a game thing. XL engines. More trivial stuff that gets sorted out in balancing. Rewards? The game should be fun to play with or without extra stuff. What is the use of extra stuff if you're doing the same thing all the time and not actually affecting the MAP.

What we need, in a nutshell, is:

Supply lines. The further from a capitol planet you are, the less you get paid. Every week, faction loyalists get to vote to change that planet. However, the larger the empire, it means that the front lines may be very far away from the capitol. This has the effect of the larger the empire, the less they pay their mercs/harder to supply their front lines = less cbills.

Raiding: a game mode that represents guerrilla warfare and partisan attacks behind the front lines. These raids have the effect of reducing supply (cash) to the front lines. If a faction doesn't defend against them, the front line guys don't get paid. The raids should be 6 v 6 or 8 v 8 filling in the blanks in our drop options and helping smaller units to build up from scouting matches to bigger groups.

Planets with meaning. Certain planets should have bonuses. These should be non-mech bonuses. If you control the planet you get stuff like sensor towers, turrets, smoke/chaff artillery, VTOL support, armor support, infantry nests (like SRM nests, hidden until triggered) and so on. These wouldn't make the mechs any better, but would be things that would help in minor ways during the battle. Mech factories: I do like the idea of faction specific mechs or tech, but for all practicality, leave it. In fact, I'm sick of the IS vs. Clan segregation. When we get the new tech in summer, IS will (canonically) be buying clan mechs from Sea Fox, Nova Cats will be part of the Inner Sphere, along with Clan Wolf in Exile, and the Ghost Bears will merge with FRR. (And thank God, so sick of the segregation.) If a faction takes a clan or IS factory, for each factory planet they take, they can add a mech of opposite tech to their drop decks.

Unit coffers should help the unit: let us withdraw money from the coffers to buy mechs or otherwise support new players or help them fill out their drop deck. This amount could be capped. Up to unit leadership how stuff is distributed.

Economic mini-game: This game would run separately from the main game, and solo players could use it representing stock brokers, arms dealers, commodities vendors. These would be 'rogue traders' who would go around and make deals both within and outside of the faction lines. The effects would be stuff for either the faction (for faction players) or the unit. You could get your hands on the black market and get technology for your friends. (Maybe put a clan mech in an IS dropdeck and vice versa.) For factions that are in trouble, it would help mitigate the effects of raids and supply line issues. It would give poorer players a chance to really contribute to their unit/faction as well. Players could own dropships and rent Jumpships to move around the galaxy.

Factions should be able to pick and vote on a very specific planet or at least prefecture to attack, and other factions (houses/clans) should not get in the way. If there aren't enough players to populate entire factions, limit the fronts to, say, Steiner vs. Falcon. Add factions as population increases, unlocking those factions/fronts. You could even consider adding more of a type of faction if populations get too lopsided. Let's say you have Steiner vs. Falcon, but there are twice as many clan players. Open up Wolf too. Wolf will HAVE to fight Falcons as they don't border Steiner. Likewise with Merrick. It would be a balancing factor. (Even I'm not sure on that, but worth a consideration.).

Notice, EVERYTHING above adds content to the game, and MEANING.

Have you ever played NBT or Proxis?

[Tarogato]

Morticia Mellian, on 27 January 2017 - 08:08 PM, said:

Does PGI have an actual QA team? As in, dedicated QA and now a Dev doing the testing?

Yes. There are at least four of them presently working at PGI:

Blake Sadoway
Jamie Schneider
Ian Matheson
Jameson Rafter

[Tarogato]

Tank, on 27 January 2017 - 07:32 AM, said:

I would love to be dropped right on the objective if team is boggled to a original drop zone and control on objectives. Will give incentive to all Mecha-Snow-Flakes to do something.

That is how it was originally in the very beginning of CW. But people complained that it was too easy to spawn camp and that was pretty much the first thing that got changed about CW, ever.

There's really no fix to spawncamping. There just isn't.

If you drop players right at the objective like it used to be in the beginning, defenders complain about getting spawncamped because the attacker's objective is at the defenders spawn. So the attackers have no choice but to spawn camp.

If you have it like it is now, with the defenders spawning out of the way of the objective, the attackers just walk up to the spawn zone and camp it.

If you spread out the spawns over a large area so that it's harder to spawn camp, then defenders will complain that they are too far from the objective and it's too easy for the attackers to take it.


You can't make imbalanced matches fair. The problem isn't spawn camping, it's imbalanced matches. Spawn camping doesn't happen in balanced matches. Imbalanced matches drive players away, because highly skilled teams don't want to sealclub all day (except for [EVIL]), and low-skilled teams don't want to get roflstomped all day.

The only solution is to segregate the good players from the bad via a rudimentary matchmaking system. But PGI won't do it because it we don't have the population to sustain it. A lot of the population left because there was no matchmaking system, because imbalanced matches aren't fun, and spawncamping isn't fun. Give balanced matches, and maybe... just maybe people will come back to enjoy them.

[Nightbird]

I'll repeat an idea for unbalanced teams: give a dynamic handicap. If the score is lopsided (X kill lead), allow the losing team to drop in more mechs. Add a fifth and sixth wave or have a reinforcement pool in terms of mechs/tonnage so that any dead player can keep dropping. The final result will be closer.

For drop zones... remove walls and add deep pits/craters mechs have to walk out of. This won't block dropship fire and still gives the spawning mechs cover.

[Deathlike]

I would like to point out that like our current MM for QP, it won't solve the population issue in FP. Because once a team waits long enough for a hypothetical MM for FP, they will probably match anyone and everyone available... which still results in what we already have now (both FP+QP).

So, a skill based MM will honestly NOT solve the issue at non-peak times.... if anything, it would exacerbate what we already see in the queues in QP.

Edited by Deathlike, 27 January 2017 - 09:43 PM.

[Monkey Lover]

Two mercs and mech the dane.... lol and the mercs talked most the time

At least the mercs tried to help the loyalists but they have no idea what the problem is because they're mercs. They want to give loyalist rewards? If they cared about rewards they would be mercs.

None of them had any idea how to help solo players.

[Deathlike]

Monkey Lover, on 27 January 2017 - 09:47 PM, said:

Two mercs and mech the dane.... lol and the mercs talked most the time

At least the mercs tried to help the loyalists but they have no idea what the problem is because they're mercs. They want to give loyalist rewards? If they cared about rewards they would be mercs.

None of them had any idea how to help solo players.

I have my solution (do I have to dig it up again?) where you are force to construct teams in a certain way to get certain rewards and this covers big groups, small groups, and solo. Forced integration is the way to do it because if you leave it to solos... they will never learn what it takes to be successful on their own. Also, smaller groups do need a certain level of handholding (well, it depends on how good they are), but overall... people have to be educated on FP to truly maximize their potential... or they are just dead weight as they are now... being cannon fodder because "they can do it themselves" when repeatedly shown.

Link of my solution:
https://mwomercs.com...__fromsearch__1

Edited by Deathlike, 27 January 2017 - 09:52 PM.

[Tarogato]

ironnightbird, on 27 January 2017 - 09:32 PM, said:

I'll repeat an idea for unbalanced teams: give a dynamic handicap. If the score is lopsided (X kill lead), allow the losing team to drop in more mechs. Add a fifth and sixth wave or have a reinforcement pool in terms of mechs/tonnage so that any dead player can keep dropping. The final result will be closer.

How do you handle "build a 4-mech drop deck, but it's actually 6 mechs just in case" ?

If you make it so that you reuse already-dead mechs, that requires quite a bit of code finagling to get the mechs repaired and rearmed so that they can drop in a second time.

Besides, why do you want to pander to the team that's so bad that they can't win? Just let them lose. Instead maybe you shouldn't let imbalanced teams face each other so that this doesn't happen in the first place.

Quote

For drop zones... remove walls and add deep pits/craters mechs have to walk out of. This won't block dropship fire and still gives the spawning mechs cover.

Requires all of the maps in the game to be edited. That's a little more involved than "when it's this game mode, place this asset here." Plus why do you think it's a good idea to spawn players inside a killing bowl that they have to climb out of?

Edited by Tarogato, 27 January 2017 - 09:55 PM.

[Peiper]

Tarogato, on 27 January 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

Have you ever played NBT or Proxis?

I've played NBT. Some good lessons to be learned from there. I thought it was overly complicated for your typical MWO player. Old guard people would be okay with it, but the new, immediate gratification crowd would not.