348 replies to this topic

[Sereglach]

Cadoazreal, on 25 January 2017 - 05:38 AM, said:

1. As I stated above replying to someone else, VOTE for Mode from 1 of 5 options then choose map then choose deck.
Worlds changing hands needs to work differently, (shorter phases? with above choose mode changing how tug bar works (bigger % effect on bar, lower threshold to take planet?))

Different take on similar concepts. I'm sure something could be worked out to make the most amount of people happy, in the end. That's one big reason for the Roundtable.

Cadoazreal, on 25 January 2017 - 05:38 AM, said:

2. reward based on rank is a TERRIBLE idea we want to be encouraging more people to play this game, that means low rank new people, not rewarding the people playing long term which penalizes new people.

You need to cover TWO perspectives of player retention; and you're looking at ONE. Not only do you need to get new people playing, but you need to KEEP veteran players playing. FW (and the game as a whole) has people of both stripes leaving it.

One way to keep people playing is to reward people based on rank . . . which allows them to feel like they've actually accomplished something as they've worked at the game. The reward systems outlined also provides different playstyles different opportunities. However, maybe one thing they could consider is a form of "Faction Play Cadet Bonus" that gives a slightly bigger bonus reward for the first few matches a player has in FW, regardless of rank, playstyle, or win/loss.

People need a reason to not just start playing, but keep playing; and failing player retention at all levels of play is a problem that PGI needs to deal with.

Cadoazreal, on 25 January 2017 - 05:38 AM, said:

3. Not sure i understand what your saying, but if your saying reward Battletech lore nerds for playing only mechs their faction mainly played in 1980's tabletop game terrible idea in my opinion, you might as well reward people for using standard loadouts to futher confuse new players and drive them away.

I'm saying you can put in theoretical bonus rewards for using Faction based lore favored mechs, only when you're a IS Loyalist; and a theoretical bonus reward for dropping under your maximum dropdeck limit only as a Clan Loyalist. Yes, they're optional lore and immersive rewards for people willing to play that way.

Whether you like it or not this game is based on Battletech and the over 30 years of lore and history that represents. Adding that optional reward layer to loyalists is something to make each faction unique and provide extra flavor to the game. However, it'd be entirely optional, take it or leave it. There's nothing wrong with adding optional reward layers to the game . . . its there for people willing to put in the effort.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regardless, I'm going off the points that were already brought up by the pre-roundtable discussion. That discussion included people who WILL be there talking to Russ and the objectives they'll be shooting towards; and I'm building upon what they already discussed.

They are some of the biggest issues facing FW right now; and they need to be addressed before other improvements really mean anything. I'm not saying those other improvements aren't necessary, or even important. However you can't build up a solid game mode play system without a solid foundation, first; and PGI still has work to do there.

[Cy Mitchell]

My ideas to address a couple areas of concern in the present Faction Play.

Now that the inclusion of more maps and modes have made FP more fun to play and drawn in more people steps need to be put into place to keep those people coming back.

- Immersion is important. Make taking and holding planets important, Rewards for doing so are OK but they do not add to the immersion. Players need to feel a connection with the world they are trying to take or defend. Planet descriptions being completed would help. Environmental themes of cold, hot, alien moon, desert, temperate, etc. would help to give the planets some individuality and character.

-Benefits beyond earning some c-bills and MC would help a lot. Getting discounts for the entire unit that place their tag on the planet for Mechs or weapons that are produced on the planet. Perhaps a planet could strengthen a supply line which would give the unit a tonnage increase for subsequent drops, defense and conquest. Losing a planet could also therefore fracture a supply line.

-Unit specific benefits could also be added if a unit controls a planet like guild houses in MMOs that benefit all members of the unit. For, example if a unit holds a planet they could set up a Mech warehouse where the unit could purchase Mechs from the unit coffer and make them available to members. This would be beneficial to members who do not have a specific Mech to complete a desired role in a drop deck or for new members who have been recruited and may not have the ability to field a proper drop deck. Losing the planet on which the Mech warehouse is located would suspend the units ability to do such things.

Mercenaries and Faction Balance. The movement of Mercenary units is still wreaking havoc on the game balance. Being a Mercenary has all the benefits and none of the drawbacks of being a Loyalist. Due to those two points, I believe there needs to be more restrictions placed on Mercenary units ability to move freely from one faction to another. They should only be able to go to a faction where someone is offering a contract for a specific length of time and paying them for a specific goal. There should also be a ceiling on how many Merc units can have contracts with each faction so the result would be close to a 50/50 split between Clan and Inner Sphere.

The alternative, IMO, is to simply drop Loyalist and Clan vs IS separations and truly make the whole FP experience Merc vs Merc with alliances, deal making, back stabbing and political intrigue being the immersion angle.

Spawn Camping Getting spawn camped is is one of the most frustrating and humiliating things that can happen to a team in FP. It is also one of the things that convince a player that is new to FP to never play it again after being subjected to it a couple times. It is fun for no one and only the team that dominating gets any benefit in the damage they can farm as the defenseless Mech continue to drop into their focused fire. For the long term health of Faction Play, a solution to spawn camping needs to be found. Here are a couple ideas to help in that area:

-Orbital bombardment is one such possible solution. This would use the special effects and some of the attributes of the retired Long Tom (gasp, I said it). Prior to a drop ship dropping Mechs onto the battlefield there would be a Orbital Bombardment on the Drop Zone with a large radius area of effect similar to the LT that would clear the zone or severely damage any Mechs within the blast radius. The blast would affect ANY Mech so it would not be possible for the spawning team to "turtle" in the drop zone to avoid combat. A smoke beacon would proceed the bombardment and the drop. This would at least keep the sniping team at range and give the dropped Mechs a chance to move to cover and prepare for combat. They would have to leave the drop zone before the next bombardment and drop ship arrival. It may not be feasible to drop before every drop but the strikes should be often enough to hold the spawn campers at bay.

-Ramp up Dropship firepower and abilities. In lieu of the bombardment, simply make the drop ships more deadly as a deterent against enemy Mechs getting in range while they are on site. They could also provide ECM and target jamming coverage for the entire drop zone.

-Random Drop Zones. Dropships would have the ability to avoid "hot" dropzones and choose alternate locations to drop reinforcement Mechs. These would be either completely random or mirror the QP drops zones so that it is more difficult for the enemy team to cover all the zones and have sufficient firepower on hand to destroy all the dropping Mechs before they can defend themselves.


I feel that the recent changes to FP have moved it in the right direction. I hope that these suggestions and others from the community can help the mode to continue to grow and become more fun and welcoming to the MWO population as a whole.

[Sigmar Sich]

If any of guys, present on this roundtable, will be so kind, please ask about what happened to concept of "lore units". You can remember early CW concepts, there were two types of units - player-driven, one we have now; and other - non-player-driven, with fixed alligiance, with lore names (which are blacklisted for player-created units).
Please ask, does this concept still have any perspective, or is buried. If latter, what fate of lore unit names, will they be released to player-created units, perhaps under rule of permanent loyalty, without ability to change faction.

Why it can be good for CW gameplay - it could be an instrument for solo players to gather, get used to each other, and eventually somewhat play as a team. Not every player wants to be a part of unit, with drills and schedule, and ranks. So for this player such semi-functional units under developers' moderation, could became solution.

At least, please ask is this concept dead or no. It shouldn't not take much of your time.

[dj_]

https://www.reddit.c...action_warfare/
Posted this a while ago.

I like what they have done with the new FW by adding QP maps. Nice job community and PGI. One thing I would like to see is the drop zones change based on enemy positions. Other respawn games do this to prevent spawn camping. It would also create the need for lighter mechs to be dropped during the main battle for reinforcement rather that filler for the end of the match. Lance fighting would be more of a thing as well. Just my 2cents.

Other though

I do not agree with buffing performance of a loyalists. Not Fair, especially to the new player.

Make loyalist wins worth more in the tug of war.

Reward players by letting them open up (capture) clan-IS mech slots in there drop deck. If you break contract you lose the ability to use captured tech and have to start over. Chasse based unlocks. This week fight for a KDK to be captured. Stuff like that.

Add capture the flag. Highest number of flags captured wins the match. Mixed decks would be necessary

Playoff system for the planet to be taken. Time zone rotated so everyone gets a chance at this. If the planet is taken by the side that has won the tug of war the planet flips. If lost the tug of war starts again.

[BWS2K]

I'll throw this into the mix as well, for consideration by all.

[Sedmeister]

Oh, I forgot to add...

More maps!

In addition, reading through this list this morning, I think the most common theme is immersion. I just wanted to highlight that for PGI.

[Idealsuspect]

I have nothing to suggest to our president RB.

Quote

Only PGI know what is good for MWO

Oh yeaaa http://steamcharts.com/app/342200#6m

[PraetorGix]

Mcgral18, on 24 January 2017 - 07:51 PM, said:

Could we get an official statement regarding the XL (and general) engine balance?

Because the Patch Notes spiel was pretty weak, being summed up as:

"Clam Battlemechs can feel free to have their superior XL engines, and completely ignore STDs, while Spheroid XLs must pay the death tax to use them"



Clam Battlemechs have exactly that choice, often with lighter and outright superior weaponry.
Clams have options with larger, and smaller engine at the 75 ton bracket, and both are top tier. Not all are, see Mr Gargles, but the Battlemechs have the same construction rules as Spheroid mechs, but get all the good tech.

The fact this message completely ignores the current necessity of buffing STD engines is appalling. They compete with Clan XLs at the moment, and it is a COMPLETELY laughable idea to ever consider one on a Clam battlemech.
The XL has no real consequence which is outweighed by the heat penalties, because you still avoid death.


And no, making cXLs die upon ST loss would just ruin the current lineup ranging from GodTier to rubbish. It would also decrease TTK a large amount, while most would agree a slight increase would be nice


Buffing the STDs to not be worthless in the form of +Structure and +Agility (because you sacrifice weight, you often sacrifice engine size, which is directly proportional to your mechs twist speed, and as a result damage mitigation via twisting)

Buff the isXLs in one of two ways:

• sidesToDie=2, cXL method. Easy, simple, still inferior
  
• Buff STs to equal CT, or greater HP wise, keeping ST death. This means they have a greater potential for damage, and have a higher skill floor and ceiling compared to Clan XLs, which would just have the ST penalties (and 60% damage reduction through destroyed components)

STD buffs are required either way, because they compete with cXLs
LFEs coming in won't fix the engine imbalance, they'll just shelve the STDs from ever being used again





TL:DR

What's up with the Patch Notes XL engine post? It completely misses the reality of the game, and ignores Clan Battlemechs.
This is relevant to Faction Warfare, because the XL imbalance (and faction imbalance) is a large part of population differences, as one is seen as more powerful/durable

Sure, let's conveniently forget about all the Omnimechs that cannot choose another engine so our point gets through easier, and looks like we're saying something intelligent, right?

[Davegt27]

FP special ops Missions

or a way teams can meet up and challenge each other in game
this would be by appointment so could be by planet or by team leader contact

basically your team gets contacted for special Operations mission on said planet

[Mcgral18]

PraetorGix, on 25 January 2017 - 01:50 PM, said:

Sure, let's conveniently forget about all the Omnimechs that cannot choose another engine so our point gets through easier, and looks like we're saying something intelligent, right?

Seeing as the isOmnis will be even worse off, yes
Let's ignore that fact, because they (generally) aren't at the top


Except that many of them are. Gyr and Timby, both sit at the top of the Heavy class, both have heavy hardwired equipment



You can ignore the facts if you want to, but that just makes you look biased

Edited by Mcgral18, 25 January 2017 - 02:30 PM.

[Seth]

There are two major problems I see with faction warfare:

• The wait times. I tend to play towards the end of the NA phase and beginning of the Oceanic phase. In my experience, when I log in, the planet is usually capped out at 100%. I guess that the 100% bar really demotivates people from dropping on the planet anymore. It won't do me or my team any good to drop on it because I can sit there forever, and if nobody drops on the other side, then I won't have even a ghost match result. Even after the phase change over, the wait times can be quite long, around 10-15 minutes. It's not that rare for us (as a CJF unit) to then get a ghost match after another 10 minutes of waiting. That is a real killer for us to take part in FW as that can be 10-30 minutes of waiting and getting minimal compensation for it when compared to a similar about of time spent in quick play. I don’t like asking people in my unit to drop in faction warfare because I know what I will be asking them to endure, and that’s just not fair to the people who don’t really want to wait, but are willing to do so just to humor me.
  
• The uneven matches. On occasion, we will face off against an organized team on the other side, which will be evident by the number of identical tags or the number of people in the same faction. But far more often than not, we will be faced off against a team of largely solo players. At that point, we know the end result is a forgone conclusion, and I’m sure the other side does as well. For us, it’s not a question of which side will win, but who on our side will score the most damage, get the most kills, or use the fewest Mechs. Seal clubbing is the term de-jour when describing these matches for a good reason. It’s just not a very gratifying experience and just makes me feel bad for the other players. Plus, I don’t even get a nice soft pelt after the fact.

I’m not one to just point out problems I see without offering solutions, so here goes:

• The wait times. I think everything that can be done to concentrate the existing players into as few buckets as possible has been done. Since there’s no way to focus the existing FW players into less than two buckets, the next step would be to motivate more players to play FW over quick play.
  
  • I think adding the quick play maps and game modes was a great way to break up the monotony of the invasion maps. Some of them can use some refinements to drop zone placement, or even be restricted in some game modes, but overall, this was a great first step.
    
  • Track the amount of time a player spent waiting for both sides to form a team and drop and reimburse them for that time. Giving 10,000 cbills and some amount of Mech XP for every minute spent waiting from the time a team or player clicks launch to the time they’re in that dropship will go a long way to soothing the frustration at having spent however much time spent waiting.
    
  • Offer an MC bonus for participating in faction warfare. Even offering just 10-15 MC per match would be a very attractive reward that would give people pause when considering quick play instead of faction warfare.
    
  • Offer an end-of-game bonus that’s based on each team’s respective average W/L ratio. I’ll throw a number of 100,000 cbills out there for each difference in W/L out there. For example, KCOM had a W/L of 10-1 last season. Had a team with a combined W/L ratio of 1-1 faced them, they would get a 1,000,000 cbill bonus, win or lose.
    
  • Please include some kind of progress bar that indicates how close your faction and the other faction is to having a team completed and ready to drop. The old system let us see how close our side was to having a team of 12 ready to drop. I would like to see a return of some variation of that as well as being able to see how close the other side is to being ready. Just give me something to look at besides that damned spinning circle.

• The uneven matches. I understand it’s impossible to guarantee an even match when the mode is basically works on a first-come, first-serve basis. I also can see how counter-intuitive it would be to restrict the kinds of players that could drop into faction warfare since that would directly affect the number of players available. But my hope is that by offering greater incentives, there will be a net gain in the number and quality of players choosing to drop in FW over quick play.
  
  • At a minimum, don’t let players who have a majority of their drop deck filled out with trial Mechs or players with less than 100 matches under their belt drop in faction warfare. Seeing someone drop in a Mech with a (c) next to its name is a dead give-away that they are not ready to drop in faction warfare. Yes, by including them, you are increasing the number of players in each bucket, but at the same time, they are going to be a huge drag on their team. Those new players are not going to have a good time. The people on their team who are stuck with these new players are not going to have a good time. The people on the enemy team, while having a predictable match outcome and better pay, likely won’t have a good time. It serves as a big demotivator for that game mode for all involved when new players drop in what should be an end-game unit-centric game mode.
    
  • Give trial Mechs efficiencies equal to an elited Mech. I understand that this system is going away soon, so I would suggest replacing it with whatever the equivalent would be under the new system. I suggest this because we all know a non-basiced Mech is a shadow of what it is with the elite efficiencies and double basics unlocked. It’s like a double whammy of saddling bad players with bad Mechs.
    
  • Let units create their own trial Mechs that their members can then use. This avoids forcing new players from using some of the champion builds that really aren’t that great, allows for more effective filling out of drop tonnage, and gives new players motivation to join a unit. To prevent abuse of this system, I would say restrict this ability to units with 30-50 players on their roster.
  I do have a couple of other improvements I would like to see, but aren’t as high on my priorities list:

• Change the unit reward system. This doubles as a motivation for units and players to drop in faction warfare. As it stands, the top four units on the winning faction gets to place their tags on a planet and gain MC. My suggestion is to keep the tagging system in place and let the largest units and most active units keep that neat reward. But with the MC, I would like to see that become a per-player participation reward, win or lose. I mentioned something similar above, but for a different reason than here. With this change in place, the MC reward would go directly towards the pilot that earned it rather than towards the unit coffer who then doles it out as they see fit. As a unit leader, it would be a big relief to me to not have to deal with trying to impartially disburse this premium currency. I cannot see the previous season’s faction warfare leader boards like I can with quick play, and it’s not practical to search 100 player’s name every day or week in the current in-game leader board to pass out MC fairly. It would be extremely useful to have a CSV or excel file I can download and open in a spreadsheet, but far better for me if the MC was simply rewarded directly to the player.
  
• Offer some kind of bonus to loyalists once they’ve reached rank 20. I guess this is something of a selfish request because I reached rank 20 long ago, but I have nowhere to go rank-wise and I have no intention of switching to another faction for any length of time to gain the rewards for their faction. MC would be effing sweet if that was a reward, but I think under the new skill system, a GXP bonus would be pretty nice as well. Maybe ranks can be cleared after each faction warfare reset so loyalists can re-earn those awards.
  
• Fix the planet voting system. I’ve already reported this bug to support, but as it stands, loyalists can vote on which planet to attack, but the one actually selected is random.

Edited by Seth, 25 January 2017 - 02:34 PM.

[Cy Mitchell]

I am not sure that increases in C-Bill and XP rewards alone will increase FP participation. It is nice but you can already earn plenty of those in QP or FP.

What may help as much or more would be Faction Play specific trophies such as Decals, Cockpit Items and Forum Tags/Titles for Faction Play achievements such as reaching LvL 20 with your faction, winning events as a unit and conquering or holding worlds. The possibilities are almost endless. Chasing such prizes will give players a reason to keep playing and is another possible way to increase immersion if the prizes are tied to BattleTech lore.

Edited by Rampage, 25 January 2017 - 03:38 PM.

[Bownd]

PGI needs to be able to control the top merc units from banning together on one side entirely in CW.
.
Clan loyalist representation needs to be involved in these meetings as well its almost entirely IS and merc unit leaders. Loyalist leaders from both sides need to share their ideas and thoughts.

[50 50]

I wanted to make a small comment regarding the loyalty ranks and rewards in general.
It was mentioned that this is going to get looked at so this seems like an appropriate time to comment.

The loyalty ranks have two measures. You can climb to the top of the tree, unlock all the rewards, and then there is the actual points.
It would seem that a main reason for changing factions is simply to unlock the rewards, once you get to the top rank there really is nothing else. So the question is why stay with the faction and remain loyal?
It has to be the points.

Turn loyalty points into a currency
This is pretty simple in its concept.
We could keep expanding the tree with more ranks and rewards but it will always have the same problem.
However, if we can spend the loyalty points we then have a reason to stay loyal and earn them back.
It creates it's own incentive to continue fighting for your chosen faction and could be setup to provide factions with a bit more individual depth.

• I would suggest that the ability to spend these points is unlocked as a reward at a certain level so it is not something that is easily accessible from faction hopping.
  
• Purchase items need both permanent and temporary options. That is, some powerful benefits are only available for a single drop or have a limited duration such as an attack phase or a day. Other options can be permanent in nature but should provide 'out of battle' benefits.
  
• Using the Loyalty points as a currency creates a benefit to players that further encourages participation in Faction Play and creates an opportunity to introduce further features for Faction Play that directly relates to it. (Ie. has no bearing on Quick Play like c-bills and MC do)

It's been mentioned in a couple of the other posts in this thread, but I'll chuck a couple of ideas in here as examples:

• Spend points to increase drop deck tonnage for a drop.
  
• Spend points to add a bonus 'Faction' mech to your drop deck for a drop.
  
• Spend points to increase drop deck tonnage for the current attack phase.

If you read my earlier post in this thread I mentioned about using the conquest resource points as a resource that can be collected during the battle and used to repair your mechs or take away as loot.


Based on that suggestion:

• Allow the purchase of NPCs that affect the cost of repairs. This is little more than having a little technician or tech crew be visible in our mech bays that provides a discount to the cost of repairs or reduces the time those repairs take. Add more to get more discount.

If we look at logistics as being a cost to transport our mechs to a battle then:

• Allow the purchase of drop ships to reduce that cost. This is little more than putting an icon on the drop decks and applying a modifier.

Down the track, if we want to think about some further options that tie in with this we would now have a method in place to introduce them through. People continually ask for a 'purpose' to capturing the planets. I would remove MC as a reward. It doesn't fit. Instead consider that the act of capturing a planet is to increase a faction's territory. Territory means living space, a space where we can say "that bit is ours". So the logical step is to allow us to invest in that living space:

• Players can buy bases.

Go back to my earlier post on combining the modes so we have major and minor objectives in a battle:

• If players individually can purchase a single minor objective point on a planet as their own, it can provide that player with a bonus of some sort, allow for it to be customised by that player and give us a sense of investing in the universe, a spot that we will defend and protect.
  
• Continue that idea through to units. If players tithe c-bills to unit coffers at the moment, then we could contribute loyalty points to unit coffers to invest in unit bases. These could be the major objectives on the planets. We could also invest in unit drop ships which provide logistics benefits to the unit in a group drop.

These last ideas are for future thought.


I would suggest something similar for mercenaries but right at the moment mercenaries are going just fine and can wait.
It is also better that there is a real distinction in the benefits between loyalist, mercenary and freelancers so lets put that aside for the moment and work on one option.

Edited by 50 50, 25 January 2017 - 04:53 PM.

[MovinTarget]

"Attunement" requirement do FP? Make it so you gotta know what you are doing?
Yes please

Don't make scouting required, but show some love to those do it a few times before moving to invasion... give them an LP/MP % boost until the next ceasefire when they've done X scouting matches or collected Y intel on gather or managed Z match score.

I may be a merc but i have no probs with loyalists getting some love... give them more weight, clan or IS, than mercs...

We all need more levels and/or reasons to keep going.

Merc contracts could be 2 weeks *but* their factions can cancel contracts because "we are doing great and no longer require your services" cancellation means to have 24 hours to switch factions or you are factionless. If you re-up with the faction that cancelled you, there will be an additional cbill/mp penalty above and beyond population penalties (if they exist)
-OR- you can opt to pledge loyalty to the faction and get fastracked to full loylist status.

More about cancellations... it would apply to all mercs with a faction whose gains surpass a certain metric over a certain time, where the merc companies' contracts start prior to the measured success occurred. In other words you don't have to worry about getting kicked out of the faction 5 minutes after signing a contract...

More about mercs:
No more one man merc companies switching sides instantly. Have a one day cooldown where, regardless of if you disbanded, was kicked, or left a unit, you are locked in as a merc for that faction for 24 hours.

Since FP is being done as seasons and all game w/l are being tracked, don't measure "need" by population straight up. Measure it by faction participation so that mercing for the faction with the lowest participation or the lowest W/L yields a bonus. Double the bonus if it is BOTH.

Edited by MovinTarget, 25 January 2017 - 04:57 PM.

[Liveish]

BluntObject, on 24 January 2017 - 11:32 PM, said:

Would it be possible to have some OC representation during the round tables? instead of just the usual NA suspects?

hahah funny man.

[Liveish]

justcallme A S H, on 25 January 2017 - 12:41 AM, said:

There is only a tiny amount of Asia Pacific zone players I know that have played more than me

ISRC play it most nights

[Wing 0]

Ban Trial Mechs from Faction Play. Make players get 4 good builds made before they are able to take on Faction Play.

[Kyrie]

I would like to raise a different set of issues entirely as it relates to FW/CW:

1. Can we get anything along the lines of Kesmai's 1992 "roleplaying shell" implemented in CW? (See signature for details.)
2. Can we get any of the concepts outlined in the failed EA reboot implemented? (see link in signature). Specifically, I am referring to the idea of logistics, hex-map for planet conquest that implements those logistics; mechs organized into military units that have logistical implications and opportunity costs.
3. Can we get a grand-strategy concept going wherein players send materiel to battlefronts, theaters, and ultimately planets to have actual military campaigns instead of random voting?
4. Can we get anything at all along these lines going?

[Marius Evander]

Ok kd ratio idea bad I agree so we need a better tier/mmr for gating with the min qp games req.

Need to add a select which spawn to drop in b4 dropping 2nd 3rd and 4th waves

That is instead of drop commander moving people everyone can move self group or select a specific drop b4 being able to drop.

Edited by Cadoazreal, 25 January 2017 - 11:35 PM.