Jump to content

Roundtable Meeting With Russ Bullock And Devs On Twitch.tv/ngngtv


348 replies to this topic

#121 MovinTarget

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Field Marshal
  • Field Marshal
  • 3,831 posts
  • LocationGreen Acres

Posted 26 January 2017 - 05:43 PM

View PostCadoAzazel, on 26 January 2017 - 05:38 PM, said:

FP/CW
lower Cbills for damage done and increase cbills for assists in formation etc
Majorly increase finishing game by objective bonus's linked to how quickly you do the objectives (1st 5 mins win __ cbills) 1st 15 < that 1st 5 etc
If you dont do above, increase IS cbill income and not Clan coz clans are designed to do more damage IS designed to take more damage therefore IS do less damage therefore they should get more cbills for damage done ?


I like where you are going with this, however bonuses for finishing faster may only make stomps worse...

#122 Frost Lord

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 419 posts

Posted 26 January 2017 - 06:23 PM

the biggest problem with community warfare is its lack of variety. compared to quick play, with 5 going on 6 game modes, faction warfare has just two.
my suggestion is that the quick play game modes be used as building blocks to balance this out. I will cover both assault and scouting separately.

Scouting
could have all quick play game modes, and would work much like quick play with map voting and group size would be locked at 4 players. you could potently make scouting and quick play the same thing bringing many players who are only interested in quick play into faction warfare without actually forcing them to give up quick play.

Assault
for Assault I would only add some game modes and I would change them a bit, like implementing waves and so on.
conquest: it would be interesting for this game mode if drop ships only came in when they had 4 mechs (so it will wait after the timer stops until it has 4 players ready to come back in) and every wave after the first could drop off at any of the six points not just the 3 they started at. that way the game would be less predictable
Domination: like conquest make drop points random. also rather than just having the radar make some maps have different more defendable assets.
Skirmish: could also have random drop zones or it could be more calculated by adding more drop zones so if the enemy tried to farm your drop zone it would drop everyone in a different area.
Incursion: ?

#123 50 50

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,145 posts
  • LocationTo Nova or not to Nova. That is the question.

Posted 26 January 2017 - 06:47 PM

It would be interesting to see how the Scout mode and Invasion Maps/Mode play out in Quick Play.

Anyone in a light or medium mech dropping solo or any group of 4 or less that make up a light or medium lance could have a chance of dropping into a QP Scout match.

Might need to remove the turrets in the Invasion mode and make a couple of other tweaks but the mixed drops with 3/3/3/3 mech options and the tonnage limits for groups I expect would play out very differently.

We've seen how the QP maps and modes have gone in FP, why not add the FP options to QP?
Instantly that's 2 extra modes and 6 maps to add further variety in QP.

Just a side thought.

#124 BearFlag

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • 374 posts

Posted 26 January 2017 - 07:24 PM

So I listened to the Pre-Round Table. If indeed they were trying to distill things down to the three most important problems with FW, they're missing the mark. They focused, as I did in my previous post, on rather mechanical aspects of FW. Here is their Top 3 summary:

1) Ability to redirect to/select from alt drop zones

2) Map/Mode voting of some sort to avoid long spells of one mode.

3) Find ways to encourage people to play as Loyalists

Number 1 is no where near being the biggest problem with FW. This is just another call to reduce spawn camping which is symptom not cause. The suggestion is mere mitigation as was my suggestion of auto-victory conditions.

Number 2 is understandable and perhaps necessary. This will effectively, however, wreck the already under-developed "battle phase" idea.

All worthy topics, but come on. If you're really wanting to talk big picture, the problems are elsewhere.

1) 80-90% do not play FW. Those that try it, don't stay. Natural attrition removes long term players. POPULATION is the number one 'problem.'

2) Contributing to 1) is MATCH BALANCE. This is the strongest cause of spawn camping, frustration and quitting.

3) Many simply do not like RESPAWN play. Whether it's the double carnage rate (96 mechs in 30 minutes vs. 24 in 15 QP), the wait times, the match length, QP players stay away. Only Scout approximates QP-style with single spawn. No QP-like game, no QP players. There should be a gateway mode to bring them in.

From there you can go on talk to about ways to improve incrementally the game. But make no mistake, the big problems are listed above (and unlikely to be discussed).

Edited by BearFlag, 26 January 2017 - 08:05 PM.


#125 Kamikaze Viking

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 384 posts
  • LocationStay on Topic... STAY ON TOPIC!!!

Posted 26 January 2017 - 08:10 PM

View PostBombadil, on 24 January 2017 - 06:43 PM, said:

There is a community-lead pre-roundtable discussion going on right now: https://www.twitch.tv/mech_xavier

Will also be monitoring comments, suggestions, and feedback here.


I think this thread is a great example of why Xavier runs these Pre-Meetings. 10,000 different ideas by differerent people with very different perspectives. Watching that stream was nice and orderly at the start with 5-6 experienced Faction play drop callers, by the end it was Pure Chaos with 30+ people making suggestions that were the equivalent of making a whole new game.

I have confidence that Xavier (and the small team) can present 3-4 concise ideas and have some interesting discussion with Russ on the things that were discussed that have the most realistic possibilities of being introduced with maximum impact and minimum effort.




On the point about varying modes I'm for the Graduated random percent options within the tug of war as i believe was mentioned at some point. I'd rather not have voting here as i don't think it adds anything of value, yet we know that current voting systems people's voting habits show clear bias and not all maps and modes are played evenly.

Edited by Kamikaze Viking, 26 January 2017 - 08:13 PM.


#126 Jarl Dane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Point Commander
  • Point Commander
  • 1,803 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationJarnFolk Cluster

Posted 26 January 2017 - 09:27 PM

First of all, I skimmed through this entire thread and read most of what people wrote; I recommend anyone with strong opinions look around at all the different opinions here. It might seem simple or obvious to you, but it is rare that a single idea is universally bad or universally good. And nothing is certain until it's tested.

I am going to be at the Roundtable, it's why I read this thread. I was also at the pre-roundtable roundtable and those of you good enough to listen may have head my voice a few times. More importantly you likely noticed with a group of 10-30 players, there was a decent amount of disagreement. It's just not easy.


As far as representation goes...
I was also present at the last (first) roundtable, along with about 12 other guys. That was way, way, way too many people and anyone who actually listened to that roundtable knows it. Everyone there had good intentions and a reason to be there, they represented some portion of the population, but it was just too much. And really, the idea that each perceived community needs a their own representative is.. I think.. a little over the top. We all play this game, we're all part of the same (already somewhat small!) community. Yeah, there are a few artificial and even fewer real differences between us (Clan/IS, Loyaist/Merc, Comp/Casual, Solo/Unit, Large Unit/Small Unit) most of these are smoke.. most of the problems that plague us, plague us regardless of the 'niche' community we say we're part of.

Furthermore, in that last meeting despite their being 12 guys that really did run the gambit of all those distinctions; the community was still livid about being 'underrepresented' - it was like some bad parody it was so farical. I actually wrote up a big arse reddit post about it.. which can be found here..


We need to remember that we're all on the same side, we all want this game to be better.

Finally, recall that last time we really only discussed 3-4 topics with Russ in 3 hours. It's impossible that everything on here will or can be discussed. It's part of the reason for the pre-roundtable roundtable, despite it's obvious flaws, it allows us to distill ideas/opinions down to a few core ones that can be addressed.


As to the agenda of Tarogato has already made an excellent post about what it is going in...

View PostTarogato, on 26 January 2017 - 01:30 AM, said:

So I listened to the pre-roundtable roundtable, and here's my thoughts:

I think the three main points were:


1. Spawn selection. Individual players should be able to freely choose between any of the three dropzones when spawning in. It's up to PGI to work out the implementation.


2. Gamemode voting. Remove the "phases" from the Tug O'War, and just present teams the option to vote on a gamemode when a match is found. After a gamemode is selected, randomly choose a map and plop players into their mech select lobbies.


3. Loyalist incentives. Loyalists should probably get a per-match C-Bill bonus once they've achieved Rank 20. Optionally, a per-match MC bonus. Another more challenging option is to give Loyalist in-game perks, such as mech quirks that only apply to FP matches, and help differentiate the factions. Another thing you could do is provide a C-Bill price reduction to mechs tied to your faction in lore. Also, achieving a certain rank (maybe rank 10?) should, imo, give you reduced prices on camo unlocks for your faction's camo pattern as long as you are loyal to that faction. As well as cockpit items.






Extra tidbits that were either discussed, or are chiefly my own ideas:


ScoutingMode bonuses. The bonuses are currently not in the order of their influence. I would say first should come Radar Jamming, and then Combat ID, and then Satellite Sweep. Also, when you lock onto mechs via Satellite Sweep, it should allow you to acquire their loadouts. Also, the further your Tug O'War bar is along the ScoutingMode, the more effective each of the bonuses should be. For instance, if Radar Jamming occurs every two minutes for a five second duration, then that duration can be increased for every percent that Scouting is in your favour - i.e., if the Tug O' War is 100% in your favour, you get a 100% buff to Radar Jamming (ten seconds in this case.)

Gating new players. At the very very very least, require players to finish 25 Cadet Bonus matches before being allowed to enter FactionPlay. Ideally, 100 matches or more. Because still... who after 100 matches has a firm grasp of this game? (Personally, I would also like to see a skill gate, where you have to be achieving an average of 200 match score or greater in QuickPlay before being allowed to enter FactionPlay. I say 200 match score because that is approximately the mark that divides the playbase into exactly two halves - 50% are above that mark, and 50% are below it. It's a very easy goal to reach. Once you achieve that goal, it grants you an Achievement and permanent access to FactionPlay. Instead of 200 match score, you could just base it off of PSR tier. But PSR is broken, and that's a whole 'nother discussion.)

Matchmaker? If you introduce a matchmaker of some sort, gating new players might not even be necessary. FactionPlay will be considered a joke as long as there is no separation between high skill and low skill. With a matchmaker funneling competitive premades specifically toward each other, more of them might return to play the mode since they have higher odds of facing each other instead of wasting time farming potatoes. Similarly, low skill but high enthusiasm lore grognards who were chased away by getting stomped against high skill teams, if protected against the competitive-premade-boogeyman... might also return. The hypothesis is that low population is a merely a symptom of a bigger problem, and if you improve the bigger problem, even if it makes longer queue times, more people might come back and the queue times will resolve themselves.

Improving the New Player Experience. Trial mechs should come with full Skill Tree (Elite) bonuses. End of story.

8-hour phases. It's pretty widely agreed upon that 8-hour phases present a lot of problems. But solutions differ. I like the suggestion that once you push the Tug O'War to the 100% mark (or maybe hold it past 90% for 30 minutes), something happens. That something could be ... it immediately triggers the end the phase and flips one planet (not all four, just one), or it triggers a countdown to end the phase and you have until the end of the countdown to maintain 90% control to win the planet.

Incentivising solo players. (note, if you implement some sort of matchmaking system, then this paragraph becomes rather moot.) Personally, I think solo players should be discouraged from FactionPlay. Instead, they should be encouraged to join units and play as a group. Solo players and pug groups are just cannon fodder and contribute nothing positive to the game mode other than monotonous C-Bill farm. Part of the reason I'm sure many units don't play FactionPlay is because it is a joke - there is no matchmaking, it's nothing but sealclubbing. This is why they continue to stick to third party leagues such as MRBC, or just play QuickPlay where there is at least some semblance of a matchmaking system.

Incentivising people to join units. First change should be that the FactionPlay's "FACTION CHAT" should be viewable at all times in in Front End UI. You shouldn't have to click FactionPlay to read and post in Faction Chat. Second change: display [unit] tags in front of player names in the chat. Third change, when hovering over or clicking on a [unit] tag (be it in chat, or on the leaderboard, or if possible on the scoreboard in match), it should provide a pop-up of information about that unit, such as the full name of the unit, who the unit leader(s) is, how many members, and a button that submits a request for membership to that unit. Optionally, also include their FactionPlay leaderboard rank, and maybe a blank field to be filled out by the unit leader that could include TS or Discord server info, a link to an mwomercs forum recruitment thread, or maybe just an "About" paragraph.

Incentivising unit play. Every time a planet is won, it evenly distributes some amount of MC to all units according to their amount of participation. If you were 1% of the individual player wins during the phase that won the planet, your unit gets 1% of the MC. This is in addition to the MC that a planet gives per phase by default to the chief occupying unit.



I'm going to add.. that, I have some personal thoughts that didn't get much time at the meeting or were politely shunted for.. later.

I think the 'surrender button' issue is important. I don't think there should be a surrender button, but I feel like there needs to be some sort of answer to some lower-skill players getting stomped then 'Get Good'. There are people who have played this game for years and skill wise, they are where they are, that isn't going to change - and if they are allowed to play in CW then there should be a place for them in CW. I think part of the reason it wasn't too seriously considered or discussed at the pre-roundtable roundtable is that it is outside most the other guy's experience there. They all run and play in units often with pretty exacting expectations and support; where as I have a relationship with an entire faction...

The other thing was 8 hour phases, I think that needs some serious work too. 8 hours is too long for events, it's too long for most units to commit to on a regular basis. I think 4 is better, and personally, I even think a case can be made to limiting how much CW is even accessible - I think maybe deceasing CW from 24/7 to 12/7 might be a good idea. With new incentives and a few other goodies tossed, we see if we can create a situation where people play QP normally.. and then funnel into the CP game-mode during those 4 hours it's up (my suggestion here would be 4 hours in NA prime time, 4 hours in EU prime time, 4 hours in Oceanic prime time.) I just see it as being more manageable for smaller units, and a potential boon to the QP and CW population as the gametypes aren't always fighting each other for both. But this is more of a fringe belief of mine and there might be serious dissent towards it. Either way, I think 8 hours is too long for a phase ;)


So.. now for a few things I saw skimming this thread...

View PostBluntObject, 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?


You might laugh at me and roll your eyes, but most of the Community Warfare I've played has been in the Oceanic Timezone. The worlds I won, was during the oceanic timezone. So if you want someone with significant oceanic experience, here I am.

I am not sure, other then understanding the low population at those times, how that makes me somehow more qualified to ask questions and give feedback to Russ, then say a NA or EU player, but there you go. Arbitrary distinction achieved.

View PostJman5, on 24 January 2017 - 10:08 PM, said:


This times a million. Davion, Steiner, and Wolf are drowning in innactive loyalists and it's artificially pushing their contract bonuses down. Meanwhile factions like Smoke Jaguar and Liao are perpetually offering a nice bonus because they aren't saddled with all these inactives.

You can see it too in the total faction leaderboard. The best contracts per side is Smoke Jaguar and Liao. The most games played per side has been Smoke Jaguar and Liao. The worst contracts are Davion and Wolf and they're both near the bottom in terms of total games played.

Nobody goes Davion because Davion has a perma -20% penalty. Nobody goes wolf because wolf has a perma -20% penalty.


Yes. That is important, I'll try to find a way to bring it up. If I have the time/opportunity.


View PostSigmar Sich, on 25 January 2017 - 09:57 AM, said:

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)..


If I can find a chance to get it in; I will.

#127 Peiper

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Dragoon
  • The Dragoon
  • 1,444 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationA fog where no one notices the contrast of white on white

Posted 26 January 2017 - 09:38 PM

Hello, sorry I'm late. I was unaware of this thread and pre-meeting.

Here is a copy of the list of suggestions and explanations I sent up the chain to PGI after the last town hall (the buckets town hall) in late July. I had responded to the feedback thread, so I summarize that, and then go into detail about a full plan to enhance faction play, in a step by step easy to implement fashion.

I posted this on page 25 of the thread regarding last night's town hall. I figured if it had any chance at all of being heard, I better send it straight to you. It is a list of suggestions that can be phased in over time, which won't break the game, but give meaning to CW. Why should I attack this or that planet? It also suggests a mini-economic game where you fly around as a free merchant buying and selling on the side which could affect either the economy of your faction or unit.

Summary of original post:

My suggestions include the following additions or changes to the game.
Ability for factions to vote on: faction capitol, which planets to attack next.
Supply lines. The further a planet is from the capitol, the less money is paid to player. If the chain of planets is severed from the capitol, players fighting on cut off planets make minimal money. The effect of this is small factions get big payouts, larger ones do not.
New game mode: raids. 4 v 4 or 6v6 or 8v8 fights. Winner gets money, loser does not. If you fail to defend on a raid, overall faction payouts reduced (supply lines/factory damage), raid winners get paid if they succeed, representing stolen goods/supplies. Raids do not affect faction ownership, but could affect supply if not defended against.
Planetary perks: Planets have perks. Control enough 'clan' or 'IS' factories and a faction can use one 'salvaged' opposite tech mech in their dropdecks. Also, access to assets in game like SRM infantry that pop up during CW fights, FASCAM (deployable minefields), Elemental ambushes, Aerospace and/or Dropship strafing runs (that can be shot down), tanks, VTOL's.
Merchant mini-game: Units have dropships and can rent space on jumpships to travel around the IS, visiting worlds, smuggling goods, providing assets and income for their unit or faction (difference between loyalist and merc players). Things can be bought including the stuff you can get from planetary perks list above. So, players with lots of time can gather resources to offset advantages given to more dominant factions/units by playing the merchant game. No combat involved, many games have models. Pick this up here, drop it off there, get money, build reputation, etc...

The original thread is copy/pasted below, which elaborates more on what I TL;DR'ed above. We need more people in CW to make it work. To get more people involved you need to give MEANING to CW. There are only so many bribe-you-to-play weekend events before people just get bored of playing the same game mode every time. So, you gotta make Community Warfare meaningful. My ideas do not break the game, and do not give super-advantages to anyone, but you do get something for your extra work and success. The worst that can happen is you get minimal pay for a drop. The best is some fun stuff like extra assets on the battlefield and bigger paychecks. Everyone still wins, but those who work harder get some perks and extra money. And EVERYONE can still play.

__________________________________________________

Just saw this thread. As this is page 25, and knowing how forums work, I'm probably too late to have an impact, but as the leader of a long standing unit of now mostly bored and/or disillusioned players who feel PGI has missed the boat on many things, well, I have a lot to say and would like to be part of this panel discussion. There are a lot of ideas that may have been thrown away or not considered that would make faction play much more interesting. I will throw them down here in a nutshell.

1. Economy.
A. Planets need meaning. If a planet produces something that players want, they will fight for it. People want what they can't have. That means the planets must produce something players want. That means technology they shouldn't have. Clan tech for IS and vice versa. Whether this is whole mechs, or let's say, 10 percent of a mech per planet, then so be it. Example. If you take Hesperus II as a clan player, you can put an inner sphere mech into your drop deck because, well, you can now make them. Another example: if you control ten clan worlds, you can make an omnimech and add it to your inner sphere drop deck.
B. Salvage. This should have been in the game from the very start of CW. Units collect parts for salvage, put them into a pool (a guild bank) and officers can distribute the salvage to the players in a clan so they can cobble together mechs.
C. Other assets. Control a certain world and you gain AI assets like VTOLS and tanks to bring with you into battle. Also, minefields and stuff for defense.

2. A black market. The black market is the equalizer for units factions that are having a hard time taking planets. Here's how it works:
A. Players and/or units have jumpships and trade dropships. They can fly around as merchants (this is another game mode, that doesn't involve mechs/combat) and visit planets on both sides of the line buying and selling products. These products could be then sold or given to their unit.
B. Money for the black market. Struggling factions pay more to fight for them as they do now, so this will help merchant players get a leg up on the competition.
C. Larger or faster jumpships could be bought or rented by units.

3. Supply lines and maybe unit dropships, also, dump faction capitols.
A. Right now there is no sandbox for CW. We keep restarting at the beginning of the clan invasion over and over, when that doesn't make sense as lore exists simply for flavor in this game and has no real function. Once let lose, even with PGI picking the planets we fight over, lore is broken because, well, players want to do what didn't happen in lore which is part of the reason Terra was taken twice by Clan Wolf, and this time, Clan Wolf is practically non-existent. So, a faction needs to be able to vote on which planets to take, or individual units should be able to attack a front/planet close to wherever their dropships are located.
B. If there are no unit dropships, factions vote on which planet to attack next. As now some planets produce something of value and others do not, factions and units have a reason to fight toward valuable planets.
C. If we have jumpships and dropships, then they exist somewhere physically on the inner sphere map and we move them around. Big or small units can affect the map by attacking planets within their jump range. Small units can do 'raid missions' and large units can lead 'invasions.' Small units can combine or help large units do 'invasion' missions. See below for mission types.
D. Location, location, location. War machines need supply lines. The larger a faction, the more likely they'll stretch their supply lines thin (represented in faction payouts. Smaller factions 'pay' more representing the ease of reinforcement.' A faction can vote on a capital maybe once a week. Capitals are the hub for supplies and there must be a chain of planets to your unit/the front in order to supply the front. If another faction cuts off/breaks the chain, or continues to raid the supply lines, then that faction's front line forces either have to do with less, with no supplies, or have to turn and prevent being stuck in a pocket/break out.

4. Types of missions with meaning.
A. Invasion. What it was before, but of course, you're taking over a planet of value, ideally, which will help gain assets for your unit and faction.
B. Raiding. Raiding a planet does not mean capturing. It means going in and either stealing supplies or damaging the planet's ability to supply others. It's banditry and thievery. If a small unit wants to raid, they attack a planet, steal some supplies which increase their own faction's supplies by an equal percentage that it damages an enemy factions supplies. Ideal missions for small units, as I envision these missions being 4, 6, or 8v8 missions. For now, they can simply be smaller versions of the public-drop queue death matchs, but the reward for winning would be faction-wide.

So, if you want to do get people to play CW, it comes down to MEANING. Planets must have assets the other faction wants. We must be able to vote as a faction (or simply move as units) to attack planets we wish to attack, or predict and put our Jumpships in range of planets we suspect we'll have to defend. Supply lines must be the game, to add a level of strategy. Raids must be a game type, where we can hurt the enemy and help ourselves with no intention of taking and holding planets. Capital planets can be voted on and changed periodically, unless you're going to expand the map to include the Kerensky Cluster and Pentagon Worlds. Even then, you'll have supply lines to clan homeworlds you can raid or sever. Black Market. The black market is a different game mode that can be used to help a unit's individual economy and supply and maybe also help a faction out. More traders, better economy even if the faction is otherwise down to one single world. they still have a chance to rebuild through the black market. Additional assets, salvage, and fighting for otherwise forbidden gear is also a great motivator. Supposedly clans and IS are balanced now, so why not allow players to have other tech in their dropdecks? Other assets would include stuff you can use to attack or defend planets with that can be from planets you conquer or the black market VTOL's, Tanks, Minefields, Infantry, Battle Armor.

If you put all this in, CW has a chance to be a lot of fun and bring a lot of people back as well as attract new players. Don't and CW is just another game mode/death match type with no meaning other than you get a dropdeck and maybe, if you're big enough, some MC for holding a planet.

#128 naterist

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 6
  • Mercenary Rank 6
  • 1,724 posts
  • Location7th circle of hell

Posted 26 January 2017 - 10:00 PM

can we put turrets and ecm towers around spawns?

#129 SuperFunkTron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Slayer
  • The Slayer
  • 910 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 26 January 2017 - 10:15 PM

View PostMech The Dane, on 26 January 2017 - 09:27 PM, said:

...

Hey Mech,

In Tarogato's list, are those top 3 items listed in his post things that are considered priority for the round table or were those just what the 30 reps are hoping will be discussed? I have a particular interest in the third item Tarogato listed, specifically the part about incentivizing loyalists through perks(faction quirks) and you may have seen that I've been on a bit of a campaign to at least have the idea given a look over to let us know what the viability of the faction quirking idea is. Creating some depth and context to FP is the most sure fire way create more interest and retain more players in FP as it would at least provide a back drop and some more emotion to player/PGI lead campaigns.

I understand if there are more urgent priorities, but knowing if PGI at least plans to eventually implement some great immersion and diversity in FP (even if it is just a step at a time) would really give the community a clearer idea of long term out look for MWO.

Thanks for your time and consideration.

#130 Jarl Dane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Point Commander
  • Point Commander
  • 1,803 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationJarnFolk Cluster

Posted 26 January 2017 - 10:34 PM

View PostSuperFunkTron, on 26 January 2017 - 10:15 PM, said:

Hey Mech,

In Tarogato's list, are those top 3 items listed in his post things that are considered priority for the round table or were those just what the 30 reps are hoping will be discussed?



Yes those are the three prioritized topics. If nothing else gets discussed; those three will.

I recommend though, you (and anyone interested) do some serious thinking on how to implement those perks.. ideally in this post.. it sounds good, but how is it going to work out so that it is balanced and makes sense?

It'll be better in the meeting if we have some answers for Russ on that question.. rather then just the beginnings of an idea with no follow-through.

Edited by Mech The Dane, 26 January 2017 - 10:43 PM.


#131 naterist

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 6
  • Mercenary Rank 6
  • 1,724 posts
  • Location7th circle of hell

Posted 26 January 2017 - 11:32 PM

maybe replace the skirmish section on the slider, and make that one a random with all modes (escept escort, it isnt ready for fw imho, and counterattack) section of the slider. skirmish is not fun to be stuck on when we get balance, and it gives invasion a chance at popping up if the slider is just deadlocked at the middle. the rest of the slider is them seizing the planet a la operation serpent style.

idk how it would work with the lobby so this is just a similar but different hypothetical idea, but instead of random for the middle slider, give it a voting mechanism for it only like in quickplay, but dress it up a bit as a batchall. would be a sweet mix, especially since when the time jump happens, the IS will be fully aware of batchalls and issue them to clanners (read operation audacity for proof it happens). but as i said, i dont think this could work so my real idea is the first paragraph.

Edited by naterist, 26 January 2017 - 11:35 PM.


#132 ThunderKats

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 20 posts

Posted 26 January 2017 - 11:42 PM

Posted Image Is this game free2play?

#133 Leone

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,693 posts
  • LocationOutworlds Alliance

Posted 27 January 2017 - 12:45 AM

Yes

~Leone.

#134 Will9761

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 4,673 posts

Posted 27 January 2017 - 01:14 AM

My thoughts for the Loyalist would be:



  • Give loyalists Faction Colors, faction decals, and faction camos unlocks to faction specific Mechs for free upon reaching a certain rank, for example Rank 5- Steiner Decal, Rank 10- Steiner Faction Colors, Rank 15- Steiner Zeus. There is nothing wrong with throwing in some free vanity rewards.




  • Give Faction warfare some RPG elements by having some lore-based faction leaders for faction specific events like Thomas Marik or Marthe Pryde.
For Mercenaries split them up between IS Mercenaries and Clan Mercenaries:


Posted Image Posted Image
  • Restrict Mercenaries from serving Clans and only restrict them to only serve the Inner Sphere.
  • Make mercenary ranks non-linear.
  • Give out decals for rewards based on Mercenary faction ties rather than the IS factions.
  • Make an equivalent faction for Clan Mercenaries and call them either "Clan Reinforcements" or " Reserve Clan" and let them serve only Clan factions.

Edited by Will9761, 27 January 2017 - 02:46 AM.


#135 WANTED

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 611 posts
  • LocationFt. Worth, TX

Posted 27 January 2017 - 06:05 AM

View PostSuperFunkTron, on 26 January 2017 - 10:15 PM, said:

Hey Mech,

In Tarogato's list, are those top 3 items listed in his post things that are considered priority for the round table or were those just what the 30 reps are hoping will be discussed? I have a particular interest in the third item Tarogato listed, specifically the part about incentivizing loyalists through perks(faction quirks) and you may have seen that I've been on a bit of a campaign to at least have the idea given a look over to let us know what the viability of the faction quirking idea is. Creating some depth and context to FP is the most sure fire way create more interest and retain more players in FP as it would at least provide a back drop and some more emotion to player/PGI lead campaigns.

I understand if there are more urgent priorities, but knowing if PGI at least plans to eventually implement some great immersion and diversity in FP (even if it is just a step at a time) would really give the community a clearer idea of long term out look for MWO.

Thanks for your time and consideration.



This above. Mech the Dane, we need you to inject lore, pride in faction, events, and stories into the discussion with PGI. I think they can actually get excitement and more interests with just a few paragraphs and words until the bigger items are addressed down the line. Use some video of mechs like they do for mech releases, chatting with each other or just text overlay saying stuff about Clans attacking this planet and add some high profile personalities ( Hanse Davion reaction, etc ) to the attack. This is can be accomplished now and requires nothing more than a CM doing what you do Dane.

#136 General Solo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • 3,625 posts

Posted 27 January 2017 - 06:21 AM

I still think
Make the dropships OP but killable
Once the dropships are down no more respawns and Game Over Man
Adds Immersion

That way it hurts to spawn camp
and gives a way to finish the game quick if team is out matched
makes spawn farming very difficult

If you spawn farm you take damage from drop ship
If you kill dropship you have no mechs to farm
Dropship destruction needs a good reward

Edit: Just to add some feedback for PGI
I been liking the new FW better, thanks

#137 Tank

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 1,202 posts
  • LocationSelling baguettes in K-Town

Posted 27 January 2017 - 06:28 AM

Last interaction of Faction Warfare killed objective based gameplay completely. I think we should watch closer to what games like League of Legends do well in this regard.

I suggest implementing uncampable garrisons on the drop zone, just make it a safe zone for people.

Make the Faction Warfare about garrison control that are capable of self-defence - something like and extended version of Conquest.

This can work on current maps, just put garrisons in to them.

This will leave current "slather fest" we have and adds a layer of tactical complexity for victory.

#138 MovinTarget

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Field Marshal
  • Field Marshal
  • 3,831 posts
  • LocationGreen Acres

Posted 27 January 2017 - 06:34 AM

View PostWill9761, on 27 January 2017 - 01:14 AM, said:

My thoughts for the Loyalist would be:



  • Give loyalists Faction Colors, faction decals, and faction camos unlocks to faction specific Mechs for free upon reaching a certain rank, for example Rank 5- Steiner Decal, Rank 10- Steiner Faction Colors, Rank 15- Steiner Zeus. There is nothing wrong with throwing in some free vanity rewards.




  • Give Faction warfare some RPG elements by having some lore-based faction leaders for faction specific events like Thomas Marik or Marthe Pryde.
For Mercenaries split them up between IS Mercenaries and Clan Mercenaries:


Posted Image Posted Image
  • Restrict Mercenaries from serving Clans and only restrict them to only serve the Inner Sphere.
  • Make mercenary ranks non-linear.
  • Give out decals for rewards based on Mercenary faction ties rather than the IS factions.
  • Make an equivalent faction for Clan Mercenaries and call them either &quot;Clan Reinforcements&quot; or &quot; Reserve Clan&quot; and let them serve only Clan factions.


The primaty reason merc-life appeals to me personally is that i can ultimately choose to play *all* my mechs. Maybe not at the same time, but over the course of months, i get to play a variety of mechs and variety of styles.

Our unit will typically stay on an alternating 2 week rotation between clams and IS. We aren't groupies following bigger units.

So basically, if we were forced to choose on side or the other, it would suck. Believe it or not, I like FP better than QP and that means FP is the primary force behind my being a bit of a whale. I am pretty sure I am not the only one.

So simply put, put me and others in a corner and there will be some wallet implications for PGI.

Additionally, while people hate to admit it, mercs are rather pivotal in "balancing" sides... if ypu lock people in and it ends up being unbalanced based on player preferences... it could make things worse.

Balance means dirrent things to dofferent people:
Is it that either side can win a given match?
Is it either side can win a planet?

These are two different things if you think about it... it would be awfully hard to flip a planet if every game is a discreet 50/50 coin toss.

So part of what needs to be tackled is honestly people just getting on board with a common idea of long term success conditions...

Maybe we simply have each hour of a phase be a certain mode and at ceasefire tally which side had the most wins... or each hour is a "pie piece" and getting 51% (or whatever it would be if 8 hours, need 5 pie pieces)... then you could get unit/player bonuses for each hour's win (an hour is arbitrary here, just an example) and also for best overall performance over the phase.

That may ultimately not be optimal either, but the current tug of war, eternal qp mode is not super fun...

#139 MovinTarget

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Field Marshal
  • Field Marshal
  • 3,831 posts
  • LocationGreen Acres

Posted 27 January 2017 - 06:39 AM

View PostTank, on 27 January 2017 - 06:28 AM, said:

Last interaction of Faction Warfare killed objective based gameplay completely. I think we should watch closer to what games like League of Legends do well in this regard.

I suggest implementing uncampable garrisons on the drop zone, just make it a safe zone for people.

Make the Faction Warfare about garrison control that are capable of self-defence - something like and extended version of Conquest.

This can work on current maps, just put garrisons in to them.

This will leave current &quot;slather fest&quot; we have and adds a layer of tactical complexity for victory.


Moving drop zones would be nice, because the flip side of spawn camping agressors are spawn hiders that never come out.

90% of the time I get accused of spawn camping its more likely the enemy simply won't come out and we get impatient.


The other 10% is when they did it first so we repay in kind.


We could alway put LT back in the game where it drops in front of the drop zones to clear the decks and people can get out, but also can drop *in* the dropzone if people don't get out... ;) I kid! I kid!

#140 Tank

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 1,202 posts
  • LocationSelling baguettes in K-Town

Posted 27 January 2017 - 07:32 AM

View PostMovinTarget, on 27 January 2017 - 06:39 AM, said:

Moving drop zones would be nice, because the flip side of spawn camping agressors are spawn hiders that never come out.

90% of the time I get accused of spawn camping its more likely the enemy simply won't come out and we get impatient.


The other 10% is when they did it first so we repay in kind.


We could alway put LT back in the game where it drops in front of the drop zones to clear the decks and people can get out, but also can drop *in* the dropzone if people don't get out... Posted Image I kid! I kid!


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.

Posted Image
you are in the army now!
But you know people they gonna whine about that like crazy. Posted Image





41 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 41 guests, 0 anonymous users