142 replies to this topic

[Gorith]

TheRulesLawyer, on 15 December 2011 - 11:06 AM, said:

LoL. Okay. Well, we disagree there. Lets face it, a game can afford to lose the hardcore and survive. Lose the more casual market and the game will wither and die. Hopefully there is something that can appeal to both. It just needs to be something better than "buck up and hold your group together better"

Thats why EVE is a dead game that no one plays right?

Now enough of being a smart ***. Someone said waiting because you died early is a big deal. Honestly waiting 15-30 mins because you got caught early with your pants down isn't a big deal just fire up hulu or netflix watch the most recent episode of your fav show while waiting or read forums or any number of other things while you wait. Honestly if 15-30 mins is a big deal to you do you really have time to be gaming anyway?

[Mchawkeye]

The more I think about it, there will probably be plenty to do outside the cockpit to occupy the 10/15 minutes if you dumb enough to get blowed up in the first 5 minutes.

If anything, the threat of not playing again for a quarter of an hour should induce people to be careful and not go jumping into fire. which is kind of the point really; movements will have to be <gasp> thought about <shock> before the mechwarriors actually enact a <wait for it...> plan of attack....

[IceSerpent]

TheRulesLawyer, on 15 December 2011 - 03:50 PM, said:

I sure hope there is a going system that will place you in an appropriate battle at any time. Scheduled battles really suck. I've wasted enough of my life on those.

I certainly agree that it would be nice to join a battle at any time, but how would you implement that? It works with only 2 factions (i.e. warfronts in WOW), but with 5+ factions which may or may not be at odds with each other...it would be tricky to say the least.

[CeeKay Boques]

I may be wrong... but I'm pretty sure that in a game like MWO, where the only way you will pay is because you play it a lot and love it, that PGI has 0 intention of having "15 minutes down times".

I'm pretty sure, that they are going to want you to be able to drive a mech, every darn miniute that you, the person paying, want to. I'm pretty sure. Downtime = Firing up a new game = slow loss of interest = customer gone.

Not me, I own all the novels, the TT, the TROs, the rulebooks. They already have my money, and if I had to wait 30 days to play, I probably would.

But my money's a given. But see that guy over there playing BF3? Yeah. He has money, but he won't pay if he has to wait. That's the money they want. Maybe you're right and there will be "tactical minigames" some where to keep us busy in between drops. But my bet is that anytime you want to jump in a giant robot, you will be able to, no waiting.

[IceSerpent]

Technoviking, on 15 December 2011 - 03:18 PM, said:

This is horrifyingly bad news for people that want to play in leagues, let alone play a friendly game not run by our Mech Overlords. They said "Lots and lots of Servers". You think its going to be matchmaker only? Man I sure hope not... *looks WoT*... I bet you are though.

I hope you enjoy playing with my children and their friends on your faction! They're almost 10!

Uhm...this was probably the most cryptic comment I've ever seen...could you elaborate on the "horrifyingly bad news" part please and maybe explain what exactly you disagree with?

[CeeKay Boques]

In your post it was just the incredible lack of player ability to do anything outside of the MWO Metagame. I'm not saying that the concept of world conquering, structured, persistant world play wasn't good. I love it. I played NBT for years just for that. But the way it was described, it was as if there was no other way to play. No other server options. No other leagues could be played. Looking at WoT... that may be true. If it is, there will be no player leagues. No friendly matches for fun. No duels. No training grounds to mess around on for me and my boys... everything will be so.... controlled. On one hand... that's good control means moderation and content. On the other, its horrifyingly bad news for people who wanted to play in leagues with their own rules, restrictions, timelines or with their own clan... only, for fun.

[MaddMaxx]

Technoviking, on 15 December 2011 - 04:18 PM, said:

In your post it was just the incredible lack of player ability to do anything outside of the MWO Metagame. I'm not saying that the concept of world conquering, structured, persistant world play wasn't good. I love it. I played NBT for years just for that. But the way it was described, it was as if there was no other way to play. No other server options. No other leagues could be played. Looking at WoT... that may be true. If it is, there will be no player leagues. No friendly matches for fun. No duels. No training grounds to mess around on for me and my boys... everything will be so.... controlled. On one hand... that's good control means moderation and content. On the other, its horrifyingly bad news for people who wanted to play in leagues with their own rules, restrictions, timelines or with their own clan... only, for fun.

I will guess the term we seek here is BETA Testing.

[Dlardrageth]

Ugh, don't compare the yet-to-be MWO to the terrible WoT. There is so much the dev team there did wrong to a bright concept there, don't know where even to start with.

And I wonder why people expect "waiting 15-30 mins". With projected total match length of 20 minutes only? Even if you get killed in the first minute, how would you have to wait 30 minutes, even if on just dial-up connection? And that leaves out the wholepoint of having the option of more than one Mech in your hangar etc.

I can see, and to some degree acknowledge the issue of someone dropping out of a match who want to play with his/her buddies. And having to wait a few for them. But heck, it is a mere 20 minutes at maximum! And that would only be assuming there is no other way whatsoever to spend the time. and just to prevent this PGI would have to turn the whole game into a perma-respawn-fest? I don't think so...

[Zakski]

Gorith, on 15 December 2011 - 03:52 PM, said:

Thats why EVE is a dead game that no one plays right?

Now enough of being a smart ***. Someone said waiting because you died early is a big deal. Honestly waiting 15-30 mins because you got caught early with your pants down isn't a big deal just fire up hulu or netflix watch the most recent episode of your fav show while waiting or read forums or any number of other things while you wait. Honestly if 15-30 mins is a big deal to you do you really have time to be gaming anyway?

Eve isn't F2P, you need a bigger playerbase to sustain an F2P model as only one in x who plays will probably pay for things regularly, whereas in eve every subscribed player pays.

Now as for 15-30 mins being a big deal it really is. Someone has to die for Someone else to win. If you die early whether you are a newbie, you simply got outclassed or you were an *****, why would you play a game were 70% to 90% of it is spend waiting? I have plenty of games that offer more bang for buck that that, TF2, Civ V, Skyrim and Frozen Synapse for instance. I would play them instead, lots of people would. A 100 or so hardcore forum goers will not support an F2P game of this magnitude for long.

Edited by Zakski, 15 December 2011 - 05:06 PM.

[RogueSpear]

By and large, I agree with Zakski on this one. Respawn for a teambased skirmish is required. That is a fact.
A 20m game time may be assumed, but even the Devs don't know how long a match will play until the game enters full Alpha at the earliest. I'm on a games development course at university, and I speak from experience when I say how long your team expects something to take to be wild mass guessing at best.
But let's assume the average game does take 20m on average. That's an average. Some games will last 10m, some will last 30m.
I don't mind waiting 5, or even 10 minutes for a match if my team is playing, especially if I'm on voice chat to them via deathcam. However, if I get annihilated through bad luck or the inevitable dick moves (Anyone ever been killed by a physics engine abused grenade at their spawn point in the first few seconds of the game?) in the first two or three minutes, if I have to wait 25 minutes for the team to even finish the current game, nevermind matchmake for the next, I'm going to get frustrated and play a lot less.
Now, Zakski is in my MercCorp. Let's say he and I, plus a two other friends go out in our lance. I die two minutes in because I overextended. Given the current order of things, my lance is now down either it's assault, or a flanking medium. Suddenly the game has changed.
This is how it should be.
However, in anything bigger than a skirmish, We Have Reserves. The first lance is getting ripped to shreds by massed lights/mediums, you send in your own fast movers to counter. If you walk into a wall of Atlas', you send in Longbows and Hellhounds to LRM and flank them respectively.
To do this properly, I would suggest wave based respawn. Ever 2m say (A long respawn while command decides what assets to place, rally them etc for the RPers, but not too long to unbalance the game or force a drop) everyone who has died respawns. I liked the earlier comment on safe LZs and dropship spawns, combine these two. Mechs are dropped in where needed (Ie, I choose to spawn at the point nearest to my lance to get back into the action, but Zakski in his Longbow spawns one back to ensure he doesn't end up in the thick of the fighting while trying to provide artillery) etc etc.
I've not really thought this through, but I can guarantee, if No Respawn is the norm, the game will end FAST. Casuals are right out, team players get distracted, only the hardcore, the obsessed and the insane remain.
Oh and the griefers. Always the griefers.

[MaddMaxx]

Quote

"However, in anything bigger than a skirmish, We Have Reserves. The first lance is getting ripped to shreds by massed lights/mediums, you send in your own fast movers to counter. If you walk into a wall of Atlas', you send in Longbows and Hellhounds to LRM and flank them respectively"

.

So we get to know the defense before we have to commit our forces offensively? I like it.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 15 December 2011 - 05:35 PM.

[Gorith]

70 to 90% is not likely an accurate ratio unless your the scout and got caught or you broke off on your own (in which case you either knew that was a possibility or you made a stupid mistake) most fights will most likely be determined with all member present meaning you generaly will not be waiting long after you die

[Gorith]

RogueSpear, on 15 December 2011 - 05:25 PM, said:

By and large, I agree with Zakski on this one. Respawn for a teambased skirmish is required. That is a fact.
A 20m game time may be assumed, but even the Devs don't know how long a match will play until the game enters full Alpha at the earliest. I'm on a games development course at university, and I speak from experience when I say how long your team expects something to take to be wild mass guessing at best.
But let's assume the average game does take 20m on average. That's an average. Some games will last 10m, some will last 30m.
I don't mind waiting 5, or even 10 minutes for a match if my team is playing, especially if I'm on voice chat to them via deathcam. However, if I get annihilated through bad luck or the inevitable dick moves (Anyone ever been killed by a physics engine abused grenade at their spawn point in the first few seconds of the game?) in the first two or three minutes, if I have to wait 25 minutes for the team to even finish the current game, nevermind matchmake for the next, I'm going to get frustrated and play a lot less.
Now, Zakski is in my MercCorp. Let's say he and I, plus a two other friends go out in our lance. I die two minutes in because I overextended. Given the current order of things, my lance is now down either it's assault, or a flanking medium. Suddenly the game has changed.
This is how it should be.
However, in anything bigger than a skirmish, We Have Reserves. The first lance is getting ripped to shreds by massed lights/mediums, you send in your own fast movers to counter. If you walk into a wall of Atlas', you send in Longbows and Hellhounds to LRM and flank them respectively.
To do this properly, I would suggest wave based respawn. Ever 2m say (A long respawn while command decides what assets to place, rally them etc for the RPers, but not too long to unbalance the game or force a drop) everyone who has died respawns. I liked the earlier comment on safe LZs and dropship spawns, combine these two. Mechs are dropped in where needed (Ie, I choose to spawn at the point nearest to my lance to get back into the action, but Zakski in his Longbow spawns one back to ensure he doesn't end up in the thick of the fighting while trying to provide artillery) etc etc.
I've not really thought this through, but I can guarantee, if No Respawn is the norm, the game will end FAST. Casuals are right out, team players get distracted, only the hardcore, the obsessed and the insane remain.
Oh and the griefers. Always the griefers.

So we can constantly counter each other in midfield till someone breaks through? You do realize that type of play artificially extends match duration in games right?

[Haeso]

Mchawkeye, on 15 December 2011 - 03:59 PM, said:

plan of attack....

What is this, I don't understand. "Planning" "Attacking"? That's not "Fun"

RogueSpear, on 15 December 2011 - 05:25 PM, said:

I'm on a games development course at university, and I speak from experience when I say how long your team expects something to take to be wild mass guessing at best.

If their QA team sucks and their designers are planning the game without a match time window in advance then adjusting the game to fit that window, which would be silly... When you've got a few years working in this industry and you're not a burned out husk of a human being then you can comment on your experience. Uni doesn't prepare you hardly at all for this industry.

Edited by Haeso, 15 December 2011 - 06:27 PM.

[MaddMaxx]

Sorry to butt in but:

Quote

"When you've got a few years working in this industry and you're not a burned out husk of a human being then you can comment on your experience. Uni doesn't prepare you hardly at all for this industry."

You forgot to wish him good luck.

[Evgeny Bear]

and i thought everything is said here

[Haeso]

MaddMaxx, on 15 December 2011 - 06:33 PM, said:

Sorry to butt in but:



You forgot to wish him good luck.

By all means, he'll need it. The burn rate of this industry is absurd. I know two types of people in this industry, people who are kept working by their passion for games, and those who've lost all of it and are almost mechanical in how they work and interact with others. The rest quit. I can't think of any industry with more turnover, only places I can think of would be stores that hire kids if you count summer jobs and such.

[Evgeny Bear]

hmm I heard similar from microsoft programmers, but well they got well payd

[IceSerpent]

Technoviking, on 15 December 2011 - 04:18 PM, said:

In your post it was just the incredible lack of player ability to do anything outside of the MWO Metagame. I'm not saying that the concept of world conquering, structured, persistant world play wasn't good. I love it. I played NBT for years just for that. But the way it was described, it was as if there was no other way to play. No other server options. No other leagues could be played. Looking at WoT... that may be true. If it is, there will be no player leagues. No friendly matches for fun. No duels. No training grounds to mess around on for me and my boys... everything will be so.... controlled. On one hand... that's good control means moderation and content. On the other, its horrifyingly bad news for people who wanted to play in leagues with their own rules, restrictions, timelines or with their own clan... only, for fun.

I am sorry if it came across that way, it wasn't my intent to imply that there should be only "planetary league" type of gameplay. My point was that it had already been indicated by devs that conquest-style game will be there and for that particular game respawn is unnecessary (imho) and traditional matchmaker would be difficult to implement. As for the other kind of leagues, we simply don't know what will be in and what won't. I am certainly not against ladders, arenas, etc. Not particularly interested in that sort of a game (the reason I don't play MWLL), but definitely don't have anything against it being available.

[IceSerpent]

RogueSpear, on 15 December 2011 - 05:25 PM, said:

By and large, I agree with Zakski on this one. Respawn for a teambased skirmish is required. That is a fact.
A 20m game time may be assumed, but even the Devs don't know how long a match will play until the game enters full Alpha at the earliest. I'm on a games development course at university, and I speak from experience when I say how long your team expects something to take to be wild mass guessing at best.
But let's assume the average game does take 20m on average. That's an average. Some games will last 10m, some will last 30m.
I don't mind waiting 5, or even 10 minutes for a match if my team is playing, especially if I'm on voice chat to them via deathcam. However, if I get annihilated through bad luck or the inevitable dick moves (Anyone ever been killed by a physics engine abused grenade at their spawn point in the first few seconds of the game?) in the first two or three minutes, if I have to wait 25 minutes for the team to even finish the current game, nevermind matchmake for the next, I'm going to get frustrated and play a lot less.
Now, Zakski is in my MercCorp. Let's say he and I, plus a two other friends go out in our lance. I die two minutes in because I overextended. Given the current order of things, my lance is now down either it's assault, or a flanking medium. Suddenly the game has changed.
This is how it should be.
However, in anything bigger than a skirmish, We Have Reserves. The first lance is getting ripped to shreds by massed lights/mediums, you send in your own fast movers to counter. If you walk into a wall of Atlas', you send in Longbows and Hellhounds to LRM and flank them respectively.
To do this properly, I would suggest wave based respawn. Ever 2m say (A long respawn while command decides what assets to place, rally them etc for the RPers, but not too long to unbalance the game or force a drop) everyone who has died respawns. I liked the earlier comment on safe LZs and dropship spawns, combine these two. Mechs are dropped in where needed (Ie, I choose to spawn at the point nearest to my lance to get back into the action, but Zakski in his Longbow spawns one back to ensure he doesn't end up in the thick of the fighting while trying to provide artillery) etc etc.
I've not really thought this through, but I can guarantee, if No Respawn is the norm, the game will end FAST. Casuals are right out, team players get distracted, only the hardcore, the obsessed and the insane remain.
Oh and the griefers. Always the griefers.

Have to disagree with you here - respawn is definitely not required and that is a fact.

The length of the fight would be roughly the same in either case - it depends on the total number of mechs involved in the assault. If you raid with a company, you could either have (for example) one longer battle with 3 waves of 4 (wave respawn) or 3 separate, shorter 4 vs 4 battles (no respawn). Problem with respawn is that it makes mechs that need ammo for their primary weapon much less effective - why go after that Longbow if I know for a fact that it will run out of missiles and turn into a large paper weight by the time 2nd wave respawns? The Warhammer next to it suddenly becomes a primary target instead. Respawn also makes a lot of surprise tactics unusable, because it allows you to see what your opponent is doing and react to it, while without respawn if you get caught by surprise, you're in serious trouble most of the time.