Jump to content

Faction Play - Move To An Open System


10 replies to this topic

Poll: Next steps for Faction Play (14 member(s) have cast votes)

Can we raise this at the next round table

  1. Yes, these suggestions would help (12 votes [85.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 85.71%

  2. I have some other concerns (2 votes [14.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.29%

  3. Can you provide some more detailed explaination? (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 50 50

    Member

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

Posted 25 March 2017 - 10:57 PM

FACTION PLAY


Proposal for the next stage of development for Faction Play and items that I would like to raise at the next round table discussion.
This post is also to tie in with several other suggestions to get a more complete picture of the possibilities.
Please also review the following posts:

Using our points as currency
Repairs, re-arm or Loot
Logistics

Looking at the Major issues:

WAIT TIMES
Spoiler


AN ENGAGING GAME MODE
Spoiler


SPAWN POINTS
Spoiler


IDENTIFYING THE CONTRIBUTION OF PLAYERS
Spoiler


GATING PLAYERS
Spoiler

Edited by 50 50, 26 June 2017 - 02:55 AM.


#2 Rick T Dangerous

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 354 posts
  • LocationExactly above Earth's center

Posted 26 March 2017 - 09:30 AM

Sounds good!

The way I make sense of the current FW modes:

Skirmish

Invading forces land and fight in open territory.

Domination

The fight focuses on one area to get control of that area.

Conquest

They work on expanding that control to a wider area.

Assault

From the base they established in their controlled area they attack a crucial outpost.

Siege

Well, attacking the main bases.

Putting those phases into a big (and challenging) map without time limit would be very cool. One big battle with lots of action. And some of what you wrote reminds me of MechCommander with its turret controls and gate controls that could both be captured....

#3 50 50

    Member

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

Posted 27 March 2017 - 01:49 AM

Adding the stages with the different modes was a welcome addition and I have enjoyed Faction Play a lot more as a result.
We have seen a few problems with it and I feel that it still limits what the mode could really grow and expand into and ultimately doesn't resolve the on going problems.

Edited by 50 50, 11 April 2017 - 06:38 PM.


#4 50 50

    Member

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

Posted 11 April 2017 - 06:47 PM

With the upcoming 'Competitive Mode' that looks to be added around the middle of the year, it seems we will have a further division of the player base.
This will likely impact Faction Play but may also impact Quick Play populations and therefore see an increase in wait times.
The competitive scene is pretty healthy and I support the decision to add in the mode.
However we need to enable players to still participate in Faction Play and right at the moment, before there is the extra mode, getting game time in Faction Play is difficult.
During NA prime time it might be less of an issue, but that is not to say it won't be in the future.

Instead of just making Faction Play a copy of the other modes and being hamstrung by the 12 clan + 12 IS player min/max limit, lets get some changes in place that will enable players to actually play the mode.
  • It doesn't always have to be about capturing the planet.
  • We don't need to have games limited by player numbers.
  • We can have as many buckets as we want if we don't have these limitations
  • We can make the mode as appealing to play for a single player or small group as well as to a large invasion force all on the one map in one mode.
  • We can reduce wait times to 0
  • We can battle it out in one scenario for as long as we like or are able.
We need to take a different approach.

#5 Nimnul

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 246 posts

Posted 18 April 2017 - 04:57 AM

When the clans gathered for more players. And can not find the enemy. Then let them play with each other and not wait! Clans vs clans. Spera vs sphere. The winner gets a part of the planetary points if they are. And it would be nice to see the current number of planetary points, somewhere in the unit's tab. With such a system, we will never wait!

#6 50 50

    Member

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

Posted 22 April 2017 - 06:17 PM

View PostNimnul, on 18 April 2017 - 04:57 AM, said:

When the clans gathered for more players. And can not find the enemy. Then let them play with each other and not wait! Clans vs clans. Spera vs sphere. The winner gets a part of the planetary points if they are. And it would be nice to see the current number of planetary points, somewhere in the unit's tab. With such a system, we will never wait!

That has got to be the single biggest problem with the mode at the moment. The wait times.
It will vary at different times of the day, but we all live in different timezones right around the world and the ability to just get a game can be impossible some times.
No one wants to wait an hour just to get enough players together to make a drop.
No one then wants to wait 10 minutes because there is no-one on the other side and get a ghost drop.
That's not playing the game.
That's sitting there waiting and you are probably playing another game in the mean time.
First and foremost, that has to be dealt with.
Various ideas have been bounced around but have ultimately failed to recognise that a minimum requirement of 12 v 12 is a really awkward number. I mean, exactly 12 players on both sides of a conflict.
Hence the suggestion of moving to an open system were we do not have this requirement.

To take an example from earlier iterations of Faction Play where we did show the number of players dropping and on which planets.
The inclination was for everyone to pool on one planet in the hope that the numbers would even out to some multiple of 12 and you would get a drop.
The odd time you saw players sitting on a planet with less than 12 and perhaps no opposition hoping to draw others to that location... their efforts seemed futile.

But flip that around with an Open System and our perspective of the whole thing changes. Instead, if we view the list of planets and see 12 players already queued on there, we know they will be in game and we could either queue up behind them or look for an instant game on a planet where there is less than 12 or no-one at all.
That small group that was hoping to gather enough players? They are actually already in the game scouting, attacking objectives and playing the game. We could join them instantly or start our own little battle somewhere else.

A big part of this is enabling players to play
It is also about creating activity around the galaxy.
One of the points I was emphasising is that it doesn't just have to be about taking over the planet.
Sure, make that a possibility and something a large well co-ordinated group can attempt, but what is wrong with simply being able to raid a planet for supplies?
We have the conquest points that pool up resources. Why not adapt that slightly?
Why can't we get a lance together and say it's going to be our mission today to drop onto planet X and capture some of those points. We are going to collect as many resources as we can while fending of the planet AI defences and watching out for enemy mechs (players) before retreating back to our dropships and leaving with our loot?

If we want variety and depth. We need options.

Edited by 50 50, 22 April 2017 - 06:18 PM.


#7 50 50

    Member

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

Posted 14 May 2017 - 07:45 PM

I would like to see Scouting incorporated into an open warfare system as well.
At the moment it's a little disconnected with the effects of the scouting impacting all invasion matches.
In an open system there is the opportunity to tie in scouting and the collection of Intel so that it relates to that single scenario.
We do have the scouting reward options, it doesn't seem a huge stretch to use those rewards as 'Intel Points' in addition to making use of feature like the scout beacons.

The Intel Points could also be used to provide individuals, groups and even teams with temporary buffs when they drop.
Things like improved sensor range, a temporary ECM effect, hot drops etc.
But as Intel is only useful while it is valid, it would make sense to have these points a shared resource for the players on a team and we use them or lose them.
This would encourage continued scouting within the scenario to collect those points again.

Few thoughts and suggestions to put together so I will get another thread setup for it.

#8 50 50

    Member

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

Posted 23 May 2017 - 07:16 PM

EDIT to main points 24/05/2017

#9 50 50

    Member

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

Posted 15 June 2017 - 06:36 PM

Remember prior to this single bucket where we could select a planet and attack or defend there was the problem that the large groups, the premades, never went up against each other.
Few reasons why that would happen:
1. Who drops on a planet in defence hoping someone will attack them?
2. What are we actually defending, ie. what is at stake. (Depth problem)
3. The better way to protect a planet you had captured was to try and bury it behind the lines, therefore, keep pushing the attack.

This did mean that in the majority of situations, the premade groups would face off against 'militia' groups who would usually not have the co-ordination in drop decks, tactics and often lacked communication. Many of these conflicts would therefore be one sided.

So, in an effort to get the premades colliding, the system was changed to the single bucket of Clan v IS at the request of the bigger units who were trying to promote more even, fairer and challenging conflicts as well as reduce wait times by not having the population split over the 50 or 60 locations that were available to contest under the previous system.

This single bucket system did have the effect of reducing wait times and while there is a priority given to groups in the match maker to try and pit them against each other there is no accouting for the size of the groups and it does nothing if there is only a group on one side of the conflict.
The single bucket was also fought against as it was removing the unique faction identies and sense of territory. Not that there was a difference between them really, but players joined a faction as loyalists because the faction in name meant something to them.

Personally, I felt we were missing out on an opportunity to create more activity around the galaxy by moving to the single bucket. This is something I believe the big units didn't and still don't understand or feel it might take away from the mode as their 'team end game no fluff mode'. Having that team objective is also something I believe the casual and solo players don't see the value of or necessarily want to be restricted to.

To date, I have not seen any other solution or proposal that will allow the mode to grow and thrive while catering to both ends of the player and group spectrum.
Everyone thinks it's an imposible task.
It's not.
It requires some work, some serious changes to the mode and a shift in our perception of it.
But it can be done.

People think we need a match maker.
We don't.
We need more visibility, the option to pick our battles and retreat from them.

People think we need more players.
Ultimately, yes, the more the merrier. But I feel Faction Play should be where we end up spending the majority of our time with Quick Play just being an introduction.
However, we don't need more players to make it work.
We need less restrictions on both player numbers and drop deck minimums (mechs and tonnages).

People think we need Faction Play to be the 'End Game' that is designed solely for teams.
Let me instead say that Faction Play needs 'Major objectives' that can only hope to be completed by teams.

People think this means there shouldn't be anything for anyone else.
Instead we should accept that there is a myriad of possibilities and options for the mode if we allow smaller objectives into the mode and get away from this concept of each battle or scenario being a 'match' with a winner and loser.

We think this can't be achieved in the one mode with all the players rubbing shoulders and mixing it up.
It can.
Faction Play can be setup in a way that will allow MWO to have a unique style that allows solos to mix with groups, contribute to the overall bigger picture of faction territory in their own way in the same single scenario and still allow the big groups to take on those 'Major Objectives'.

But we need to take a step back and look at the structure of the mode and the battles.
We need to take that sideways step and come at this differently.
The stages, the tug of war... it was worth a try but it still has the same limitations, the same road blocks and restrictions and the same problems over and over.
Let's take the big step and make the big changes and really shake up the mode.
It's a big galactic map.
There's plenty of space for everyone.

#10 50 50

    Member

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

Posted 16 June 2017 - 12:30 AM

MMOs like World of Warcraft have areas where you create your group and then it generates an instance for your group to perform that raid, ie. take on that major objective, and you might need 20 or 30 players or something.
But prior to that, you might have had a smaller group and run around doing the smaller quests, the minor objectives, that then lead up to or unlocked the ability to do that instance.

I'm suggesting we can do something similar but in a unique way for MWO.

This thread and the others I've linked to are to promote the idea that we can have a system that works for everyone.

We have a galactic map that we can pick a planet on. (Old map with all the faction territories)
Each planet has some territories. (Bit like we used to)
These territories have a specific map type (think desert, arctic, forest etc) so we know what we are going to drop into.
We select our drop deck accordingly and commit it to attack that planet.
This creates a bucket, I prefer scenario, that is open for other players to join if they want to.
Now the maps and single objectives as they are will not be suitable, so let's expand them a bit:
-Put three major objectives in defensible locations at the back of the map under the control of the defending faction. (Think the assault base, the domination radar and the siege cannon)
-Heavily fortify these objectives. Walls, gates, towers, turret and let's get some AI tanks, VTOLS and infantry around them as well so they are tough as nails. These are our 'bosses'. Nasty enough that if I get too close as a solo, I'm dead. These are the objectives that need the big pre-mades and a dozen mechs or more to take over even before defending players are taken into consideration.
-Then put the 5 minor objectives, the conquest points, around the middle section of the map and neutral.
-Fortify these objectives as well so that as a solo player I might burn through my whole drop deck trying to capture one of them, I'd be better off forming a lance and tackling it as a small team.
-Hide all of these objectives from me unless they are controlled by my side.

This gives me purpose as a solo player to scout out the locations, capture some listening beacons (think the towers in escort or from scouting) and gather intel for my side that I can use when I drop into the scenario.
Let me, scout the map, skirmish with some AI defenses and any defending players that join in.
Let me retreat from that scenario if I find I am suddenly outnumbered.
I might leave, form a group, come back again with a different drop deck and look at the minor objectives as my mission.
Maybe I'll start there with a small group.
I might leave and go and do the same thing somewhere else.
But let me play the game and achieve something that might draw in more players and escalate the scenario.
I may not be able to complete one of the major objectives, but I can see what is required to do so and either build up to that level or not.
Maybe I'm part of a large group and we can see that some other allied players have been scouting or raiding on a planet on a territory and it's just right for us to jump in enmasse and attack.
Or maybe as part of that large group we decide that those allied players on that planet over there are making a nice diversion for us to start our own thing and drop in a surprise attack somewhere else.

We can make the mode cater for both ends of the player and group spectrum without needing to split the population or use match makers or create alternative modes. I also feel there is a way to extend the scenarios so that we can have more than 12 players involved per side if we restructure the way we handle the waves and the queues. We might only be able to have 12 active mechs per side, but how would the big groups feel about being able to bring 24 or 36 of their unit members, or a mix of allies, to a single scenario if we can better utilize the waves and queues? Let's make it EPIC.

And the advantages of using an open system like this?
No wait times. Pick a planet and go.
We still get to mingle the different levels of players so there is still the opportunity to meet players and invite them to the group or unit.
We create activity all over the galaxy of our choosing be it small scale actions all the way up to significant conflicts for planetary control.
With more objectives and fortified locations, we can look at how to change our drop (spawn) locations and some player controlled options for the drops.
In a scenario that does not end until we leave it, we can explore and add features that only work in an extended scenario, such as repairs.
With an open system we also have the option to play only for as long as we would like or are able. We can rotate players through so a battle could wage on for hours, or it may last for minutes.
Plus more.
If we have the control, we make the story.
PGI make the sand pit. We play in it and build our castles and smash them down.

Edited by 50 50, 16 June 2017 - 12:31 AM.


#11 50 50

    Member

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

Posted 26 June 2017 - 02:57 AM

EDIT 26/06/2017
Added some additional points about wait times.
Linked to other features for faction play.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users