9 replies to this topic

[Skribs]

Currently, it is way too hard to get a Siege match, which for a lot of players (like myself) is pretty much the only mode I want to play in Faction Play. It also causes problems when events come along that require us to get siege matches.

Incursion, like Siege, wouldn't do well in Quick Play, at least as far as I think. It would make a great Faction Play mode, though. My suggestion is this. Have only 3 modes available for Faction Play: Siege, Incursion, and Conquest. This gives you plenty of different game modes (symmetric and asymmetric base attack and conquest). It doesn't support modes like Assault or Skirmish which can just lead to base camping. The objectives are important to victory, and feel like something worth doing.

For Quick Play, have all the current QP modes: Skirmish, Assault, Domination, Escort, and Conquest. Maybe tweak the rewards a bit on escort and the locations a bit on domination, but overall keep this setup.

Obviously have Scouting as the other option, which would still be its own queue.

[Tier5ForLife]

This mode is fine for Quick Play. The rewards for everything except skirmish need to be reworked. It is not rocket surgery.

I think 99.3% of players feel that the rewards for Objectives need to be reworked. Yet, PGI does nothing about it.

I do understand the fact that Sieges do not happen as much. And I feel like I do not know what world we are on, where we are at in the scheme of things etc. It is hard to see your wins or losses having a effect. I do not know how many of what mode we would have to win to hit Siege.

But Siege is the hardest for new players and players not in a unit. The addition of the others has been a plus. FW is always going to be unfair because groups of PUGs will always drop against the best Units in the game. The QP modes being added gives them more of a chance. PUGs all not able to practice and train only for Siege like some Units do.

Adding more maps would be a plus. Making a better chat where PUGs can really talk and plan would be great. You should be able to chat to one or more players without having to send messages. That is lame and so slow that no one does it.

[Lehmund]

I agree to the part where some modes are FP only and some QP only, but most IMO are good on both.

FP only: Siege and Incursion.
QP only: Escort.

The rest are good for both.

Skribs, on 29 March 2017 - 06:08 PM, said:

Currently, it is way too hard to get a Siege match, which for a lot of players (like myself) is pretty much the only mode I want to play in Faction Play. It also causes problems when events come along that require us to get siege matches.

Incursion, like Siege, wouldn't do well in Quick Play, at least as far as I think. It would make a great Faction Play mode, though. My suggestion is this. Have only 3 modes available for Faction Play: Siege, Incursion, and Conquest. This gives you plenty of different game modes (symmetric and asymmetric base attack and conquest). It doesn't support modes like Assault or Skirmish which can just lead to base camping. The objectives are important to victory, and feel like something worth doing.

For Quick Play, have all the current QP modes: Skirmish, Assault, Domination, Escort, and Conquest. Maybe tweak the rewards a bit on escort and the locations a bit on domination, but overall keep this setup.

Obviously have Scouting as the other option, which would still be its own queue.

[Skribs]

I think Incursion can replace Assault on FP, and Skirmish just becomes one team spawn camping another.

Domination I guess I could see, but I already have issues with that game mode.

The most important thing is to make FP only modes available more often. Especially if they do events where you need them.

[LordNothing]

id rather see qp fully merged with fp, picking up map/mode voting and some form of match maker (possibly simpler than the qp mm). then do a more robust custom games system for those that fall through the cracks.

Edited by LordNothing, 01 April 2017 - 09:08 PM.

[B L O O D W I T C H]

LordNothing, on 01 April 2017 - 08:57 PM, said:

id rather see qp fully merged with fp, picking up map/mode voting and some form of match maker (possibly simpler than the qp mm). then do a more robust custom games system for those that fall through the cracks.

Nah, i don't want to have only those two option, quickplay or quickplay with respawn.
FP needs its own modes and maps.

[LordNothing]

Toha Heavy Industries, on 02 April 2017 - 02:37 AM, said:

Nah, i don't want to have only those two option, quickplay or quickplay with respawn.
FP needs its own modes and maps.

i was more thinking fp as being the only mode. it would pick up voting and match maker but more or less be the same as it is now.

if you dont want to play that edition of fp, your other option is a better custom games system. it would be an anything goes type system, similar to the server browsers of olde. you can set up lobbies of any mode any map, any number of players. there would be a lobby browser so you can join forming games. since custom games are currently a premium feature it would need a redesign of the pricing model.

people with active premium time can start lobbies and play anything they want. everyone can join a 24-player lobby for free. everyone would also get like 10 premium points a day which would allow you to join premium lobbies as if you had running premium time, but without actually having it and without the other bonuses. this lets everyone play the premium games for free on a limited use model. so you want to play the steiner coliseum, sure you can do that a few times a day for free. you want more you need to pony up.

premium point costs are as follows (note that if you are running premium time its as if you have unlimited premium points):

join a 24 player lobby - free
join a 16-23 player lobby - 1 premium point (10 games a day)
join a 8-15 player lobby - 2 premium points (5 games a day)
join a 7 players or less lobby - 3 premium points (3 games a day with a point left over)
host a lobby - 1 premium point (in addition to the above costs for the type of lobby you are creating)

to make things more profitable for them, pgi could also sell blocks of premium points or passes that grant additional premium points each day on a subscription type basis. these would be at a lower price point than premium time (pricing dependent on additional server costs that are projected to occur). you might have an additional competitive team pass for official and 3rd party competitive competitions. this might also allow pgi to open the door for 3rd party maps since they would only be permitted in the custom lobbies.

there would be no match maker in custom games, it would be up to the players to join appropriate lobbies and the host to make sure games are fair. overall it would make some of these premium features easy to find/use, and its much easier to join a game than find a group. it also opens the doors to more diverse game play, you might find stock mode games, coleseum games, games with certain weapon and tonnage requirements, games with respawns (unlimited or with a deck), varying game length, asymetric games, scenarios and so on.

it also lets players choose games in line with their play style, where '24/7 polar highlands no lerms' might be an option, or better yet 'terra therma flamers only' or 'stock medium coleseum'. players with limited play time might join more generic short duration lobbies. all in all it would put the player in charge of the games, or they can play fp.

[Skribs]

Gating how often you can play behind a paywall is the absolute worst.

[Sunstruck]

Ya I agree, skirmish and assult need to get taken out of the current faction play system. Incursion will be fine for quickplay, but it really is more of a faction playesque mode so I can see why it makes sence to keep it in CW too.

[LordNothing]

Skribs, on 03 April 2017 - 11:36 AM, said:

Gating how often you can play behind a paywall is the absolute worst.

is it worse than not being able to play premium content at all? take the steiner map, being able to play it 3 times a day for free is better than getting to play it 0 times a day. most games are going to be the free 12v12 games. though now that i think about it, it would need to be free to host these sort of games, but hosting limits would apply to any games that would be considered premium, like 8v8 or 1v1. more importantly people wont pay into content they dont know exists. making it available for free on a limited use plan would let players know its there and might encourage people to pay.

Edited by LordNothing, 05 April 2017 - 01:00 PM.