31 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Nesutizale, on 02 June 2017 - 01:14 PM, said:

I would like to see PGI, beside asking for help, to concentrate more on one aspect and flesh that one out to the fullest.
Currently it seams like, with the new design guy, they are finaly focusing more on balance as their first priority.

Balance shmalance!

We still have mostly a skeleton of a game when compared to the original feature set sold the Founders.

[Katastrophy Kid]

Mystere, on 02 June 2017 - 06:09 PM, said:

Balance shmalance!

We still have mostly a skeleton of a game when compared to the original feature set sold the Founders.

Which is why I'm advocating for larger battles and maps with more mech pilots in the fight, to flesh it out.

https://mwomercs.com...-conquest-mode/

Edited by Katastrophe Kid, 02 June 2017 - 07:17 PM.

[Anjian]

12 vs. 12 with 5 respawns is like 60 vs. 60 mechs.

Now if that takes too long to finish, you can do something similar to Overwatch Quickplay, where you are allowed to leave the game but incur a penalty in doing so, and your space is replaced by another player.

[Peter2k]

Katastrophe Kid, on 02 June 2017 - 01:04 PM, said:

CE may be a problem, but the devs of Star Citizen are working on solving these problems. Open some lines of communication and see if some collaboration is possible.

Take baby steps toward 64 vs 64, start with better servers and up the ante to 16 vs 16 and 6 mechs in a dropship on much bigger maps.

different build of CryEngine

Russ stated it's as much work getting to newer build of CryEngine than it is to switch to Unreal Engine



it's not like they have a server farm at the basement

they rent the servers

I would have to dig deep
but, I think it was Russ who said servers are at there best already (I think it was a town hall)


anyway
it's the outdated CryEngine

moving from 8vs8 to 12vs12 incurred some bad fps hit
there are too many draw calls being made and the old engine and old API can't handle that so well

considering 12vs12 can bog down anything but the highest clocked Intel system (Ryzen seems to be doing OK, but not great; no wonder there, MWO doesn't scale with cores very well)
there's a lot of threads how MWO should run better on people's hardware, always has been

the particles from over a 100 mechs launching LRM's and PPC's would probably crash the game
and maybe you haven't noticed, but performance passes are a rare thing
the turret pass I thought was in months ago, just read it's coming now

Anjian, on 02 June 2017 - 06:37 PM, said:

12 vs. 12 with 5 respawns is like 60 vs. 60 mechs.

Now if that takes too long to finish, you can do something similar to Overwatch Quickplay, where you are allowed to leave the game but incur a penalty in doing so, and your space is replaced by another player.

sounds good enough

hell I wouldn't even mind respawns
as long as the gamemode isn't team death match for a change
means putting more weight on objectives

Edited by Peter2k, 02 June 2017 - 07:18 PM.

[Katastrophy Kid]

If there's a better engine than CryEngine then how hard would it be to transfer this game from this engine to the better one?
Can CryEngine be developed into a better platform?

[kuma8877]

Katastrophe Kid, on 02 June 2017 - 07:23 PM, said:

If there's a better engine than CryEngine then how hard would it be to transfer this game from this engine to the better one?
Can CryEngine be developed into a better platform?

That would be Lumberyard, but MWO is fairly customized at this point already so it might not transition very smoothly. Though it could be an interesting move on PGI's part to try and position as another LY flagship title like Star Citizen is now. But with MW5 on UE4, I would guess that's a much more likely path for MWO 2.0.

[Hindenhoot]

Katastrophe Kid, on 02 June 2017 - 09:56 AM, said:

so We Can Maybe Move towards the 64 vs 64 Matches so many of us Dream of

Is there much support for this at all? I haven't really seen this ever come up on the forums in the last year I've been playing this game.

Even if it was possible, I'm not sure I'd be keen for this, except maybe faction play with ENORMOUS maps - more of a roleplaying setting with lots of coordination.

In a casual game I honestly can't see this being much fun - the nature of this game means one team would get rolled in most matches.

[Tavious Grimm]

Forget 64v64 its unrealistic. Technical problems aside this SUPPOSED to be a Battletech game yes? Let's do 36v30 One IS battalion against two Clan Trinaries. Of course there will be the needed balance fixes and new maps.

[xWiredx]

64/64 can't work because the amount of processing overhead on players systems is already too much with 12/12. PGI does not have excellent code in place for the network stack.

[Anjian]

xWiredx, on 02 June 2017 - 08:14 PM, said:

64/64 can't work because the amount of processing overhead on players systems is already too much with 12/12. PGI does not have excellent code in place for the network stack.

It can work because you have less game instances. Whether you have 64 vs 64 or 12 v 12, your player queue remains the same size.

The main problem of 64 v 64 is the huge waiting time to assemble a team. This is going to be worst than waiting for 24 or 32 players in an MMO to be assembled to conduct a massive raid.

If you're going to only die instantly without respawn after waiting for a long time, this will be a game killer for many people.

I am saying this in theory because its better to have such a project be made an entirely new game and given to someone else to properly execute.

Edited by Anjian, 02 June 2017 - 08:34 PM.

[Katastrophy Kid]

Anjian, on 02 June 2017 - 08:32 PM, said:

It can work because you have less game instances. Whether you have 64 vs 64 or 12 v 12, your player queue remains the same size.

The main problem of 64 v 64 is the huge waiting time to assemble a team. This is going to be worst than waiting for 24 or 32 players in an MMO to be assembled to conduct a massive raid.

If you're going to only die instantly without respawn after waiting for a long time, this will be a game killer for many people.

I am saying this in theory because its better to have such a project be made an entirely new game and given to someone else to properly execute.

Expanded drop deck size. 12 mechs

A man can dream can't he.

Edited by Katastrophe Kid, 02 June 2017 - 08:57 PM.

[AlexEss]

Katastrophe Kid, on 02 June 2017 - 06:05 PM, said:

Wouldn't it be worth it?

Not really.... The costs ould be astronomical compare to the community it would serve.