109 replies to this topic

[SuperFunkTron]

Faction Play is the main thing the original backers of this game were sold on and it has been long promised that it would be an immersive and interesting mode to play in. Currently, we are playing "capture the dot" with a series of battles to decide the who will control said dot. This was fine as a stand in system to get people accustomed to the system in the beginning, but these bare ones have been exposed for way too long.

I want to start collecting the ideas people have to make Faction Play more interesting. I want to hear concepts that will affect both in game play as well as factors that can be decided on the IS map. Concepts that address logistics, rewards for planetary conquer, Missions of the Week, Alternate drop weight conditions (forcing lighter or heavier battles), on going political alliances and shifts that alter based on decisions made by factions, anything that could add depth to Faction Play!

I will start cataloging these ideas in the original post so they can be easily found. It's high time for us to get an improved Faction Play and I hope you guys are ready to raise your voices so PGI understands that they need to start delivering on it now!

Edited by SuperFunkTron, 27 July 2017 - 09:48 AM.

[Savage Wolf]

I'm a founder and I was never sold on Faction Play. Mostly because even back then I knew those were overambitious plans that in the end would only be fun for the the tryhards, if they could even pull it off.

We were sold Founders mechs, beta access and some MC, that's all. It's on the reciept. So stop using all founders to push for your agenda when it's just your own personal opinion.

[Spheroid]

These topics are already discussed in depth in the FP sub-forum.

[Savage Wolf]

But some good things have come of Faction Play. It's the place where the game modes actually function the way they should. So my suggestion is to scrap Faction Play and instead have Objective Play. Like Quick Play, but with the Faction Play game modes and drop deck. Or Faction Play with matchmaker and pug queue.

[Fais]

I agree, I have left and come back to this game now three or more times. I am enjoying playing with the new toys in the latest patch but I'm not sure how long it will hold my attention. Playing the Battletech Beta game recently brought back to me what I loved about this universe. The old mech commander feel is what everyone really craves. This is just a taste of that. The current system is a compelling arena type battle game. But there has got to be a way to capture a greater feeling.

I want a new game, throw out everyones mechs and inventories as they can continue to play the current arena game with them, put us all on a monthly fee schedule. Give us a universe where we have to earn each weapon, part, and chassis. When they get destroyed their gone. Have the usual sellers for each faction, but maybe a black market seller with 4 mechs outside that faction. You have already built the arena, the mechs, and some balance, build the game.

[Darky101]

Easy!
Give meaningful prizes to members of units that own planets! Meaningfull! Prizes that get units to compete even against each other!

[Abisha]

So long premades vs Pug's are represented to FP they can stick in the darkest of places.

[Aim64C]

To develop an immersive faction play experience, you need to completely re-design MWO from an arena shooter into a battlefield shooter/tactics/simulation style game.

Consider the following:









The problem with MWO is that it is a simple arena shooter shoehorned into a mode of "faction warfare" that arena shooters are simply terrible at delivering.

Not to mention, the game of MechWarrior is impossible to balance as an arena shooter. Most of the reasons we see the weapon balance in the state that it is stems from the fact that the game is an arena shooter. We all know we are going to drop into a box canyon in the middle of nowhere against a set number of opponents and we know roughly where they are going to be once we get there.

Single-elimination style play makes it even worse - though at least faction warfare allows for some variation in that we get to bring along three other things to blow up in.

But that's really it. Even the objective play can be completely bypassed for simply crushing all opposition.

This is hardly the first time an online game has been done. We should be looking for clues in other games about what can drive an engaging style of play that both captures the tactical shooter/sim focus of MechWarrior and advances the series into new 'dimensions' of play.

The old arena shooter style isn't going anywhere. It can and has been built into any of the above mentioned titles - with substantially less popularity ... and for a reason.

[Coolant]

I am a Legendary Founder and was not at all promised or swayed about Faction Warfare. I invested because it was Mechwarrior and I had played multiplayer MW4:Mercs for many years. Please don't include me OP.

[SuperFunkTron]

Savage Wolf, on 27 July 2017 - 08:17 AM, said:

I'm a founder and I was never sold on Faction Play. Mostly because even back then I knew those were overambitious plans that in the end would only be fun for the the tryhards, if they could even pull it off.

We were sold Founders mechs, beta access and some MC, that's all. It's on the reciept. So stop using all founders to push for your agenda when it's just your own personal opinion.

Coolant, on 27 July 2017 - 09:43 AM, said:

I am a Legendary Founder and was not at all promised or swayed about Faction Warfare. I invested because it was Mechwarrior and I had played multiplayer MW4:Mercs for many years. Please don't include me OP.

I fixed it for you guys.

[PurpleNinja]

Capture the dots?
What are those dots?

[Aim64C]

Savage Wolf, on 27 July 2017 - 08:17 AM, said:

I'm a founder and I was never sold on Faction Play. Mostly because even back then I knew those were overambitious plans that in the end would only be fun for the the tryhards, if they could even pull it off.

We were sold Founders mechs, beta access and some MC, that's all. It's on the reciept. So stop using all founders to push for your agenda when it's just your own personal opinion.

Coolant, on 27 July 2017 - 09:43 AM, said:

I am a Legendary Founder and was not at all promised or swayed about Faction Warfare. I invested because it was Mechwarrior and I had played multiplayer MW4:Mercs for many years. Please don't include me OP.

That may not have been what caught your eye when you spent money, but it was what was billed with the sale. Simply because you're shallow does not relieve the developer of the responsibility or change the color of that red light you have on your porch.

You're due no respect and have no place to demand it.

It's just as unreasonable to ignore contract obligations simply due to your own lack of standards as it is to expect the delivery of items outside the bounds of a contract. To deny that the game has devolved from a lore-inspired tactical shooter into an arena shooter hilariously lacking the spectator mode necessary to turn it into the E-Sport PGI is dreaming it will become... is... well... an exercise in naiveté. I have some waterfront property in Osage Beach to sell you, if you're interested.

[SuperFunkTron]

PurpleNinja, on 27 July 2017 - 09:58 AM, said:

Capture the dots?
What are those dots?

Have you seen the FP map? Those are the dots that I'm referring to. In the larger scheme, they represent planets, but not much else beyond that.

[PurpleNinja]

SuperFunkTron, on 27 July 2017 - 10:09 AM, said:

Have you seen the FP map? Those are the dots that I'm referring to. In the larger scheme, they represent planets, but not much else beyond that.

Oh, so they're planets.
What happens to then when we win a faction game?

[Mystere]

Savage Wolf, on 27 July 2017 - 08:17 AM, said:

I'm a founder and I was never sold on Faction Play. Mostly because even back then I knew those were overambitious plans that in the end would only be fun for the the tryhards, if they could even pull it off.

We were sold Founders mechs, beta access and some MC, that's all. It's on the reciept. So stop using all founders to push for your agenda when it's just your own personal opinion.

Excuse me?
Excuse me?

This was just our own opinion?



Are you saying that video is a complete fabrication and that PGI had nothing to do with it?

Edited by Mystere, 27 July 2017 - 10:22 AM.

[SuperFunkTron]

PurpleNinja, on 27 July 2017 - 10:13 AM, said:

Oh, so they're planets.
What happens to then when we win a faction game?

They are like Pokemon, we are trying to collect them all.

[Sunstruck]

None of the features or implemented suggestions over the past two years have saved faction warfare. The reality of the situation is we don't have enough population to implement a full featured / engaging faction warfare mode. Even now with ONE QUE you get ghost drops unless PGI has an event running for fw.

In my opinion PGI should finish Solaris, a mode that we actually have the population for, that a lot of players including myself would enjoy.

I feel like with our current population faction warfare is only good for special events, events that PGI just finished up some kind of system for. So well just have to wait and see how the event system plays out.

[Bud Crue]

I admire the motivation behind Superfunktron's idea to obtain, catalog and promote ideas to try and get PGI to improve faction play. I fear however that such efforts are doomed to fail. Besides Russ's stated view that this is his game and he wishes that we would stop trying to tell him how to make his game better; consider also the conflicting views of the community:

Some folks who really enjoy FP much as it is (though some would prefer certain changes, but over all they like it as it is): an environment for high level team based play. Immersion, lore, story, etc. has no place in that environment. Example of this view is illustrated in the various versions of the following that comes up in any FP forum thread about balance, builds, team work, etc: "Read the sign noob, if you can't join a team and bring the latest and best meta builds FP is no place for you."

And yet, FP is also the mode that appeals most to the neck bearded loretard who just wants to play his faction specific, table top lore build in the one environment in this game that somewhat stinks of the "rich Battletech universe" that PGI still has the gall to assert that the game is about.

These two factions (pardon the pun) of FP have totally contradictory views of what they want in the mode and how they want it to be altered or improved to their respective ideals.

Now add those contradictory views to the historical precedence of PGI's apparent capabilities to change the mode in any direction toward or away from either of those views and it seems likely that PGI is simply incapable of providing a mode that more than a fractional number of players from either of these two views would ever be happy with, no matter what those changes might be. Tell me: Were the lore folks happy with long tom? Were the competitive folks? How about loyalty reward path vs that of mercenary? How about the 1 bucket consolidation, addition of QP modes, the tug of war, the so called victory conditions? Do any of these changes make anybody think "now that is exactly what this mode needed and will make it a great gaming experience!"

I haven't been around as long as many, but even I have given up looking for immersion, story, lore, or anything else that one would expect to be in a "rich" Battletech universe. Hell, at this point, I would be happy if faction play had something to do with factions! The new ones don't even have planets! The community can propose anything it wants, as forcefully as it wants; but factions without actual factions is the level of indifference that you are looking at from the developers. So good luck competitive folks and loretards alike. I salute your efforts. May ANY of them be listened to.

Edited by Bud Crue, 27 July 2017 - 10:50 AM.

[Savage Wolf]

Mystere, on 27 July 2017 - 10:15 AM, said:

Are you saying that video is a complete fabrication and that PGI had nothing to do with it?

I'm saying that PGI's vision for community warfare wasn't part of your purchase of Founders mech(s). It said clearly what you paid for on the receipt and community warfare wasn't part of it. It's a free to play game, you pay for items. You got those items. The game play is free. Or are you also complaining that all the people who didn't pay get to play it?

So no, that video is real. But it has nothing to do with your title of Founders. And you have no more right to whatever you think what was promised than free to play players.

If you want that those things in the video you a free to ask PGI for them. But thinking you have special priviledges because you were among the first to buy a mech pack is pathetic. And more importantly, do not asume all founders are as entitled as you.

[Mystere]

Savage Wolf, on 27 July 2017 - 10:52 AM, said:

I'm saying that PGI's vision for community warfare wasn't part of your purchase of Founders mech(s). It said clearly what you paid for on the receipt and community warfare wasn't part of it. It's a free to play game, you pay for items. You got those items. The game play is free. Or are you also complaining that all the people who didn't pay get to play it?

So no, that video is real. But it has nothing to do with your title of Founders. And you have no more right to whatever you think what was promised than free to play players.

If you want that those things in the video you a free to ask PGI for them. But thinking you have special priviledges because you were among the first to buy a mech pack is pathetic. And more importantly, do not asume all founders are as entitled as you.

But isn't that exactly what the OP was doing, asking that PGI do what they said they would do?

And as for being "entitled", I guess asking for a quality product or delivering on what was promised is now considered nothing but entitlement, right?

Well, I'd rather be so-called "entitled" than settle for mediocrity. If you prefer the latter, eat your heart out.

Edited by Mystere, 27 July 2017 - 10:59 AM.