108 replies to this topic

[Kin3ticX]

Tune into https://www.twitch.tv/kin3ticx on Friday at 5PM PST, 8EST where we will be discussing Community Warfare / Faction Warfare / Faction Play. In particular, 50 50 will be discussing his ideas here:
https://mwomercs.com...-it-a-campaign/

Others in the roundtable may include Queenblade of 228 IBR and Antonius Rex of -MS-.

HYPE HYPE HYPE




Other possible topics

Space nerd politics most underrated necessity for CW
Ingame support - Simple things like Unit-Unit Cbills Coffer Transfers but not limited to this. Right now, contracts can only come from the ether, not from players or units.
Forum Support - Over moderation has been known to strike down rivalries

Phase 3 and 4 were big blows to space politics, a one-two punch. Now its just pretty much 24/7 Tuk and which tech base do you feel like....


Map still feels pointless 3 years in, you dont have a real need to use it to play CW. Its just ceremonial.

Coffers still in a sad place

Faction doesnt really matter anymore except for contract bonuses from the ether. Its just Clan vs IS. It doesn't matter who you pick except who has the bigger % bonus. This ties into the next topic.

Lack of lore fluff such as LP bonus from faction cockpit items, faction camos, favorite faction mechs (faction pride mechs) (Dragon = Kurita favorite) etc. The game doesnt detect it if you are Kurita and you drive Dragons or if you are Davion in a Jagermech. Most of the planets have blank fluff information as well.

Roundtable Ideas that PGI implemented
Change longtom into sensor scan
Tug of war
Quickplay maps
24/7 tukayyid event (Bukkits)
Russ’s side quests never happened

Melding Invasion dropdecks with quickplay maps was a Roundtable idea gone wrong. Shotgun marriage



Too many matches of farming baby seals and skittles, no matchmaker
Tier based handicaps based on player tier rather than blanket tonnage. (matchmaker impossible)
Player tier system (tier 1 base 240t, tier 2, 3, 4, 5 get extra tonnage)


Invasion mode unpopular, maps need rework possibly, Dropdeck system needs rework
Current dropdeck system allows extremes of 12 assaults or 12 lights and this is kinda dumb tbo. How could it be changed?

Edited by Kin3ticX, 28 July 2017 - 03:06 PM.

[Carl Vickers]

I debated for a bit about replying to this topic due to the last round table being such a success.

Something to keep in mind, no matter what you come up with, it needs to be able to be implemented by PGI to make it worth while. That is the biggest thing.

Fixing maps is the first thing Id be looking at, more new maps as well. Having Incursion where only 1 team has the base would be great.

Please dont be like the last round table and promote ideas that are pie in the sky and will never happen, real and tangible stuff that can be presented to PGI would be more helpful.

Lets get things fixed before we try for fluff.

[Chagatay]

Well to be perfectly fair, fixing maps at this point is just as "pie in the sky" as other suggestions.

[Kwea]

I would have thought they would limit this to people who actually play this game. Or groups with more than 6 people in their group, including the placeholder accounts so that he could keep the unit coffers.

Edited by Kwea, 26 July 2017 - 08:33 PM.

[Kin3ticX]

Kwea, on 26 July 2017 - 08:01 PM, said:

I would have thought they would limit this to people who actually play this game. Or groups with more than 6 people in their group, including the placeholder account so that he could keep the unit coffers.

You need outsiders because insiders are blowing a lot of smoke

Chagatay, on 26 July 2017 - 07:48 PM, said:

Well to be perfectly fair, fixing maps at this point is just as "pie in the sky" as other suggestions.

On that note, telling PGI to do a system restore back to 2015 and then starting over from there is also just as likely.

Funny thing is, you wouldnt lose any CW maps doing that. (except the quickplay ones )

[Deathlike]

That tug of war is going swell right? Especially with fixed rates of winning and all of the two buckets is what everyone needs right?

I mean, nothing was changed mapwise, so everything is swell amirite?

Edited by Deathlike, 26 July 2017 - 08:10 PM.

[Carl Vickers]

Kin3ticX, on 26 July 2017 - 08:08 PM, said:

You need outsiders because insiders are blowing a lot of smoke



On that note, telling PGI to do a system restore back to 2015 and then starting over from there is also just as likely.

Funny thing is, you wouldnt lose any CW maps doing that. (except the quickplay ones )

Respect Kin3ticX, but people who havent played in a fair while should not be in the front slots. That being said, I dont know who I would pick to be heading this up.

So all Ill say is fix core game play before anything else. The vets wont come back unless game play changes, same stale game play is stale.

[naterist]

a) is this even pgi sanctioned? b)is it open forum like xavier's was in the last roundtable?

[Kin3ticX]

Deathlike, on 26 July 2017 - 08:09 PM, said:

That tug of war is going swell right? Especially with fixed rates of winning and all of the two buckets is what everyone needs right?

I mean, nothing was changed mapwise, so everything is swell amirite?

Nah man PGI is doing everything we asked for. C'mon

naterist, on 26 July 2017 - 08:16 PM, said:

a) is this even pgi sanctioned? b)is it open forum like xavier's was in the last roundtable?

its just us dreaming of what could have been

[Kaoba]

Carl Vickers, on 26 July 2017 - 06:38 PM, said:

I debated for a bit about replying to this topic due to the last round table being such a success.

Something to keep in mind, no matter what you come up with, it needs to be able to be implemented by PGI to make it worth while. That is the biggest thing.

Fixing maps is the first thing Id be looking at, more new maps as well. Having Incursion where only 1 team has the base would be great.

Please dont be like the last round table and promote ideas that are pie in the sky and will never happen, real and tangible stuff that can be presented to PGI would be more helpful.

Lets get things fixed before we try for fluff.

Yeah incursion needs to be changed, i am faking tired of all units just running like headless chucks straight to a base rush with line backers.

[50 50]

There are always possibilities to consider.
I would hope that there is a way forward that will resolve some of these outstanding problems, bring players back, bring new players in and appeal to small and large groups.

EDIT: (Sorry, trying to write this stuff while I'm at work is not a great idea)

The discussion was going to be around some concepts presented in the 'making it a campaign' thread.
This is going to touch on a few different ideas such as:
-wait times
-maps
-modes
-the drop deck

I imagine we will talk over a few other things as well and I'd like to thank Kin3tiX for the invite.

Edited by 50 50, 26 July 2017 - 09:52 PM.

[Kin3ticX]

there may also be discussion on other topics

Heres something i threw together and we can pull other issues from the public as well





Space nerd politics most underrated necessity for CW
Ingame support - Simple things like Unit-Unit Cbills Coffer Transfers but not limited to this. Right now, contracts can only come from the ether, not from players or units.
Forum Support - Over moderation has been known to strike down rivalries
Phase 3 and 4 were big blows to space politics, a one-two punch.


Map still feels pointless 3 years in, you dont have a real need to use it to play CW. Its just ceremonial.

Coffers still in a sad place

Faction doesnt really matter anymore except for contract bonuses from the ether. Its just Clan vs IS.

Lack of lore fluff such as LP bonus from cockpit items, camos, favorite faction mechs (Dragon = Kurita favorite) etc.

Roundtable Ideas that PGI implemented
Change longtom into sensor scan
Tug of war
Quickplay maps
24/7 tukayyid event (Bukkits)
Russ’s side quests never happened

Melding Invasion dropdecks with quickplay maps was a Roundtable idea gone wrong. Shotgun marriage



Too many matches of farming baby seals and skittles, no matchmaker
Tier based handicaps based on player tier rather than blanket tonnage.
Player tier system, Unit tier system


Invasion mode unpopular, maps need rework possibly, Dropdeck system needs rework

Edited by Kin3ticX, 27 July 2017 - 07:33 AM.

[50 50]

Let's add a better editor for the forums to the list.... but that's probably more pie in the sky than the other items.

[Carl Vickers]

Faction stuff, yes, why is it easier to be a merc than a loyalist, why even be a loyalist. Remove 10 match trial period and loss of 25% loyalty points for leaving, restrictions do not make things easier or more attractive. If you are not going to do that then do something for the people who are max level, what reason do they still have to play the damn game. Not rocket science PGI.

Coffers, whats the point in having them unless they are actually going to be used. Get rid of the recruitment costs until units hits 100 odd members.

Maps, the big map offers nothing and the maps we use for combat need to be reworked and more maps added. Game modes need to be looked at too.

Dont even bother discussing a matchmaker, population wont support it till game play is actually fixed.

I dont think you can do much about the MWO forums as they wont change it, need to protect those that cant string 2 words together.

No need to talk about long tom, its been and done, PGI left it too long and we all know this, lets move on and not waste time.

Something for ingame recruitment for units, places to find them, chat to them ect.

These for a start, that will pretty much take up most of your time.

Edited by Carl Vickers, 26 July 2017 - 10:35 PM.

[Carl Vickers]

Seeing as Ash is on a holiday I am posting his list for him.

justcallme A S H, on 27 July 2017 - 02:10 AM, said:

My list in terms of the QUICK wins that they must attend to.

1. Loyalist / Merc Tree - Need to be option past LVL20/LVL10 immediately. Even if it's a tree reset, better than nothing.

2. Planet voting as loyalist - Means nothing since "Buckets". No clue what PGI were thinking, just peeved off ALL loyalists, same as #1. Fix this so it means something. NFI what, but anything is better than nothing.

3. Proper population calculation - PGI currently calculates off overall calculation. Not from the current/active population (active should be played a game in past 90 days). This is such a simple fix it is mind boggling that it hasn't occurred yet. For something so simple it would go a long way to helping the population imbalance in a number of factions/sides.


4. IS vs IS, Clan vs Clan - Promised to be delivered in Q1 2017, still not delivered in Q3 2017. Not good enough. Although due to PGI inactivity FP population is so low right now, it might not be viable, but needs to be attempted.

5. Loyalist / desertion penalties. It shouldn't be 25% loyalty points and 7 days. Make it instant with maybe a 30mil cbill / 24hr cooldown or something. Losing 25% rep is just dumb

6. Maps - It's been covered many, many times. No point going over it again. Apparently Russ said they are in "Dev", whatever that means without any evidence I dunno. Hopefully something comes here.


Largely pointless items

1. Having people on the round table that don't play the mode.
2. Coffers - No direction in years, forget for now.
3. Anything past discussion of things like Long Tom etc. Let the crap die.
4. 50 50's idea. While it's great, and i mean no disrespect, it's just not feasible for PGI to do it and too many major flaws. It's an idea that'll never eventuate. MWO is a FPS

[Kyrie]

Let us demand pie-in-the-sky, pie for everyone! Implement real CW as was discussed back in 2012. Links in signature.

[Deathlike]

I remember talking "skittle" integration a while ago, but to no avail.

You have to structure stuff that everyone is involved and that for the most part... people that want to invest and contribute in groups should be well rewarded.

It's not that we can't have solos... we just can't have everyone for themselves to even attempt any semblance of teamwork.

[Chagatay]

1. Matchmaking. Doesn't have to be a full blown matchmaker but it should attempt to at least balance out teams.
Queue as a 12 man you will face another 9-12 man.

4 ranges corresponding to lance sizes rounding up except for the last which is solo people. Largest group size must match for both teams whatever that is. Anything else goes.

Examples that are ok:
12 vs 9 1x3
8 4 vs 7 3 1x2
4x3 vs 4x2 1x4
4x3 vs 2x3 2x2 1x2

(9-12)
(5-8)
(2-4)
(1)

2. Bling. Higher payout especially on losses. Recommend a time/money modifier be added to payouts.

3. Maps. More maps which should developed and borrowed from QP. Let's be honest the real development moneys should be spent on QP where most people reside. More maps in QP makes everyone happy. Next map can be the fabled Desert Lowlands. Polar Highlands is really popular so might as well make a hotter dry version with cactus(es/i) and rolling sand dunes.

Edited by Chagatay, 27 July 2017 - 06:31 AM.

[Kin3ticX]

Chagatay, on 27 July 2017 - 06:29 AM, said:

1. Matchmaking. Doesn't have to be a full blown matchmaker but it should attempt to at least balance out teams.
Queue as a 12 man you will face another 9-12 man.

4 ranges corresponding to lance sizes rounding up except for the last which is solo people. Largest group size must match for both teams whatever that is. Anything else goes.

Rather than giving an entire techbase a blanket tonnage handicap, PGI should give targeted tonnage handicaps. If CW had some kind of player tier, solos or maybe players in general could be given a tonnage handicap based on their CW tier rating.

Edited by Kin3ticX, 27 July 2017 - 07:28 AM.

[Chagatay]

Kin3ticX, on 27 July 2017 - 07:13 AM, said:

Rather than giving an entire techbase a blanket tonnage handicap, PGI should give targeted tonnage handicaps. If CW had some kind of player tier, solos or maybe players in general could be given a tonnage handicap based on their CW tier rating.

I didn't mention anything about tonnage handicaps but I am not opposed either but as you say there is so many ways that could be done. The matching table I am proposing at least avoids more egregious mismatches and at least sorta guarantees that at least organizationally both sides are equal (not in skill). It certainly won't eliminate stomps but 12 solos can only face 12 solos. Big teams face big teams. Medium sized teams face medium sized teams etc.

You can even simplify the system to build by lances (max 3 groups in a set)
Queue as 11 you are matched with 1 solo to make a three lance group.
Queue as 7 you will be matched with 1 solo to make a two lance group.
Queue as 2 you are matched with 2 solo people to make a single lance.

A three lance group is always pitted against a three lance group
A two lance group + X is always pitted against a two lance group + X
A single lance + X is always pitted against at least one or more single lance(s) + X
A bunch of solos can only be matched against a bunch of solos.

X is always less than or equal to the highest ordered grouping. In the case of single lance compositions you would probably need to ensure that the number of lances on each team is the same but that is pretty easy as well.

Edited by Chagatay, 27 July 2017 - 09:21 AM.