14 replies to this topic

[Marius Evander]

The last Faction Play Roundtable there was quite a few FP issues / topics including this one brought up and PGI said "could probably do/would make priority", none of which are mentioned on the roadmap ? why ?

Thanks.

[Appogee]

PGI have effectively given up on MWO. They're just trying to string us along until they get to sell us MW5 in December.

[xX PUG Xx]

I miss that naughty little nod towards self-determination that was stripped away like dirty bedsheets on a Sunday morning.

If only the Puggled masses had learned to read the map and planetary information screens, perhaps then we wouldn't have had to "dumb down" this "thinking mans shooter" to a mere point'n'click Quick Play mode with added faux-strategy. We can't even reliably have a band of "forum warriors" to stoke the fires of distrust, angst and joy with Inter-Faction rivalries without the PC brigade hitting the Report button en-masse.

Gone are the great ones, the Dear ones and even the feared ones are in short supply.

Gone too soon.

[FallingAce]

Cadoazreal, on 29 August 2017 - 04:34 AM, said:

The last Faction Play Roundtable there was quite a few FP issues / topics including this one brought up and PGI said "could probably do/would make priority", none of which are mentioned on the roadmap ? why ?

Thanks.

PGI is still "working" on promises from the Sept 8 (2016) podcast
Those were supposed to be delivered in ~February.

FallingAce, on 07 July 2017 - 07:24 AM, said:

Russ Bullock on rewards Sept 8 podcast

https://youtu.be/TqmK38kZSgY?t=1351

Russ Bullock on timeframe for revamped rewards system and special events windows

https://youtu.be/TqmK38kZSgY

"~2months ish" after the launch of 4.1

60-90 days

Soon™

The last FW rountable you are referring to was last February. Means they still have another 6 months to implement anything discussed. Well beyond the scope of a 3 month roadmap.

[SuperFunkTron]

Cadoazreal, on 29 August 2017 - 04:34 AM, said:

The last Faction Play Roundtable there was quite a few FP issues / topics including this one brought up and PGI said "could probably do/would make priority", none of which are mentioned on the roadmap ? why ?

Thanks.

Of all the things that FP needs, is that really anywhere near the top? That roundtable was a great example overly narrow focus and wasted opportunity for FP. Walls, choosing drop zones.... When the hell are we going to get some of the dam features from the original advertising?

We need to push for answers to topics like Incentivizing Faction Specific Mechs, Dynamic Political Alliances, weekly short campaigns with rewards and consequences, and some sort of system incorporating logistics into the map play to influence players into varying their drop decks.

Those ideas will add some substantial, meaningful, and most importantly, engaging improvements to the mode.... and here you are asking for switching where you drop...

[50 50]

Given the voting for allies was also seen as too difficult I would not be surprised if the selectable drop zones falls by the way.
The current modes and maps are not really set up in a way that makes it that practical.

However.

Maybe we can have some hope in Assault mode.
When this was getting remade we really didn't know what was happening but as we all know, it eventually became something different entirely and we now have Incursion which does it's own thing and the original Assault mode hasn't changed.
Perhaps this is an opportunity to explore some ideas around that mode specifically and how selectable drop zones might work with it.

For example:
What if Assault mode consisted of a starting base for each team.
Had a base in the middle and a base on the halfway line on the far sides of the map. So essentially it's 5 bases arranged in a +
Only use it on the big maps so we have sufficient distance between each one.
Make the win conditions either control of all bases to end the match, or control of the majority of bases when the timer runs out.
We can use the lifts as a way to deploy at the midway bases, but could leave the drop ships for our starting locations.

These bases do not need to cover half the map like they do in Incursion but we can use a lot of the assets from that mode to build them with.

So maybe it's not about adding the selectable respawn option for Faction Play to all the modes, but to a specific mode so it is setup to cater for it properly and not tacked on.

The follow up question might then be, is the mode left in the quick play rotation and if so, how would that work?

Maybe that's worth a thread on it's own.

Edited by 50 50, 06 September 2017 - 05:15 PM.

[Carl Vickers]

50 50, on 06 September 2017 - 04:44 PM, said:

Given the voting for allies was also seen as too difficult I would not be surprised if the selectable drop zones falls by the way.
The current modes and maps are not really set up in a way that makes it that practical.

However.

Maybe we can have some hope in Assault mode.
When this was getting remade we really didn't know what was happening but as we all know, it eventually became something different entirely and we now have Incursion which does it's own thing and the original Assault mode hasn't changed.
Perhaps this is an opportunity to explore some ideas around that mode specifically and how selectable drop zones might work with it.

For example:
What if Assault mode consisted of a starting base for each team.
Had a base in the middle and a base on the halfway line on the far sides of the map. So essentially it's 5 bases arranged in a +
Only use it on the big maps so we have sufficient distance between each one.
Make the win conditions either control of all bases to end the match, or control of the majority of bases when the timer runs out.
We can use the lifts as a way to deploy at the midway bases, but could leave the drop ships for our starting locations.

These bases do not need to cover half the map like they do in Incursion but we can use a lot of the assets from that mode to build them with.

So maybe it's not about adding the selectable respawn option for Faction Play to all the modes, but to a specific mode so it is setup to cater for it properly and not tacked on.

The follow up question might then be, is the mode left in the quick play rotation and if so, how would that work?

Maybe that's worth a thread on it's own.

Sounds like conquest to me with less FPS.

[Black Ivan]

PGI has literally given up on FW and now work on Solaris. All it get is an "event system", no bug fixes or redesigns.

Only chance would be to flood Russ Twitter acccount with questions or rants concerning FW development

[Carl Vickers]

Seems like we arent even getting the event system for FP, capitals have been surrounded for a while now and no event has been mentioned by PGI.

[Marius Evander]

Carl Vickers, on 07 September 2017 - 02:28 AM, said:

Seems like we arent even getting the event system for FP...........

I pretty sure PGI 's usual lack of clarity in their event system announcement for taking Capital worlds can easily be interpreted as we have to surround 3 Capitals b4 the event occurs (we currently only have Draconis and Steiner Capitals surrounded, pgi clearly said FRR capital and does not count and Terra does not count.) Yes it gives the impression event is supposed to happen after each planet is surrounded, but pgi was purposely vague about how long a capital planet had to be surrounded for b4 event would happen (probably because it aint programmed duh) best of luck to us for something new in FP/CW !

Edited by Cadoazreal, 07 September 2017 - 04:09 AM.

[Davegt27]

Quote

PGI have effectively given up on MWO. They're just trying to string us along until they get to sell us MW5 in December.

I wish I could put my money down now
before the people that try it says how bad and broken it is

[50 50]

Carl Vickers, on 07 September 2017 - 02:28 AM, said:

Seems like we arent even getting the event system for FP, capitals have been surrounded for a while now and no event has been mentioned by PGI.

Except the 'Event System' is coming in the September patch.
What that actually is, is debatable as it also seems like it is just a way for their events team to easily make events instead of having the system dynamically do something based on player actions.

The capture three planets was going to be a Tukayyid end of season followed by a map reset sort of event.

That there is/was nothing for the loss of the capitals of Kurita and Steiner is sad.
The taking of planets is insignificant and it seems the taking of capitals is just as insignificant.
This all falls back to the planets having some meaning.

[50 50]

Carl Vickers, on 06 September 2017 - 05:36 PM, said:

Sounds like conquest to me with less FPS.

Well, if we look at the modes we have Conquest is fairly widely regarded as being a good mode for Faction Play as the objectives move the battle and have meaning.
People like siege because it's unique to Faction Play, asymmetrical and really needs good team tactics.
So wouldn't it make sense to have a mode that follows a similar setup?
Assault seems like a reasonable choice to work with.

[naterist]

50 50, on 06 September 2017 - 04:44 PM, said:

Given the voting for allies was also seen as too difficult I would not be surprised if the selectable drop zones falls by the way.
The current modes and maps are not really set up in a way that makes it that practical.

However.

Maybe we can have some hope in Assault mode.
When this was getting remade we really didn't know what was happening but as we all know, it eventually became something different entirely and we now have Incursion which does it's own thing and the original Assault mode hasn't changed.
Perhaps this is an opportunity to explore some ideas around that mode specifically and how selectable drop zones might work with it.

For example:
What if Assault mode consisted of a starting base for each team.
Had a base in the middle and a base on the halfway line on the far sides of the map. So essentially it's 5 bases arranged in a +
Only use it on the big maps so we have sufficient distance between each one.
Make the win conditions either control of all bases to end the match, or control of the majority of bases when the timer runs out.
We can use the lifts as a way to deploy at the midway bases, but could leave the drop ships for our starting locations.

These bases do not need to cover half the map like they do in Incursion but we can use a lot of the assets from that mode to build them with.

So maybe it's not about adding the selectable respawn option for Faction Play to all the modes, but to a specific mode so it is setup to cater for it properly and not tacked on.

The follow up question might then be, is the mode left in the quick play rotation and if so, how would that work?

Maybe that's worth a thread on it's own.

Add the bases idea to skirmish and domination (remove centerbase for dom), keep incursion, siege, and conquest as is, and remove assault.

Boom, now you got some cool twists to qp maps thatre only findable in fw. Would readd some flavor to fw.

[50 50]

Combining modes.
How would that shake things up.

Imagine Assault + Conquest?
Or Incursion + Escort?
Scout + Domination?

It would be interesting just to get the option to do this in Private lobby...as well as use drop decks.
Probably a big undertaking for little benefit.

Edited by 50 50, 12 September 2017 - 02:42 AM.