19 replies to this topic

[Nightbird]

It doesn't have to be a pretty UI, emails work too, should PGI let the player base create its own stories, write its own drama?

What I'm most afraid of with the new event system is that the events will be utterly generic. Faction X fights Faction Y over Planet Z. ZZZzzzzz...... would it be better if PGI hands the keys over, let the player base write the narrative on the forums, and support it with ingame events?

Who would get the keys? The loyalist unit in each faction with the most matches? Most wins? Solaris? Maybe even two levels, the 'best' unit in each faction gets a vote, people on the forum that want to be Story Master posts their scenarios, forum users pick best 3, then the 'best' units use their votes to pick the winner. PGI adopts the Narrative that wins and sets off events. Some hybrid of forum and in-game participation.

Discuss

edit... stellaris/solaris, same difference

Edited by NlGHTBlRD, 25 September 2017 - 03:22 PM.

[justcallme A S H]

Well it would probably help things...

But.. I have one word to reply with.

Russ.

[Nightbird]

Well, there is no interest in this, can't blame PGI for not providing what isn't wanted right?

[Van mw]

What's the point? I don't see any reason in postining ideas about FW on forums. Nothing from here was used for 2 years I'm in game. Why waste server space to store conversations without any consequences except disappointment?

[Appogee]

Van mw, on 26 September 2017 - 06:49 AM, said:

What's the point? I don't see any reason in postining ideas about FW on forums. Nothing from here was used for 2 years I'm in game. Why waste server space to store conversations without any consequences except disappointment?

I'm sure the Community Manager reads these ideas with great interest, strongly advocating them in PGI's development roadmap meetings, where the committed team enthusiastically ideate and commit to the priorities which will see Mechwarrior:Online fulfill its true potential.

┈╱╱▏┈┈╱╱╱╱▏╱╱▏┈┈┈
┈▇╱▏┈┈▇▇▇╱▏▇╱▏┈┈┈
┈▇╱▏▁┈▇╱▇╱▏▇╱▏▁┈┈
┈▇╱╱╱▏▇╱▇╱▏▇╱╱╱▏┈
┈▇▇▇╱┈▇▇▇╱┈▇▇▇╱┈┈

Edited by Appogee, 26 September 2017 - 07:01 AM.

[MischiefSC]

I was an admin on a game where we did that. It made an incredible game experience. It was a lot of work and required a lot of communication. It worked because we really enjoyed the game too and were happy and excited to be engaged with the players. The player base in turn was mostly very mature about it.

There is a lot of that missing here.

[Bud Crue]

Remember the little com star intercepts? A paragraph or two of narrative like text to try and create a pretense of immersion...remember those?

They didn't last because they took too much effort for PGI.

Now think of what you are proposing. I love the idea, but it would require someone at PGI to read those emails, to then create a an interface to put those community created stories into the game or likely just this website in the form of text. If putting a couple of paragraphs of text in was two much work a couple of years ago, I gotta think it will be too much work now...what with MW5 presumably being the priority, and all that. Alas, the best you are going to get in this regard is the sort of thing the NBT folks are trying to do; and that only works by keeping the need for any input by PGI out.

[Commander A9]

Actually, I think the ComStar intercepts didn't last because they did two things:

1. They only awarded one side for "winning."

2. Their conflict zones were typically off the current front line in Faction Warfare.

Example:

https://mwomercs.com...ssion-09042015/

Davion versus Jade Falcon: If Pleione is under Davion control at any point before the above deadline, and you participated in at least one victory on Pleione while aligned with Davion during this initiative, you will receive a one-time reward of 4,000,000 C-Bills.

Davions lost this intercept event. Jade Falcon was victorious, but Jade Falcon got no rewards for "winning" over the Davions.

So during this particular intercept, the only one for Davion, the only people who got any rewards were the Davions if they won - Jade Falcon got no rewards when they stopped their attack.

So, you had a choice on these intercepts: drop on the front line and try to take a planet, or stop an enemy force from taking a planet in your backline, but receive no reward for doing so.

[Bud Crue]

Commander A9, on 26 September 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

Actually, I think the ComStar intercepts didn't last because they did two things:

1. They only awarded one side for "winning."

2. Their conflict zones were typically off the current front line in Faction Warfare.

You may of course be correct. I don't know why PGI chose to stop doing them, and I don't recall any official explanation as to the actual cause of their cessation. But the point still stands, I think. PGI is not in the habit of doing much to:
1) encourage and support player participation in CW
2) engage in activities that don't result in the purchase of mechs or game content.
3) provide any semblance of an immersive act or content other than the aforementioned intercepts, and the vignettes that accompany each new hero.

That history taken together suggests to me that PGI is not about to have a staff member(s) take the time to interface regularly with the community to parse through potentially numerous and conflicting narrative entries in accordance with the OP's idea, and then decide which one to use, then create an event around that selected narrative entry, and then place this specially tailored event and its narrative into the game. We will have a rainbow farting unicorn dekal before they will EVER put forth that kind of effort into community engagement, immersion and CW.

[Nightbird]

Any therefore would the keys be better served in the hands of the community? PGI only need to implement the event and rewards, the community writes the narrative, picks the location, the faction paticipants, and the win conditions. Less work for PGI and a lot less blame.

[Bud Crue]

NlGHTBlRD, on 26 September 2017 - 09:15 AM, said:

Any therefore would the keys be better served in the hands of the community? PGI only need to implement the event and rewards, the community writes the narrative, picks the location, the faction paticipants, and the win conditions. Less work for PGI and a lot less blame.

Sure. Now get folks who tweet, to bug Russ. I wish you the best of luck.

[Nightbird]

I'm hoping for a few community members fluent in the lore to say they are interested in doing the narratives, or PGI to say they're willing to collaborate on events.

[50 50]

This is actually a really interesting topic to discuss but I see two parts to it.

Dynamic Events
The events that actually have an in game effect such as increased rewards need to be manually generated by someone at PGI at the moment. It's something that requires time and manual effort and for the majority of the events they don't tie in with what is happening 'on the map'. There is the capital world major event that was proposed, but even that is a manual effort.
To increase player investment in Faction Play, it needs to be more dynamic - triggered automatically by our actions, but tied in with what is happening 'on the map'.
That's where I have suggested in my Campaign post that should a particular faction achieve X type of victories over a period of time, then there is an automatically generated 'event' based on what is happening.

For example:

• Clan Smoke Jaguar has voted to attack House Kurita 4 weeks in a row.
  
• They have succeeded in getting more Siege victories than House Kurita each week and each week have taken a planet from them.
  
• After the 4th successive victory, a 'Counter Attack' event is triggered where by the players aligned with those two factions fight under slightly different conditions and with different incentives.
  
• At the end of that event we can apply a result that can impact the two factions and the successive victory tally is reset and off we go again.

The different conditions (without adding any new features right at the moment) would be:
Smoke Jag forces have a reduction in maximum drop deck tonnage to simulate that their supply lines have become extended and need to be consolidated before they can push further into enemy territory.
Kurita gets an increase in drop deck tonnage to simulate that they are redirecting greater forces to that battle front in an effort to halt the advance.
Both sides might get increased payouts for the duration.
Mercenary contracts might become more lucrative for Kurita for the duration.

If we really wanted to simulate supply lines a bit more, we could have a small function in there to reduce the drop deck tonnage of the side making the advance each successive week until the event is triggered.
IE: Week 1 - Smoke Jag wins. For the next week their drop deck tonnage is -5 tons if they attack Kurita again to 235 tons. Week 2 - They win again and attack Kurita again, it drops -5 again to 230 tons. Week 3, same thing, down to 225. Week 4, 220 tons. Trigger the event and boom.
Should Kurita win the counter attack, then it could be that Smoke Jag would not be able to vote to attack them for a period of time.
Should Smoke Jag win then they consolidate their supply lines and their drop deck tonnage returns to normal.

We could have different types of events based on the number of victories a faction achieves in the particular mode.
Siege here represents taking the planets as that was what it was about 'traditionally' in earlier phases. But there is nothing stopping the system incorporating a bit more variety by using the different modes we have in Faction Play to trigger differently styled events with different outcomes. However, it would benefit Faction Play to have some additional features outside of the combat that these successive victories could influence.

Player contributions
Our actions would speak for themselves in a dynamic system as proposed above and having some little pre-generated text to go along with those events in game would give visibility to the player base as we are playing and help build on that immersion and investment in the game mode.
Where the player contributions can be made is in these forums by promoting conflicts and faction agendas.
For something in game, there could be room to expand on the Faction chat and make some form of announcement but given the level of access everyone has to these systems, it may not be practical.

This would leave PGI to concentrate on the weekend events with prizes and so forth and major events such as the Tukayyids.

[Nightbird]

Archiving this, will try again next time. Notes: Event needs dynamic balancing controls to keep results from being too skewed (e.g. tonnage). Event should not have a tie condition that is 90% of the bar, requiring a few matches at the end of the event to decide.



------------- INCOMING TRANSMISSION ---------------
This is Captain-General Thomas Marik calling on all Inner Sphere forces in the area. The combined FWL Armada consisting of the First, Second, Third, and what remains of the Fourth and Fifth fleets have just scored a victory against the Jade Falcon-led battle group besieging Atreus, and they have retreated to regroup. Make no mistake, they will return in force soon as there was no attempt to retrieve the sizable landing force that remains on Atreus.

The situation on the ground is dire. The Clans control major population and production centers, along with a significant portion of the air and space defense systems. Those defensive systems are keeping our ships from providing orbital fire support. Our forces on the ground took too many casualties in the initial wave of the invasion to mount an effective counter-attack. Nonetheless, we must regain control of those systems at all costs before the Clan fleet returns! If those guns are not at our side, they will be pointed at our back.

Make no mistake, the Clans' trust in their lab grown warriors will prove their downfall. Even as I speak, our blockade is cutting off logistical support to their ground force. They have no way to replenish losses, and soon they will have no spare parts and no ammunition. This is a war of attrition they cannot hope to win. Wherever you are, whoever you are, the time to set aside our past differences is now. Rally to my call, and here, together, we will break the back of the Clan advance! I give you my solemn promise that when we are done, Tharkad and Luthien will be next, and we will make the Clans regret ever setting foot in the Inner Sphere!

Event:
Battle for Atreus
Initial ToW bar at 75% in favor of clans
Win Condition for IS: Control >50%
Win Condition for Clan: Control >=50%

3 Days:
Day 1: Clan Drop deck limit: 220 Tons, IS Drop deck limit: 265 tons
Day 2: Clan Drop deck limit: 2?? Tons, IS Drop deck limit: 2?? tons
Day 2: Clan Drop deck limit: 2?? Tons, IS Drop deck limit: 2?? tons


------------- INCOMING TRANSMISSION ---------------
To -ll warriors receiving this transm--sion, this is Star --lonel Cewen Newclay commander of --- 3rd Falcon Talon. The --eatest battle of our generation is ----ntly underway on Atreus. With our vic--ry, House Marik will ---mble. If y---d like to participate, our guns will open a path --- --- through the blockade. Newclay out.

Edited by Nightbird, 19 October 2017 - 06:13 PM.

[Tarl Cabot]

Basically, PGI has been trying to rely too much what they can or can not code into the game while not taking a more hands-on approach.

[Jun Watarase]

PGI isnt the type of company to share any kind of control with anyone. I mean, look at how stuff like townhalls are structured.

[Nightbird]

Not true at all. Past changes to FP I can remember
1. More severe penalties to breaking loyalty
2. Merc bonuses to under pop factions
3. MC from tagging planets
4. Split solo/group queue
5. One bucket IS vs Clan queue
6. Merc tree, mercs can't earn loyalist ranks
7 More factions
8. Not allowing mercs to jump factions everyday

All came from the player base, from townhalls and the forum. Problem is that people don't always know how to achieve what they want without breaking something else. For example (1, 6, 8) was from people who felt mercs were too powerful, and loyalists weren't rewarded. Instead, these suggestions pushed mercs into loyalist contracts, on one side, Clans. 4 was to stop seal clubbing, but most FP players were in groups small and large and solo players couldn't get drops.

As someone who posts many suggestions, I have no problems with also saying PGI listens too much to the player base. They should never skip the step of asking, will this solve the problem and will this break something else?

Edited by Nightbird, 20 October 2017 - 10:30 AM.

[Jun Watarase]

Nightbird, on 20 October 2017 - 10:27 AM, said:

Not true at all. Past changes to FP I can remember
1. More severe penalties to breaking loyalty
2. Merc bonuses to under pop factions
3. MC from tagging planets
4. Split solo/group queue
5. One bucket IS vs Clan queue
6. Merc tree, mercs can't earn loyalist ranks
7 More factions
8. Not allowing mercs to jump factions everyday

All came from the player base, from townhalls and the forum. Problem is that people don't always know how to achieve what they want without breaking something else. For example (1, 6, 8) was from people who felt mercs were too powerful, and loyalists weren't rewarded. Instead, these suggestions pushed mercs into loyalist contracts, on one side, Clans. 4 was to stop seal clubbing, but most FP players were in groups small and large and solo players couldn't get drops.

As someone who posts many suggestions, I have no problems with also saying PGI listens too much to the player base. They should never skip the step of asking, will this solve the problem and will this break something else?

Thats probably because a PGI dev just happened to want the same thing. When it comes to situations where the playerbase wants something which PGI doesnt want, PGI proceeds to igore the playerbase unless there are mass pre-order cancellations.

I mean, laser DPS nerfs? Countless people tried to point out how this doesnt address the laser vomit They still nerfed med laser DPS anyway. They only backpedaled on many of the changes because pre-order cacellations gave them pause. They probably just delayed the other nerfs to a later patch once pre-order cancellations arent an issue anymore.

You will notice they didnt backpedal on the DRG-1C nerf even though the playerbase tried to point out why it was dumb.

[xX PUG Xx]

Nightbird, I like the Atreus event layout and especially the nice little bit of immersive "Lore". I certainly think there is (or at least WAS) those in the playerbase that would like to contribute this kind of back story to the conflicts and if I was honest would forgoe regular FP battles if this sort of "event" were couched in this manner.

I think this would play into 50 50's "Campaign" idea and actually make FP something special, allowing us to organise and drop in the "Event" and make it seem worthwhile. I feel that the current day-to-day FP matches lack any sense of purpose or backstory due to not even knowing which planet we're supposed to be dropping on.

[Nightbird]

Jun Watarase, on 20 October 2017 - 10:46 AM, said:

I mean, laser DPS nerfs? Countless people tried to point out how this doesnt address the laser vomit They still nerfed med laser DPS anyway. They only backpedaled on many of the changes because pre-order cacellations gave them pause. They probably just delayed the other nerfs to a later patch once pre-order cancellations arent an issue

A major pass is needed to balance Clan/IS equipment. See my thread in General Discussion on Lore Damage/Heat.

PGI's mistake is in singling out the medium laser and also not doing it on the test server.