92 replies to this topic

[50 50]

If it was to revert to phase 2, we need to remove restrictions on group sizes and maybe put a maximum on planet queues so the population does spread out and can get a game.

[Nightbird]

Phase 2 was terrible in terms of getting a match. Plus maps are designed for 12vs12, I don't think the tech is there for dynamic turret/gen health.

The priority should be making the matches fun, so that players aren't leaving after 2-3 stomps in a row. Then we'll have the population to do more. I would like true factions as well, but with the current dynamics it'll make a bad mode - really unbalanced matches - worse with much longer queues.

[BIOHAZARD]

To me the greatest issue is time investment vs gains. And I feel this applies to most. If you are to sacrifice 30 mins to drop with a band of useless pugs for a guaranteed loss, this kills any love for lore. As a result, most people flock to the side that is winning.

Solution: untie match payout from the performance of the team, for mercenaries.

In general, all people always play the best way they can, anyways. If you got proper payout, regardless of what the pugs do, that would make being whipped every time less important.

I laos agree, that forcing mercs into having one deck of IS and one of Clan, and dropping them randomly is a way to go.

[BIOHAZARD]

There's one more thing that would keep the FW going at higher rates. MWO needs small amount MC rewards for mercs fighting on loosing side. The loyalists can get that too, but balancing depends on merc population. If you could get, say, 5 mc for playing on the loosing side (with condition having one of top results in the match), this would quickly distribute the entire population. Contracts are just not attractive enough.

FW games are quite long and demanding. For me, going for three QP matches is better (given how bad people can be at this) than committing to 30 mins of unknown. Its risk management .

[Nightbird]

Yep, experienced players manage risk and play PGI's metagame, which says always stack Clans. PGI can change the rules of the matagame so that pilot experience is more evenly distributed if they want FP to succeed.

[FallingAce]

Bud Crue, on 28 September 2017 - 12:41 PM, said:

Reset to phase 2.

Sunstruck, on 16 October 2017 - 11:57 PM, said:

This is the best answer, though it will never happen as the population is so low that nobody would get any games, like ever.

Phase 2 would be your starting point. But then you would have to build on it. You have to understand what needs improvements and not go for buckit solutions.

Which pretty much means you need a new developer.

[tauSentry]

Issue Tracker #240: Mech Academy Siege-mode Tutorial

[Pahrias]

Just a brain fart i had this morning staring at the wait lobby, and thought id share it with you all here and see what you thought.
Should be simple enough to do i think.

I was thinking why not try a doing IS vs IS only and Clan vs Clan only. Then have weekend raids into IS territory and vice versa.
Or maybe keep it as is, but dont flip planets until the events.

i thought it would slow the overall approach of the Clan invasion, because instead of the invasion progressing every day, it would be a set number of planets a week up for grabs. Which would make sense as planet raids are HUGE undertakings, requiring a lot of man power and time.

It would separate the tech for the most part, which has good and bad points, but i feel it would give a more realistic progression as far as the map goes. And the event would be a community thing, so it would bring a bit of meaning to the fights again.

for the clans i was thinking they could fight each other during the week days and the ones with the highest territory, or most wins or whatever, could choose which planets to attack. As such they would have to increase the size of the current clan controlled space at the top, to have a decent fight of it.

For the IS it would be pretty much the same, but with faction specific goals. if those goals are met during the week said faction can participate in the raids to reclaim clan controlled territory. If those goals are not met, said faction can still participate in the defense of clan raids. In fact, this would work for both sides.

The idea here is to give a more realistic sense of progression, and return a bit of give and take where the planets are concerned. Make the clan invasion an EVENT in and of itself, with planets being attacked on both sides.

Like i say just a brain fart. could it work? could it be done inside of a month?

Edited by Pahrias, 23 October 2017 - 03:05 AM.

[Kin3ticX]

DevlinCognito, on 14 October 2017 - 01:34 PM, said:

'As we pass by the main hub that connects Piranha Games’ various workspaces, I spy a map of the Inner Sphere, the cluster of some 3,000 star systems that make up MechWarrior’s universe. Each one has a name and a history etched into the stone tablets of BattleTech lore. And for those who have grown up living in that universe, it’s these little details that matter. Fortunately, Russ Bullock is all about the little details.'

Haha, the sad thing is that most of the planets have blank descriptions. I guess those are big details they are not really about?

[50 50]

@Pahrias
Could definitely do with mixing on the combat a bit. However, would excluding one half of the population with the events be good or bad?

I feel we could achieve the same goal if the 'bucket' was more of a free for all.
IF we restrict groups to only consist of a single Clan or House, then why not just pitch the teams against any other team from a different Clan or house?
It would slow down the process as suddenly some of that drive for planets is a competition between factions as to who gets it.
It also would allow for big groups that might be both IS or both Clan to get the matches against each other.
The only other change we would need to go with it straight away is to change it from a tug of war to a tally system per Clan and per House. The one with the highest tally wins.... or it still get totalled under the larger Clan/IS pools and then it's still the highest one wins.
If we really want to make the competition for the planets to be a bit more significant, then we also slow down the attack cycle and make it last a week. Not everyone can be involved everyday so it allows more players to become invested in the system and contribute something.
A Tally system rewards participation as well as success which may resolve some other issues.
Lastly, if it was a free for all system we can bring back some faction identity and pride.... without needing to split into more buckets.

[Pahrias]

50 50, on 23 October 2017 - 03:37 AM, said:

@Pahrias
Could definitely do with mixing on the combat a bit. However, would excluding one half of the population with the events be good or bad?

I feel we could achieve the same goal if the 'bucket' was more of a free for all.
IF we restrict groups to only consist of a single Clan or House, then why not just pitch the teams against any other team from a different Clan or house?
It would slow down the process as suddenly some of that drive for planets is a competition between factions as to who gets it.
It also would allow for big groups that might be both IS or both Clan to get the matches against each other.
The only other change we would need to go with it straight away is to change it from a tug of war to a tally system per Clan and per House. The one with the highest tally wins.... or it still get totalled under the larger Clan/IS pools and then it's still the highest one wins.
If we really want to make the competition for the planets to be a bit more significant, then we also slow down the attack cycle and make it last a week. Not everyone can be involved everyday so it allows more players to become invested in the system and contribute something.
A Tally system rewards participation as well as success which may resolve some other issues.
Lastly, if it was a free for all system we can bring back some faction identity and pride.... without needing to split into more buckets.

while i do like your idea, the tug of war system is kind of pointless as it is, i wasnt intending to limit the people who could participate in the event itself.
Saying that if you "dont fullfil the faction goals", was a "just in case" clause. The faction goals should be something simple, like for example stiener pilots have to down so many davion pilots, or have so many matches against marik during said week.

It should be an amount that only the least populated faction would MAYBE struggle to achieve, and even then, that said faction would still be able to participate, just not in the attacks. remember, in my idea attacks would be going both ways you see, so some defenders would be required on both sides. think of it like a weekly tukkyid.
true, there would essentially be 2 queues you could join, the attackers or defenders, but i dont feel that would be such a big change. except, on the invasion maps. defenders would always be defending and attackers, attacking.

the rewards would be the same for said event. only the attacking teams would get the "glory", i guess, of conquering a planet and bestowing their tag on it.
i guess it might need a re work of the MC rewards system. maybe base it on a more match by match basis?

or am i totally missing the point of your post? (disclaimer: 420)

[Bud Crue]

FallingAce, on 19 October 2017 - 08:43 AM, said:

Phase 2 would be your starting point. But then you would have to build on it. You have to understand what needs improvements and not go for buckit solutions.

Which pretty much means you need a new developer.

Well, since we are supposed to be discussing fixes that could be achieved in 1 month, yeah, a reset to phase 2 would just be a start. I'd also double all rewards for winning, triple them for losses, for all loyalists. Give mercs a rewards tree based exclusivley on rank and provressive c-bill bonuses; and one wherein they get significant $ for winning and a fraction of that for losing. I'd give loyalist lorenerds some bonus rewards for bringing lore decks and clanner loyalist still more bonuses for running under tonnage (basically anything to attract ANY of the population). But alas, Russ once mentioned in a town hall just how amazingly difficult changing rewards are (seriously) and so yeah, reset is a starting point.

[Kin3ticX]

Bud Crue, on 23 October 2017 - 12:40 PM, said:

Well, since we are supposed to be discussing fixes that could be achieved in 1 month, yeah, a reset to phase 2 would just be a start. I'd also double all rewards for winning, triple them for losses, for all loyalists. Give mercs a rewards tree based exclusivley on rank and provressive c-bill bonuses; and one wherein they get significant $ for winning and a fraction of that for losing. I'd give loyalist lorenerds some bonus rewards for bringing lore decks and clanner loyalist still more bonuses for running under tonnage (basically anything to attract ANY of the population). But alas, Russ once mentioned in a town hall just how amazingly difficult changing rewards are (seriously) and so yeah, reset is a starting point.

I fully support a windows system restore back to phase 2 lul

[50 50]

Pahrias, on 23 October 2017 - 04:43 AM, said:

while i do like your idea, the tug of war system is kind of pointless as it is, i wasnt intending to limit the people who could participate in the event itself.
Saying that if you "dont fullfil the faction goals", was a "just in case" clause. The faction goals should be something simple, like for example stiener pilots have to down so many davion pilots, or have so many matches against marik during said week.

It should be an amount that only the least populated faction would MAYBE struggle to achieve, and even then, that said faction would still be able to participate, just not in the attacks. remember, in my idea attacks would be going both ways you see, so some defenders would be required on both sides. think of it like a weekly tukkyid.
true, there would essentially be 2 queues you could join, the attackers or defenders, but i dont feel that would be such a big change. except, on the invasion maps. defenders would always be defending and attackers, attacking.

the rewards would be the same for said event. only the attacking teams would get the "glory", i guess, of conquering a planet and bestowing their tag on it.
i guess it might need a re work of the MC rewards system. maybe base it on a more match by match basis?

or am i totally missing the point of your post? (disclaimer: 420)

I quite like the idea of having weekly faction goals and finding a way to get the internal IS vs IS and Clan vs Clan conflicts back.
I think we are looking at trying to enable the same thing.
The question is, how do you re-enable these internal conflicts?
I feel it is possible under the 'one bucket' system if we make it more of a free for all which provides even more flexibility than the original map where we had the individual borders.

Just to elaborate on that for a moment.

If we formed teams comprised of only players from a single Clan or House, we simply put all those teams into the one bucket to get matched up against each other and have a fight. There are only 2 rules.
1. The bit about everyone in the team belonging to a single faction.
2. you can't fight against yourself. ie. No FRR vs FRR matches.
Where this has advantages over what we have now and what we had in phase 2 is that you can get any single faction fighting against any other single faction. It re-enables the IS vs IS and Clan vs Clan conflicts. It also allows factions like Liao and Marik to fight against Clan factions because we do away with the strict borders.

Which then brings it to the next bit....

... that the tug of war is not working as well as it could.
Can I just point out to everyone that the tug of war is just the sector system we had but simply represented a different way.
That's where the suggestion to make it a tally works a little differently.
Every time we fight, we fight for our faction.
It doesn't matter who we fight against, only that we do fight and win.
Instead of pushing the bar back and forth where there is that potential for players to not participate and only jump in at the last moment to thwart progress, every victory adds to a tally for your specific faction. It takes into consideration greater participation so players who fight all day and work hard at it should have a higher tally of victories for their faction. Players that jump in at the last moment simply can't earn enough points to have a higher tally.
But that is why we also extend the attack phases to a week so more people have a chance to participate in each conflict.

So, with your weekly suggestion of having faction goals you have the opportunity to now have those conflicts of IS vs IS, Clan vs Clan or Clan vs IS and rack up those achievements without splitting up the queues.

I am also suggesting that it could go further than that.
Remember how we could vote to fight certain opponents?
If we could do that again, then with the tally system, at the end of the week we check to see if we had more points than our selected opponent and if so, we take a planet from them.

But, take that a little step further and break up the tally according to the type of modes we win.
If we have more siege victories then we take a planet.
But what if we had more assault victories, or more domination victories, or more conquest victories?
Let's apply some other affect so there is a way to buff and debuff at a faction level.
What if getting more assault victories than our opponent meant that opponent suffered a drop deck maximum tonnage reduction for the next attack phase?
We suddenly get a more dynamic system, but perhaps more importantly, we open up a way to add in depth and individuality to each faction and ways to affect them.

The only provision we should consider is that it might be difficult to get full 12 player teams all from the one faction if player participation is low.
Therefore, change the restrictions on teams to give more flexibility so we can have 4 v 4, 8 v 8 or 12 v 12.
Be nice to also see how many players from each faction are participating at any point of time as well.
Bit like seeing the deployment of forces from each faction.

Edited by 50 50, 23 October 2017 - 01:33 PM.

[Pahrias]

@50-50
Good we are on the same page.

I think that while it would be possible under one bucket as you suggest, i would rather separate the tech.

The main reason being, is if the tech were separate, big "name" units who hog one side or the other seemingly to avoid one another would no longer be able to. (not wanting to call anyone out here, just saying) They would be forced to fight in the same circles again. As such i feel that this would bring the population back to a more even playing field for when the weekend event starts. Because naturally these units would then switch to avoid again, so the population would be less stacked.

The second reason, is that newer players, or at least those new to FP, would have an easier time dealing with tech that they are familiar with. Mostly the IS newbies, because thats where i think most new players would naturally gravitate towards.
I feel this would allow newbies and pugs alike, to get to grips with the style of play that FP demands, while not having to deal with either "god quirks" or "OP tech" (which i think are the main complaints from either side?) it would ease the learning curve a little bit.
At least that's the theory.

I do much prefer your Tally system to the current tug of war. this system needs a shake up. not sure we would need to change team restrictions, couldnt this be the perfect place for mercs? just have mercs fill out these slots.

A little off topic, but since I mentioned population, I had a thought for loyalists. why not make the reward tree, the faction rank, repeatable? similar to the prestige ranks from the call of duty series, tho maybe with different cockpit items and other rewards, like faction specific cockpit items and towards the end, special variants of mechs unique to the faction. give people a reason to stay with a faction, rather than just bounce around when they complete the loyalty tree.

[Kael Posavatz]

Pahrias, on 24 October 2017 - 01:44 AM, said:

@A little off topic, but since I mentioned population, I had a thought for loyalists. why not make the reward tree, the faction rank, repeatable? similar to the prestige ranks from the call of duty series, tho maybe with different cockpit items and other rewards, like faction specific cockpit items and towards the end, special variants of mechs unique to the faction. give people a reason to stay with a faction, rather than just bounce around when they complete the loyalty tree.

Not off topic. The reward tree has been a topic of discussion from the moment they put in enough faction-specific stuff to make faction-specific rewards truly viable. doing something to keep rewarding players who have maxed their faction has been a topic for what, two years now? I just don't think PGI has responded to either of these points.

Ever.

[Nightbird]

I hope this event kills all talk of multiple buckets unless we get 1000 people playing FP during peak times minimum...

[Nightbird]

Idea: Turn seige map gauss cannon generators into domination zones to disable them instead of destroying them. Try this on one map to start, to fit within scope of one month ideas.

Reasoning:
1. This helps attackers in that you no longer need to shoot at gens, just get close enough to them and keep defenders out and not get damaged. You can even hide behind the gens to force defenders to come out. Defenders do not get a chance to flip gens back.
2. This helps defenders in that it's no longer possible to gen rush, as long as you're contesting the zone the timer doesn't tick down. Minimum time to 'rush' is the timer on the 3 gens (taken down simultaneously) and the timer on the gun.

Thoughts?

[Husker Dude]

I think that would increase my own personal enjoyment by quite a lot, but I go back and forth on this a little; while I think that there are some teams who abuse the gen rush, doing it every match no matter the opponent, in general I think defenders don't need to be handed another advantage, and the threat of a gen rush can keep an overwhelming defense force a bit more honest.
I think you were in the match last night, where we lost because most of the team pushed out to the enemy drop zone to farm and couldn't eject to stop the lights rushing in through the other gate? I feel like we got greedy and deserved to lose.

[Marquis De Lafayette]

One month improvement:

1. Never hold a FW event during a nearly 2 week, 100 loot bag QP event
2. If giving loot bags in FW: Either don't give loot bags for scouting, give more than 2 loot bags for invasion. or make additional and worthwhile invasion rewards (as part of the event) to those that take the time during the event to do Invasion.