![](https://static.mwomercs.com/forums//public/style_images/master/icon_users.png)
![](https://static.mwomercs.com/img/house/merc-corps.png)
Zero Mention Of Cw At Mechcon....
#1
Posted 10 December 2017 - 09:39 AM
Yes I am excited about Solaris, no I don't give a crap about silly bolt ons that will certainly be over priced as well as useless.
To have absolutely nothing said about CW and its future is more than a little disappointing.
#2
Posted 10 December 2017 - 09:49 AM
tker 669, on 10 December 2017 - 09:39 AM, said:
Yes I am excited about Solaris, no I don't give a crap about silly bolt ons that will certainly be over priced as well as useless.
To have absolutely nothing said about CW and its future is more than a little disappointing.
But were getting to put plastic swords and party hats on our mechs! Thats alot more important. Lol
#4
Posted 10 December 2017 - 09:54 AM
![:(](https://static.mwomercs.com/forums//public/style_emoticons/default/sad.png)
#5
Posted 10 December 2017 - 11:08 AM
#6
Posted 10 December 2017 - 11:56 AM
Battletech has not had an official territorial control element since EA bought out and destroyed the highly successful and loved multi-player Battletech creators almost twenty years ago.
![Posted Image](http://www.localditch.com/mechwarrior/mpbt/shot1big.jpg)
QP is a dead end with no long term cash income potential. There are only four weight classes and a narrow selection of meta. People only buy new mechs because of powercreep and that is a bubble that will soon reach its max and burst. After the Rifleman IIC, Warhammer IIC and Bane you really can't add anything meaningful absent powerful quirking that will be worth a damn.
How were sales of the Uziel and Thanatos? I am guessing below expectations. Don't fool yourself people weren't nostalgic for the Mad Cat Mk II, they were desirous of the raw power.
Look at FP though. I bought ten Battlemaster-2Cs in expectation of fighting on known maps under a variety ranges and temperatures. If I only played QP that purchase would have never happened. Why is PGI not developing their income through mechbay sales? Long ago they said this was an important source of revenue. Since then they very unwisely eliminated the three variant requirement which was completely unrelated to the implementation of the skill tree.
FP is the only mode that promotes mass mech purchasing. If they change the tonnage I need to be prepared. If they lock equipment behind faction exclusivity I need to be prepared. QP is without soul or long term enjoyment. How many mechs will a casual collect before coming bored? My guess is a dozen not the hundreds I have carely collected in desperate anticipation of all out community warfare.
Edited by Spheroid, 10 December 2017 - 12:07 PM.
#7
Posted 10 December 2017 - 12:43 PM
#8
Posted 10 December 2017 - 01:34 PM
I don't see a path forward for FP, until and unless PGI appoints a community manager/producer specifically for the mode, and empowers them to make decisions, and provides them with the dev resources to make changes.
I predict FP will continue to limp along on life support, especially if Solaris proves popular.
#9
Posted 10 December 2017 - 01:51 PM
r4zen, on 10 December 2017 - 01:34 PM, said:
Will Solaris be popular? I suppose some very high-skill players will enjoy duking it out to achieve the top of the leaderboards. But it seems like that'd be a relatively small number of players who'd commit to it long term.
Vs say a fully-realised FP with an actual economy, logistics, and an actual reason to capture planets and territory, and fight for a particular House loyalty, etc.
#10
Posted 10 December 2017 - 02:49 PM
Appogee, on 10 December 2017 - 01:51 PM, said:
Vs say a fully-realised FP with an actual economy, logistics, and an actual reason to capture planets and territory, and fight for a particular House loyalty, etc.
Yep. People don't get that Solaris, as 1 v 1 and 2 v 2 will be brutal and unforgiving of bad builds and mistakes in a way that makes pug v premade FW look tame. Bad players or people in bad mech will lose every single match against even average players.
It'll be brutal. Going to love it.
#11
Posted 10 December 2017 - 03:01 PM
Appogee, on 10 December 2017 - 01:51 PM, said:
Vs say a fully-realised FP with an actual economy, logistics, and an actual reason to capture planets and territory, and fight for a particular House loyalty, etc.
I'm just as biased as you are, in terms of preferring something with depth - however, the numbers don't lie. FP currently has at best, 10% of the gamewide monthly active population dropping semi regularly. That's literally tens of thousands of players that never touch FP on a monthly basis. Even if FP were vastly improved, I don't think it's likely that we would more than double that.
Depending, obviously, on implementation (and PGI also obviously doesn't have the best track record here), I think it's very likely that Solaris will be at least as popular as FP, and likely moreso. And because it's the shiny new toy, it's likely to get all of the limited attention paid to MWO until MW:5 release paid to it anyway. Plus all the incentives to play the mode that PGI will likely throw in ... yeah, FP is toast.
EDIT: After thinking about it more for a minute, my basic thought is that someone who is tired of the banality of QP will now have a lower investment option than FP, and I think that appeals to the majority of the MWO playerbase.
Edited by r4zen, 10 December 2017 - 03:04 PM.
#12
Posted 10 December 2017 - 03:14 PM
Sadly I was correct. IMO PGI have given up on FP. Which if true they may as well just shut it down and put those of us with a forlorn hope for something better out of our misery.
I tolerate QP on occasion because finding FP matches these days is just too much work. Particularly during OC where I live. Random events like Luthien and Tharkad are about the only time I FP play now.
As for Solaris, PGI can shove it where the sun don't shine. Never wanted it. Certainly didn't invest any money in MWO for it and won't be playing it. I can see it devolving to either long range poke fests or more likely up close and personal SRM bombers with massive alphas that will be over 10 seconds after the mechs get in range. People will spend more time in the loading screen than in the actual match.
Edited by slide, 10 December 2017 - 03:20 PM.
#13
Posted 10 December 2017 - 05:40 PM
After 5 years I should have gotten used to it though.
#14
Posted 10 December 2017 - 05:59 PM
Johnathan Tanner, on 10 December 2017 - 09:49 AM, said:
Hold your horses Tanner, as long as I cannot put on an apron like the fella below me on my annihilator these party hats and plastic swords won't do at all!
![Posted Image](http://media2.intoday.in/indiatoday/images/Photo_gallery/3_052715102822.jpg)
#15
Posted 10 December 2017 - 06:03 PM
No mention of FW is disappointing but not unexpected. I think pgi gave up on it a long time ago.
#16
Posted 10 December 2017 - 06:36 PM
MischiefSC, on 10 December 2017 - 11:08 AM, said:
My guess would be, the job was supposed to be well done by phase 4. Since phase 3 was botched horriby...phase 4 was partially wasted as a regrouping and retreating phase.
Kinda feel PGI is trying to distance itself because it sounds like Solaris is its own thing rather than a button inside of CW. (you know, that planet called Solaris that says "planetary information unknown" like all the rest.
#17
Posted 10 December 2017 - 07:04 PM
Wolfways, on 10 December 2017 - 06:03 PM, said:
No mention of FW is disappointing but not unexpected. I think pgi gave up on it a long time ago.
im gonna hold opinion until i see it. I think PGI has a better chance of hitting a home run with Solaris. It isnt as ambitious
#18
Posted 10 December 2017 - 07:13 PM
Please PGI, if you are reading this, invest in FP and lets put together a new roadmap for it.
#20
Posted 10 December 2017 - 07:31 PM
Charles Sennet, on 10 December 2017 - 07:13 PM, said:
Please PGI, if you are reading this, invest in FP and lets put together a new roadmap for it.
PGI probably thinks CW is a ghost town after Solaris, else Solaris resources would have gone into CW.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users