415 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

well as a compromise we could just make the smaller maps 8v8 and the larger maps 12v12.

get rid of map voting. have maps/gamemodes picked randomly. and the game just fills in however many players the map allows.

that at least fixes the issues with 12v12 on the smaller maps that have no business being 12v12.

I would be fine with that too.

Edited by Khobai, 11 March 2018 - 02:44 PM.

[kuma8877]

I'd be outright down for changes like that.

[Mystere]

kuma8877, on 11 March 2018 - 09:56 AM, said:

If there is a switch to 8v8, there better be some graphics upgrades and lock-tight networking fixes to herald the switch, ...

I'll just add those to the following list:

• inverse kinematics
  
• collisions
  
• switchable ammo
  
• delayed convergence
  
• logistics
  
• repair and rearm
  
• community warfare
  
• etc., etc., etc.

kuma8877, on 11 March 2018 - 09:56 AM, said:

... otherwise the greater gaming community WILL look at MWO and think the title is regressing and dying (goodbye potential new players). It's human nature to do so, so do you have a plan to overcome those perceptions?

Nah! 8v8 will attract legions of new players and expand MWO.

Edited by Mystere, 11 March 2018 - 03:33 PM.

[Mystere]

Imperius, on 11 March 2018 - 11:48 AM, said:

That’s ok, the ones who left because 12v12 will come back to fill that assumption hole.

Yeah, as if MWO's biggest turn off was really 12v12.

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 11 March 2018 - 12:46 PM, said:

75% of players who voted in the poll said they wanted 8v8...

What poll? The one with around 200 voters? That poll?

Khobai, on 11 March 2018 - 12:46 PM, said:

whats your solution if people who want 8v8 quit because the game stays 12v12?

75% of players who voted in the poll said they wanted 8v8...

why is it okay to ignore what a 75% majority wants? but ignoring a 25% minority suddenly isnt okay? youre not really making sense.

honestly anyone who hasnt quit the game by now, isnt going to quit over something trivial like 12v12 going back to 8v8. PGI needs to side with the majority on this one. Its what will make the most people happy.

certainly theres no reason we cant try 8v8 and if it doesnt work out bring back 12v12...

Did any of these return (or even arrive at all)?

• inverse kinematics
  
• collisions
  
• switchable ammo
  
• delayed convergence
  
• logistics
  
• repair and rearm

Edited by Mystere, 11 March 2018 - 03:44 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

What poll? The one with around 200 voters? That poll?

200 voters is actually pretty good representation considering theres only about 1200 players on at a time

[GoatHILL]

Ouch. Did I personally attack Imperius? If so it was not meant that way unless saying 8v8 sucked is a personal attack then yea I guess I did.

As to my stats I don't think I've claimed to be anything but average at best.

[SFC174]

Imperius, on 11 March 2018 - 12:20 PM, said:

You’re assuming people will leave so I countered you crap assumption with the exact opposite. Weird how that just worked and you called your own comment a disaster. Hence why I called it “assumption hole.”

It's not an assumption if it's true. If I was forced to play FW for 12v12, I'm pretty sure I'd call it quits. Wouldn't be the only reason, but a last straw sort of thing. Now maybe you can go find me someone who will only come back and play if the game goes to 8v8.

This whole argument for 8v8 or 12v12 is pure conjecture. No one has any proof that 8v8 will improve anything other than wait time in edge cases. There are so many other issues this game needs to resolve first.

Oh, and don't stat shame. No need to be a d**k to make a point if you have an actual argument.

[Khobai]

Quote

This whole argument for 8v8 or 12v12 is pure conjecture. No one has any proof that 8v8 will improve anything other than wait time in edge cases. There are so many other issues this game needs to resolve first.

the game was 8v8 before it was 12v12. and it was better. how is that not proof?

[SFC174]

Khobai, on 11 March 2018 - 05:32 PM, said:

the game was 8v8 before it was 12v12. and it was better. how is that not proof?

LOL. Really? You believe it was better. Someone else does not. Who is right? Define better first. Then gather your data (oops, can't do that unless PGI gives us some help).

Never mind that the game is a helluva lot different now than it was then. How are you going to isolate the effects of match size vs. everything else?

I'm not trying to poke you here, just saying that the idea of better is so subjective that you're going to have massive disagreement unless you can get everyone to agree to what criteria define better in the first place.

What I'm saying is that there are far bigger problems in this game than number of players that should be resolved before we open the can of worms that changing match size will be. Those bigger problems have been mentioned at length already. Pick any 3 and work on them first. Please.

[GoatHILL]

He can stat shame me all he wants man does not bother me I was more upset that he thought I was attacking him personally.

[Imperius]

SFC174, on 11 March 2018 - 05:26 PM, said:

It's not an assumption if it's true. If I was forced to play FW for 12v12, I'm pretty sure I'd call it quits. Wouldn't be the only reason, but a last straw sort of thing. Now maybe you can go find me someone who will only come back and play if the game goes to 8v8.

This whole argument for 8v8 or 12v12 is pure conjecture. No one has any proof that 8v8 will improve anything other than wait time in edge cases. There are so many other issues this game needs to resolve first.

Oh, and don't stat shame. No need to be a d**k to make a point if you have an actual argument.

I will stat shame anyone who decides to use personal attacks on me. So bug off.

It’s not pure conjecture we played 8v8! Did you?

Edited by Imperius, 11 March 2018 - 06:32 PM.

[Scout Derek]

Mystere, on 11 March 2018 - 03:40 PM, said:

What poll? The one with around 200 voters? That poll?

Actually it has 300+ now. That's a pretty good amount.

[SFC174]

Imperius, on 11 March 2018 - 06:18 PM, said:

I will stat shame anyone who decides to use personal attacks on me. So bug off.

It’s not pure conjecture we played 8v8! Did you?

Looks like you deleted the stat shame attack, so.....

And whether you played 8v8 in the past is not relevant to the discussion of which team size is better for the game today. Different game, different player base, etc., etc. You want me to believe 8v8 is better based upon your fond recollections of the past. Sorry, but "the good old days" argument holds no weight, even if I actually knew you, let alone you being an anonymous handle in a forum.

If you really want 8v8, you're going to have to make a logical, fact based argument to convince people. Otherwise it's just a preference. You have yours, I have mine, and changing the status quo on such an apparent hot button issue entails more business risk than continuing as is - IMO.

[Imperius]

SFC174, on 11 March 2018 - 07:33 PM, said:

Looks like you deleted the stat shame attack, so.....

And whether you played 8v8 in the past is not relevant to the discussion of which team size is better for the game today. Different game, different player base, etc., etc. You want me to believe 8v8 is better based upon your fond recollections of the past. Sorry, but "the good old days" argument holds no weight, even if I actually knew you, let alone you being an anonymous handle in a forum.

If you really want 8v8, you're going to have to make a logical, fact based argument to convince people. Otherwise it's just a preference. You have yours, I have mine, and changing the status quo on such an apparent hot button issue entails more business risk than continuing as is - IMO.

Check the poll if you want to keep 12v12 you’re going to have to prove why it’s better than 8v8 that most us want back.

There will be an official poll going up as per Russ about it.

We have made plenty of logical good reasons why 8v8 is better. The only thing I’ve got from pro 12v12 is “it’s fun fur me”, sorry it’s not fun for most of us who knew we never should have left 8v8.

I only deleted it because it got cleared up in the DM. I will defend myself how I see fit on these forums. I have had zero faith in the mods since the MK II days.

Edited by Imperius, 11 March 2018 - 08:02 PM.

[SFC174]

Imperius, on 11 March 2018 - 07:58 PM, said:

Check the poll if you want to keep 12v12 you’re going to have to prove why it’s better than 8v8 that most us want back.

There will be an official poll going up as per Russ about it.

We have made plenty of logical good reasons why 8v8 is better. The only thing I’ve got from pro 12v12 is “it’s fun fur me”, sorry it’s not fun for most of us who knew we never should have left 8v8.

I don't care about a poll. A poll is feelings. A poll is opinion. I don't ask you to value my opinion over yours, don't ask me to value yours over mine. No one, including you, has given any logical reasons why 8v8 would be better except wait times in edge cases (when I say edge case I mean it would only impact a small number of players at any given time who are waiting for a match because of too small a population).

Your case for why it would be better is full of unfounded and unprovable assumptions. I don't doubt that you believe, strongly, that 8v8 will be better. But you can't prove it. The reason you need to come up with something more than unproven assumptions is that 12v12 is the status quo, it isn't broken (if you think it is, prove it), and changing it entails risk to the player base - a fragile beast if there ever was one. We've all seen what happens when PGI makes changes that upset a significant portion of the player base.

A PTS for 8v8 makes sense, but we also know that the rate of participation in those is dismal. I remember when they did the Civil War tech PTS it would take me 5-10 minutes or more of wait time just to get a 4v4 match. That's why Russ originally proposed a 2 week trial on the regular server for 8v8 - he knew it wouldn't get any play on PTS. But I suspect he also worried it would tank game participation during the trial period as well.

TL:DR - For me, it simply comes down to this - a major change like 8v8 will upset many people. I _believe_ that if PGI makes the change, it will cause more players to leave the game. I don't think the game can take an increased rate of player loss over what it is already suffering. All the 8v8 proponents are still playing the game and frankly I don't see them leaving if nothing changes. It's that simple for me.

[Imperius]

SFC174, on 11 March 2018 - 08:16 PM, said:

I don't care about a poll. A poll is feelings. A poll is opinion. I don't ask you to value my opinion over yours, don't ask me to value yours over mine. No one, including you, has given any logical reasons why 8v8 would be better except wait times in edge cases (when I say edge case I mean it would only impact a small number of players at any given time who are waiting for a match because of too small a population).

Your case for why it would be better is full of unfounded and unprovable assumptions. I don't doubt that you believe, strongly, that 8v8 will be better. But you can't prove it. The reason you need to come up with something more than unproven assumptions is that 12v12 is the status quo, it isn't broken (if you think it is, prove it), and changing it entails risk to the player base - a fragile beast if there ever was one. We've all seen what happens when PGI makes changes that upset a significant portion of the player base.

A PTS for 8v8 makes sense, but we also know that the rate of participation in those is dismal. I remember when they did the Civil War tech PTS it would take me 5-10 minutes or more of wait time just to get a 4v4 match. That's why Russ originally proposed a 2 week trial on the regular server for 8v8 - he knew it wouldn't get any play on PTS. But I suspect he also worried it would tank game participation during the trial period as well.

TL:DR - For me, it simply comes down to this - a major change like 8v8 will upset many people. I _believe_ that if PGI makes the change, it will cause more players to leave the game. I don't think the game can take an increased rate of player loss over what it is already suffering. All the 8v8 proponents are still playing the game and frankly I don't see them leaving if nothing changes. It's that simple for me.

Dude you’re so wrong you’re not even worth arguing with.

I’ll drop one 100% fact (again) since obviously you’re new and didn’t read the thread.

8v8 has better client side performance than 12v12.

Type this into google search and educate yourself a bit.

Site:mwomercs.com 12v12 2013

Also I will be making a new topic about this tomorrow or Tuesday. We’ve already tested 8v8. It was better. I don’t care if you didn’t. You still haven’t provided one fact for 12v12!

Check the leaderboard... I haven’t been playing.

Edited by Imperius, 11 March 2018 - 08:38 PM.

[SFC174]

Imperius, on 11 March 2018 - 08:35 PM, said:

Dude you’re so wrong you’re not even worth arguing with.

I’ll drop one 100% fact (again) since obviously you’re new and didn’t read the thread.

8v8 has better client side performance than 12v12.

Type this into google search and educate yourself a bit.

Site:mwomercs.com 12v12 2013

Also I will be making a new topic about this tomorrow or Tuesday. We’ve already tested 8v8. It was better. I don’t care if you didn’t. You still haven’t provided one fact for 12v12!

Check the leaderboard... I haven’t been playing.

Yet you keep arguing......I'm wrong, but you don't provide proof or evidence. Posturing without purpose.

Again, I don't need to provide justification for 12v12. You're the one who wants to change the status quo.

As for your client side performance tidbit, how is it making the game better? Seriously, going from 80 fps to 90 fps won't change the game a bit for me. It's another edge case argument, to help out people with really old hardware. I applaud you for at least bringing it up though. Point given.

But here's the rub - the matchmaker. Some 8v8 proponents think it will make matchmaking better. I disagree and its my #1 problem with a change to 8v8. Why? Because the problem with the matchmaker isn't the fact that it opens the floodgates to lower tier players in times of low population. The problem is that even a pure Tier1 match includes players of vastly different skill who are all treated equally because they are in Tier1. Today, if I get a match with two top 100 or top 500 players on one team, the other team is going to have a very hard time winning. It can be done, but its rare. In an 8v8 match getting those two players on one team is a guaranteed win.

Until the matchmaker is fixed (meaning new skill rankings that don't group half the player base into Tier1, and proper ratings balance between teams) 8v8 is simply a non-starter. Ignore every other consideration if you like, but that one reason would be enough to make me leave the game if 8v8 is forced upon me.

[Imperius]

Read the thread do a search.

[SFC174]

Imperius, on 11 March 2018 - 09:10 PM, said:

Read the thread do a search.

Read about 10 pages of it. Lots of complaints about frame rate. Clearly not the same sort of problem today or else we'd be hearing about it - a lot. Lot of complaints about Lurmpocapalypse, weapon balance issues, capture times and C-bill earnings. Again, not relevant to the discussion today. Also, given how the 8v8 proponents have pitched it as so much better for gameplay, I saw a rather large number of people who enjoyed and preferred the 12v12 action. Not so cut and dried as the 8v8 crowd would have had me believe. Thanks for posting the link.