831 replies to this topic

[vidjahgames]

Instead of making it 8 v 8 in QP, just limit the max group size to 8.

More groups (instead of more buckets) = less wait time
Smaller groups = slightly less imbalance
Less work and fewer changes = spend developer time on stuff that actually matters

Unless the game is dying and we don't know about it, don't bother to overhaul it again. We're all just waiting for MW5 anyway. Just finish that up asap and make it good.

[TheRealKaiAllard]

No! A resounding no! I say go higher. 16 vs 16. More enemies to shoot, more fire to dodge. More players means forcing more teamwork, and strategy. Fewer players mean a more Call of Duty game. Garbage. Look at Solaris and how the 1 v 1 is working out. Not so good, now, huh?

[VXJaeger]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 09 June 2018 - 06:46 AM.
staff abuse, unconstructive

[Erik Krieger]

Brain Cancer, on 08 June 2018 - 11:19 AM, said:

Quite the opposite. A good player usually has to carry.

You didn't get the point. If you are in the team with more bad players, you will lose. Discussion over.

[Erik Krieger]

To make it clearer... if you are in a 2 vs 2 on solaris and fight with a bad teammate against 2 good ones.... you WILL lose... if you fight with 5 bad ones in your team of 100 against a team of 100 good players, the 5 bad in your team don*t matter at all... get it?

[Traumfeuchte]

how about dynamicly matching like 4 veterans vs. 12 rookies

Edited by Traumfeuchte, 09 June 2018 - 01:00 AM.

[Bishop Six]

I voted No.

I think it is better to invest the required resources for this project into something else.

12 vs 12 is one of the few immersive elements for a fps-BT-Online-Shooter. It is 1 company versus 1 other company.

Alpha, Bravo, Charlie Lance. I use Lance commands while Calling and i enjoy this immersion.

"Charlie Lance! You will do a flanking maneuver over H5 in 30 sec!"

"Roger."

So imo better use these resources to work on general improvements for the modes you already have.

For example:
- Better hardware support/usage
- invisible walls
- Server stability / DC-lowering
- Hitregs
- Solaris/QP/FP mode/map overhaul/improving

I am convinced these points would better grind some corners of the game and could lead to better gaming experiences and satisfaction of the players.

Edit:
grammar

Edited by Bishop Six, 09 June 2018 - 02:59 AM.

[TWIAFU]

Nameless King, on 07 June 2018 - 09:26 AM, said:

QP is not training grounds for FP, want to trian go play FP.

FALSE!

Read the warning. Tell you to hone your skills in QP FIRST!

[D V Devnull]

Paul Inouye, on 08 June 2018 - 12:54 PM, said:

Thanks for all the input and discussion folks.

Speaking as best as I can for the Community, "You're Welcome." ... albeit I figure some of them would say, "Speak for yourself, D. V. Devnull!" ... because we both know there are people out there who are just nasty like that.



Anyway, on a more serious note, and due to lack of response to earlier inquiries from others, I have a rather critical question for you... If 8v8 had been implemented as a 'forced' item, what would you (and rather obviously, the rest of PGI's Staff) have done about the "Death Star" (12 Kills) and "Philanthropist" (12 Kill Assists) Achievements in Quick Play? Obviously, it would be that Quick Play could no longer provide a situation for earning those Achievements. So, in order to not permanently cut them off and anger a large chunk of the Community, I would guess something would have to change elsewhere?


~Mr. D. V. "just trying to understand about the 'white elephant' question hiding in the discussion" Devnull

[Too Much Love]

NO.

Why:

1) Step backwards

2) Maps have been already changed to 12x12.

3) In fact the searching time would be longer.

E.g. now I wait 1 min 20 sec to find 12 opponents =6,6 sec for 1 person, after the change I will wait 1 min to find 8 opponents = 7,5 sec for 1 person.

It would be wrong, don't do it.

[Nameless King]

TWIAFU, on 09 June 2018 - 04:31 AM, said:

FALSE!

Read the warning. Tell you to hone your skills in QP FIRST!

Which means nothing.

[Magik Jack]

I'm all for trying 8vs8, but I don't think we can really predict how it might change way matches unfold. Maybe a trial run for 2 or 3 weeks in quickplay would be a good idea, then let people vote? I have this feeling the game would be faster, and people would end up taking more chances. (For example. In 8vs8, is a wolfpack of say 2 or 3 lights or fast mediums more dangerous, or less?). It would be interesting to see.

Edited by Captain Hawkins, 09 June 2018 - 08:02 AM.

[MechWarrior6908891]

Seems not right time for start talking about urbie soccerball by 32 players. I will explain it later.

[Deeber]

I think it's excellent that PGI is asking the playerbase about this potential change. We need more of this, even if it'll sometimes just end up being a discussion, with no immediate changes to the game. This isn't to say that the playerbase should dictate to PGI, but I think that more meaningful consultation will help strengthen the MWO community, and that will certainly be in the game's best interests in the long run.

In my view, what MWO currently needs is stability more than anything else. By that, I mean stability in rules, settings, and so on—the game mechanics. At this point in time, I think that moving Quick Play from 12-vs-12 to 8-vs-8 would create disruption for many players (and create unnecessary additional work for PGI). The more mature a game is, the fewer changes should be necessary. Players should be able to focus on becoming better because they have developed a good 'feel' for the game mechanics, and that can only really happen if the game mechanics are stable. I'm not saying that there should never be any changes; I'd just like to see fewer of them.

As a light pilot, I also have concerns that moving to 8-vs-8 would (as a few others have already mentioned) inherently encourage more 'meta' play—and to be blunt, that means no light mechs. From my own experiences in 4-vs-4 Scouting mode, it just becomes harder to contribute to your team unless you are maximising your firepower and armour by taking a medium mech. To me, Conquest is the only mode where speed/mobility can really make a difference, and even then it will depend in large part on the map.

[Pz_DC]

Yes, please, make it 8v8.
Because:
more players = longer wait times (doesn't matter);
more players = less tactical play and more nascar&mid-rush games because 90% of players don't even heard about "team play";
more players = more load on PC = more lags;
more players = less space on maps = more "mid-map-dogfight";
etc.... But for those who like chaos of 12-12 .. let it be, if they like feel their self in middle of band running somewhere without any reason except "all run this way so I should be with team" let them have , why no?..

[Prototelis]

Add a 16 vs 16 option.

More players = means greater emphasis on map control (you know, tactics). More people to flank and break lines. A lot less lets just run straight into the guys shooting us.

[whiphand]

No. Just please fix FP.

[Xx_M01S7R47JU1C35_xX]

I'm sure it's been mentioned already but I will mention it again just incase it was missed. The only reason I have to vote No, why I voted No, and why I think this would be a horrible change is simple. The less total mechs on the field, the more valuable individual mech tonnage, from firepower and armour, ends up being. Right now a significant majority of players drop in heavies or assaults because they, on average, have more presence on the map and more carry power. If a few players out of the 12 drop as lights it isn't a big deal to the overall firepower and armour distribution of the team because its only 2 to 4 out of 12. 60% to 80% of your team is still high tonnage. If you reduce the match size I feel your going to see a large swing in players moving even further towards heavies and assaults because each individual mech matters more as there are only 2/3rds as many mechs on the field and you can't get away with the urbie squads or locust squads that you normally could. With only 8 mechs on a side if 4 of then drop in locusts, and the other team just fields heavies, you're going to lose that matchup the majority of the time. Plus, everyone wants to feel like they're not detrimental to their team, there is less of an opportunity to drop as a light when you're expected to carry at least 1/8th of your team's weight, instead of 1/12th.

This change will disproportionately push the quickplay community in to heavier mechs, and I have no doubt we would see a queue with 80% of players in heavies or assaults.

[JohnnyWayne]

Limit group size to 4 and make matches of flexible sizes: 4, 8 and 12. Everyone wanting bigger sized groups can play comp or FW.

[Soulless86]

I've had one faction game in three weeks, where as quick play takes less time to find than a solarias game.
If anything increase game sizes, make larger maps and allow respawn and load-out selection during a match.

I long for a battlefield style game with mechs and the mechlab.

Edited by Soulless86, 10 June 2018 - 05:51 AM.