89 replies to this topic

[Imperius]

I voted a BIG NO because MWO needs a Engine Update before it needs more wasted development features half implemented because Engine Limitations!

[Novakaine]

PGI seriously needs to restore IS vs IS and Clan vs Clan.
They have totally destroyed and kind of flavor fp had.

[Spheroid]

Imperius, on 25 July 2018 - 02:37 AM, said:

I voted a BIG NO because MWO needs a Engine Update before it needs more wasted development features half implemented because Engine Limitations!

See this is where I disagree. Fundamentally faction warfare is a mechanism that plays out separate from the ingame tactical experience. The choice of engine is irrelevant. The results of a match could have been determined if you were using Netmech in ancient MW2, MGZ with MW3/MW4, old skool MPBT or even pen and paper table top.

The programing that deals with changes in faction territory are separate from the ingame combat engine. That is where the problem is, the strategic level. Unless you disagree. It seems MWO's fighting mechanics are good enough for privately run ladders and tournaments so I don't know why this win loss data can't shape interstellar cartography.

Faction warfare is a hybrid system. Just like any game of Creative Assembly's Total Warfare series is the combination of the real time and the turn based actions, the strategic element doesn't care if you auto-resolved or manually fought the combat phase.

Lets say I am playing a tabletop linked scenario campaign. Does it matter whether a planet is fought at the regimental level using alpha strike or numerous lance sized engagements that are meant to represent the same number of forces deployed? Maybe I don't have time to play one hundred lance sized engagements. I will just approximate it at the grand strategic level using the Succession Wars board game.

What I am getting at is the strategic game is simply an independent module. Spending resources on that module does not undermine its use in a future engine iteration like Unreal. The sooner that work is undertaken the better all future products with such a gamemode will be.

Edited by Spheroid, 25 July 2018 - 01:48 PM.

[SFC174]

I see a lot of maybes which is a rational choice for those with issues with how FP works, but hope that it will improve.

That said, I said "no". As faction play stands, I simply don't want to commit to playing a 4 mech drop deck with the same crew of largely random people. Yes, sometimes I drop with larger groups, but as a largely solo player, the risk of getting stuck in with a low skill/low experience team is too large when I have to go through an entire FP game with them.

At least in Solo I can change mechs, or wait a bit before jumping back into the matchmaker.

If you found a way that I could play a 10 minute match with soloQ style matchmaking that means something in faction play, I'm cool with that (that means 1 mech, no groups, and hopefully an improved matchmaker/skill ranking system).

And no, I don't care for scouting. And I don't like being pigeonholed into playing only Clan or IS mechs at any given time (I'm about 2:1 clan:is in games played, but I like the IS mechs I play). I like variety. I suspect that a lot of people in the game feel the same way much of the time. They simply don't want restrictions on what or when they play. If I choose Clan:Jade Falcon as a faction, and you want my solo games in clan mechs to count toward some FP goals, go for it.

[S O L A I S]

Asym, on 18 July 2018 - 05:33 AM, said:

No. Any video game with teams greater than four becomes Toxic... No. It drove off so many people; to the point PGI "shut it down" and Solaris is the strategic intent. They thought the ePeen guys would flock to S7 !!! What they didn't realize was that it "was the toxic farming and seal clubbing" that was the actual attraction of Faction Play. The power to "control" and make life a misery some really got off on.....

So, players who really liked the team work but abhorred the toxic behaviors left. There was no logical reason to stay and be abused every night... Faction Play is, to this day, a complete and absolute disaster.... You are now reaping what you've all sown......we voted with our keyboards and stopped spending and playing..... I seriously doubt it will be back as many of you want.... If I were the CEO, I would 100% gar-un-tee you it would not be back and if I had a reason to bring it back, there would not be teams > that four pilots.... Sorry.

Again the vast majority of toxicity happening in CW comes from the pugs who are unable to compete. Saying groups of more than four breeds toxicity is abject nonsense. Playing with 12 folks you like and working as a team is about as anti toxic and pro-social as it gets.

As well if people typing stuff out in chat hurts your feels, block them and never have to read their typing again! Personally my block list is huge and my safe space secured easily with a couple of mouse clicks.

The best part of CW is being prepared for the map, having four mechs, and the ability to co-ordinate and actually use strategy.

That you are so anti team, and have been so for quite a while now is a good indication that CW is not meant for you. Groups if even not of the highest skill level have much more success and fun in CW than solo artists and we still have people such as yourself that want every mode to cater to uncoordinated singletons.

[Bishop Six]

S O L A I S, on 25 July 2018 - 09:09 PM, said:

Again the vast majority of toxicity happening in CW comes from the pugs who are unable to compete. Saying groups of more than four breeds toxicity is abject nonsense. Playing with 12 folks you like and working as a team is about as anti toxic and pro-social as it gets.

If i am toxic i would hurt myself because after that long time playing FP these guys are all friends and/or respected enemies. We will meet again for sure!
Its like starting an argument in your relationship, makes no sense^^

S O L A I S, on 25 July 2018 - 09:09 PM, said:

The best part of CW is being prepared for the map, having four mechs, and the ability to co-ordinate and actually use strategy.

Thats the point why QP sucks hard and FP rules!

[HGAK47]

Never really played much of FP I just come to muck about in QP. Im open to the idea I just dont know if I have the time for it all.

[Savage Wolf]

S O L A I S, on 25 July 2018 - 09:09 PM, said:

The best part of CW is being prepared for the map, having four mechs, and the ability to co-ordinate and actually use strategy.

All true. Sadly all that is overshadowed by the following cons:

• No matchmaker
  
• Abysmal payouts for losses
  
• No reason not to play for the winning faction

All resulting in the mode only being worthwhile if you are a top player in an established unit playing for the winning faction. These cons all need to fixed otherwise PGI could create the best game mode ever and people still wouldn't play it. Just add a matchmaker, remove the factions and actually give loses a payout that still makes it worth spending the time to try.

[C E Dwyer]

If bolt ons were removed from this mode of play, I'd probably come back, and play it exclusively, when I had time to give it more than one drop


Though of course if bolt on were removed from Q.P i'd probably spent most my time there in game, as it's far less time intensive.

[Spheroid]

@Cathy: Where are you seeing a blight of bolt-ons? Bolt-ons are a result of playing Solaris and it is well established that is a dead gamemode.

One Kodiak with angle wings is but a tiny minority of all those in the field. I suggest you learn to cope. The death of practical combat aesthetics predates bolt-ons. Hot pink and decals have done far more damage.

[catsonmeth]

FP sucks. 40 minute game mode with no option to back out, if someone does back out that's a permanent disadvantage for a half hour of game, most games are a stomp anyway, if you're PUGing you might as well give up, if you're new you'll try once and never play again, you can't get in through QP, it's supposed to be the big lore-driven part of the game but there's no weight or story at all behind it, and Seige is just ill-conceived and executed poorly in general. It's boring.

The biggest problem is that it's only fun for a small percentage of the top players, so no one else plays, which means there's no one for the top players to play against, so it sucks for everyone, milked whales included.

Scouting is okay, but it still gets bland quick. Kill the other guys, maybe get some of the glowy things after. Everyone plays 55 ton brawlers and no one does any scouting.

[ShaneoftheDead]

I voted "No". In the past, I had fun with Faction Warfare. I remember playing in the Tukayyid's. I remember fighting to hold & liberate Berenson. I remember when my unit liberated Terra. Those days of Glory were fleeting.

Faction Play was dead to me the day they removed the Factions.

Now, I will only play that mode if I am well rewarded for doing so. Like an event that gives away a pile of MC or the equivalent in Mech Bays.

[Imperius]

Spheroid, on 25 July 2018 - 01:46 PM, said:

See this is where I disagree. Fundamentally faction warfare is a mechanism that plays out separate from the ingame tactical experience. The choice of engine is irrelevant. The results of a match could have been determined if you were using Netmech in ancient MW2, MGZ with MW3/MW4, old skool MPBT or even pen and paper table top.

The programing that deals with changes in faction territory are separate from the ingame combat engine. That is where the problem is, the strategic level. Unless you disagree. It seems MWO's fighting mechanics are good enough for privately run ladders and tournaments so I don't know why this win loss data can't shape interstellar cartography.

Faction warfare is a hybrid system. Just like any game of Creative Assembly's Total Warfare series is the combination of the real time and the turn based actions, the strategic element doesn't care if you auto-resolved or manually fought the combat phase.

Lets say I am playing a tabletop linked scenario campaign. Does it matter whether a planet is fought at the regimental level using alpha strike or numerous lance sized engagements that are meant to represent the same number of forces deployed? Maybe I don't have time to play one hundred lance sized engagements. I will just approximate it at the grand strategic level using the Succession Wars board game.

What I am getting at is the strategic game is simply an independent module. Spending resources on that module does not undermine its use in a future engine iteration like Unreal. The sooner that work is undertaken the better all future products with such a gamemode will be.

Any modules like Solaris or FP can not and will not be copy pasted to MWO if it is moved to Unreal. You’re clearly missing my point. It’s completely obvious that doing things on CryEngine takes too long and is too difficult to get things working correctly. A lot of these modules may have been more successful if the engine they were using was more small team friendly. Look at Star Citizen. It literally advertises not to use CryEngine. Way bigger team and budget than MWO. Still nothing to show for it.

Basically I’m saying it’s time for MWO to step up and upgrade proving to the fans it’s not abandoned.

[DarkFhoenix]

Honestly if they removed FP , I would probably lose interest in MWO . Life would be dead boring if all we had was QP and Solaris .

[Bishop Six]

FP is getting a chance:

https://mwomercs.com...52#entry6142352

Vote!

[Appogee]

It's my preferred way to play.

I only QP these days when there's an MC reward.

I won't touch Solaris because my ping puts me at too much of a disadvantage in close range 1v1s.

[Imperius]

I see they don’t care about the long term. Woot for more FP band-aid patches that will “invigorate” the standby players waiting for delivered promises for a couple of weeks.

[Tetatae Squawkins]

I'm aware it's not the purpose of the thread but I'd like to see representing a faction be optionally tied into every aspect of gameplay.

If someone just wants to play solo QP let them choose to rep their faction and contribute in some small way and earn rewards for doing so. Get casual players in the casual gamemodes invested in factions so they don't feel completely left out.

FW/CW should be the core of MWO and everything should feed into it.

[Anjian]

ShaneoftheDead, on 26 July 2018 - 06:55 PM, said:

I voted "No". In the past, I had fun with Faction Warfare. I remember playing in the Tukayyid's. I remember fighting to hold & liberate Berenson. I remember when my unit liberated Terra. Those days of Glory were fleeting.

Faction Play was dead to me the day they removed the Factions.

Now, I will only play that mode if I am well rewarded for doing so. Like an event that gives away a pile of MC or the equivalent in Mech Bays.

The problem is that there are too many factions. Even on games that are built around a faction war premise, you will have only two or three, three in the case of Planetside. Chromehounds, which was a mech game built around the concept of large scale community warfare --- you cannot play this game without joining a squad --- is only built around three factions. And these are games that initially had large player bases.

Its essentially correct to reduce the amount of playing factions into two. However, there should also be some form of internal competition between the internal subfactions, limited events that say pits one internal faction against another, or these internal factions compete with each other on honor points.

Tetatae Squawkins, on 03 August 2018 - 04:31 AM, said:

I'm aware it's not the purpose of the thread but I'd like to see representing a faction be optionally tied into every aspect of gameplay. If someone just wants to play solo QP let them choose to rep their faction and contribute in some small way and earn rewards for doing so. Get casual players in the casual gamemodes invested in factions so they don't feel completely left out. FW/CW should be the core of MWO and everything should feed into it.

Essentially the last sentence is correct. You cannot have too many modes in the game that divides the player base, and this situation is aggravated with a small player base that is shrinking by the month.

One of the most important experiences in a game is to get a match in a short time, and failure for a game to achieve that is a cancerous situation for the game.

[adamts01]

Anjian, on 04 August 2018 - 02:02 AM, said:

You cannot have too many modes in the game that divides the player base, and this situation is aggravated with a small player base that is shrinking by the month. One of the most important experiences in a game is to get a match in a short time, and failure for a game to achieve that is a cancerous situation for the game.

A game as small as this with so many buckets is absolutely insane. They really do need to scale back. Group Que could be deleted an 95% of players wouldn't notice. I'd say the same for Solaris, but it's too new for that. It was such a waste of money. Scouting was a decent idea, but really not much more than another bucket, just a goofy 4v4 for big mediums. RIP lights. I am surprised to hear that PGI is taking another look at CW. I think that mode is the single greatest letdown this community has had, and if they manage to do something cool then a lot of players would return. I'd be happy to check it out. But.... I don't have much faith in that.