1169 replies to this topic

[Bishop Six]

Joshua McEvedy, on 06 August 2018 - 02:33 AM, said:

That's not entirely true. I'm an old drop caller and have had clueless PUGs whine, complain, argue, or simply ignore the calls altogether. During the last PUG match I called last fall, an obviously drunk or high team member who got himself slaughtered actually berated me for his own failure. I don't need that kind of negativity in a game, so I refuse to call PUG matches any more.

Your comment is not untrue.

But the difference is that with my comment i try with to encourage people's own initiative to get a productive part of the team.

It doesn't matter if its true or not, this thread here is for being constructive and productive and to give everyone a positive feeling about FP again.

Or to describe it in your own words: "It's not dead Jim!"

So please focus on suggestions for a better future in FP instead of complaining about the past. One thing is sure: The past is gone and will never come back.

And yes, there are some players with negative attitude, but the majority appreciates teamwork and some callings and that's also true. So focus on that.

For me i learned many things in this thread regarding technical issues and many people here have good ideas. I like that.

I also vote for a better protecting of the drop zones.

There is this argument: "If you have to defend the Drop Zone the match is lost anyways."

Thats true if you only look at pro gamer matches. But there are matches i have seen where you could manage a comeback after 2nd or 3rd wave, even if you already were in your DZ defending after the 1st wave. It is possible. But more important, you can give pugs the chance to not get totally ***** and the possibility that they have more fun even in probably loss.

And thats the way i think we have to go: That casuals can have more fun, not the premades pro gamer.

Edited by Bishop Six, 06 August 2018 - 02:58 AM.

[MurghSharduk]

My (and others) 5 cents:

First, I stopped playing FW for 3 reasons:
1) Premade ROFLstomps, especially 12 EVIL players in Clan mechs.
2) Long match waiting times
3) FW has no deeper meaning or clear goal.

---------------------------------------------------
KISS level changes I propose:

-My big YESSS!!!!! -vote for IS vs IS / Clan vs Clan! (because IS/IS was much more fun than Clam missile- and laservomit -warriors)

-FW match making in one one bucket, but with tick boxes like this:

Drop to:
( ) Scouting
( ) Invasion

( ) IS/Clan
( ) IS/IS or Clan/Clan

ADD STRATEGIC GOAL
--------------------------
-1 month seasons, season win condition: Clan takes Terra. (Depending how late or early it happens, IS would have (or not have) possibility for counter attack.

-Most star systems change hands easily, important systems (faction home planets) would be events, Terra will be major event.

(-Starlanes would be great to create fronts and choke points.)


MERC BALANCING
------------------------
-The more Faction is losing, the better rewards mercenaries would get from it (because of desperation!). And winning side would start cutting paychecks ("We no longer need you, dirty mercs").

In theory could work against lame, honourless hopping to winning side.


EASY TACTICAL CHANGES
---------------------------
-One base only Incursion with Attacker and Defender. Cant think that deleting one base from map would be very difficult.

-Siege maps should have an additional drop point in middle map, which can be captured and recaptured. Helps
with (boring) reinforcing treks AND helps attacker, as defender usually wins.

Pie-in-sky -ideas:
1) Use Solaris maps as base for 2v2 destroy/protect mobile base -missions
2) Copy Rush gamemode from Battlefields, using Siege maps. BF Rush has threes sets of two points, that one side defends and another tries to destroy. Attacker wins when defenders lose all points.

Lore
---------------------------
-Community written background for planets and mechs. Total Win-Win!


BOOSTED REWARDING TO EXPAND FW PLAYERBASE:
-------------------------------
-double 2xCB/XB -rewards, one for 1st match win and second for 1st non-win match with over 150 or 200 match score, to encourage trying.

-Trick that really works in every game ever: Bonuses to Top Performers. Give out c-bills and GXP to top performers in each mach. Have different categories. Examples: MVP, Most Capture Points, Most KMDs, Most AMS Missiles Destroyed, Most Damage taken and Survive, Most Damage done by a Dead Player, Most time spent Over Heated, etc. Make it fun.

LOYALIST REWARDING
------------------------
Non-merc Faction loyalist players should get special prizes, easiest and always usable would be MC. 1MC for win for beginners, something like 5-10 MC for highest ranks. And/or GPX.

[Ensaine]

Ok, back on topic.......first off, thanks Paul for the dialogue ......

On FP improvements, and keeping things to a basic level .......

1: Visible Queue

2: Lobby Voice Chat. This is a must have IMO.

3: Rewards - Some kind of Salvage reward would be nice on top or present rewards......Loken had a good idea ......

4: Trial Mechs - should either NOT be allowed, or, re-made so as to be competitive.....

5: Triggered Sounds - for a minor immersion thing.. "Do NOT let them get another Node" .......type of thing.....

6: Map tweaks. Some maps need a hill flattened out here, and a wall moved there, etc.

7: Unit Coffers - Well, look Paul, every game out there has a hard limit cap on # of members. Time we do the same. What's a good number? I'd say 50. That's up to 4 whole teams per Clan. It's plenty of people.

Several Clans have worked around the cost prohibitive fees by making offshoot clans: 228 IBR. 228 LOL, and what have you......so, I don't see why a cap would get anyone butthurt.

Smaller Units simply can't operate..... My unit, when we play, is down to about 5 people. If we wanted to invite a new guy, it's painful.

Make Guilds/Clans/Units friendly, so people can band together easily.

My Unit is up to 500k to invite someone new. That needs to stop.

[ADI84000]

just give a random quality supply cache to everyone who wins a FP match , and 1 every 2 games lost for the ones who loose, and people will have an incentive to play it more, its like random salvage

[Bud Crue]

Paul,

Another thing you wrote up above, that has been percolating over the weekend is this:

Paul Inouye, on 02 August 2018 - 10:19 AM, said:

When it comes to new maps/modes, this is a resource issue we have to deal with here and would have to be something monumental in reception before it would gain traction.

-Paul

Can you elaborate on this point as well?

My hesitation to propose anything, given your comment comes from things like, that from my perspective an overwhelming majority of FP players have been asking for things like an adjustment to Boreal for at least as long as the map has existed. To a lesser extent doing something with the choke points on Vitric. Given the lack of movement on these seemingly near universally raised and agreed to issues, what exactly are you looking for from us in order for our map/mode ideas to, as you say, “gain traction”? Are you looking for very specific type proposals like https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__6144123, for example, that then would need a zillion likes to reach your level of monumental acceptance or is it just a question of what the development team feels is universally accepted as being within their immediate capabilities, or something totally different?

Again, I am not trying to be a pain here or “edgy”, but trying to understand how to best approach your comments and eventually this assumed FP update process in order to get as many of, and/or most useful changes, that the majority of us want into the game. If map/mode changes are in fact not within the realm of possible FP changes, please just say so, so we don’t waste your time proposing them. If they are in fact possible, please give an example of the sort of change/addition you have in mind and how we illustrate to you the level of acceptance necessary to get it done.

[Hanky Spam]

Ensaine, on 06 August 2018 - 03:39 AM, said:

7: Unit Coffers - Well, look Paul, every game out there has a hard limit cap on # of members. Time we do the same. What's a good number? I'd say 50. That's up to 4 whole teams per Clan. It's plenty of people.

50 is way too low.
If a hard-limit should be introduced I hope that it will be at least at 100 members.

Ensaine, on 06 August 2018 - 03:39 AM, said:

My Unit is up to 500k to invite someone new. That needs to stop.

500k Cbills?
That really isn't much. You earn this money even by loosing a FP match or win 2-3 QP matches (without premium time) which should be about the same payout...

[Cato Zilks]

Or to put the Boreal Vault problem very simply. Paul, literally everybody that plays FW says some variant of "aw, ****!" when they see they are assigned attack on Boreal Vault. It is universally agreed upon that it is not a balanced map. If you can spare some resources to make map adjustments let us know and we can get a thread going specifically on what slight modifications would best help balance that map out.

[Vellron2005]

OK, here's what needs to be done to Faction Play.. simple, yet, doable changes:

1) Factions - make them distinctive, immersive, and important. Award certain mechs to their lore-given factions. Make those mechs cheaper for loyalists.Make them more expensive for Mercs and even more expensive for Freelancers. Sort of like Timberwolves belong to Clan Wolf, Ebon Jaguars to Smoke Jaguars, Kodiaks to Ghost Bears and alike.. Give mercs better contract bonuses and give freelancers better freedom to switch factions.

2) Planetary value - Make certain planets dictate the prices of mechs and equipment. Holding some planets makes mechs cheaper. Holding others makes some equipment cheaper. Holding supply route planets gives extra cbills or even MC.

3) Careers - loyalists should get different bonuses from Mercs, and freelancers, but make them distinctive, and immersive. Freelancers should be able to change factions like we do now, no penalties. Mercs with a week long contract. Loyalists with penalties.

4) Payouts - faction play payouts and bonuses should reflect number of held planets. If your faction holds many planets, especially planets with mech factories and supply planets (described above), you should get better payouts and bonuses.

Coupled with point 2), this should create a player effort-driven economy. Because if say, Clan Wolf players disregard FP, and get pushed to their homeworld, their QP payouts will suddenly be 30% lessened, and their new mechs 30% more expensive.

Divide planet worth between large factions like Davion and Stiener, and smaller factions like the Clans equally, with strategic planets being worth more than others, dictating prices and payouts.

5) Conquering planets - Targeted planet is voted for out of the nearest planets available - the planet chosen is then attacked in a very similar fashion as the Kurita vs Davion event is played - in stages, with locked-in game modes. Game modes determined by progression bar, map determined randomly. IS vs IS, Clan vs Clan and IS vs Clan fighting available.

6) Maps - all current invasion and scouting maps and modes available, plus, return of the counter-attack mode. Adjust certain maps (like Tourmaline) to discourage spawn camping. Remove O-gens on doors, and make the doors themselves destructible (because new players instinctively shoot the door, I've witnessed this many many times). You can do that now, that you know how to make destructible walls.

7) Map modifications - Make the o-gens and Omega targetable and hit-able by LRM, but only with TAG or NARC. Would make LRM boats and scouts a lot more useful on many invasion maps.

8) Events & rewards - Make more events like Kurita vs Davion, stop gearing most events towards QP.

9) Immersion - Appoint staff members as official "faction leadership", and have them post and be active in the forums and in-game. Have daily messages and news from the front be posted. Have these official leaders actually drop-command. Like, literally have people sit in a PGI office or where ever, behind an account with a famous name, like saaay, Victor Steiner-Davion, and have that person drop into FP and have Drop Command immediately assumed by them, and have them actually directing drops. Multiple people can use the same celebrity account. We need not know their names. But they need to project a role-play persona and leadership, geared towards making drops more fun and immersive. Kinda like Heaven Kendrick style.. These individuals must apply all tactics and play styles, not dissing on LRMs or snipers, or brawlers or whatever. Not promote cookie-cutter builds, or brown tactics like Linebacker rushes. Simply assume command by default once in-match, and drop command from there.

10) Make maximum group size in faction play 4-6 (dependent on playtesting). That would at least curb some big units from stomping pugs.

11) Immersion upgrade - When joining a faction, immediately make all faction-specific paints, decals, cammos and cockpit items available for all owned mechs. If possible, make the homescreen reflect faction chosen (faction banners in the 3D mechbay, like those that used to be on invasion doors). When you leave the faction, re-lock and remove all installed faction regalia (except already owned items). Mercs get merc-specific items, decals and cammos. Freelancers get freelancer specific items, decals and cammos.

If a player is switching factions, and saaaay, has a mech with all cockpit items in Clan Wolf regalia (that he does not already own before this change), Wolf cammo and painted in wolf paints, with "clan Wolf" decals applied, and is switching to Jade Falcon, immediately replace all installed items from wolf to jade falcon regalia. If he is switching to IS, and they are installed on a clan mech, simply remove them.

I believe you guys can do this, because, right now, forum avatars reflect factions that we belong to, and reflect changes, even reflect merc or loyalist, or freelancer.. so why not do the same for mechs and mech vanity items? Would increase immersion into a faction..

12) Make additional mercenary factions according to lore. Let us be Wolf's Dragoons, Death legions, Kell hounds, Waco's Rangers and alike..

So basically, make Faction Play the "Campaign" mode, meat of the game, and QP the "arcade mode" side dish, with comp and Solaris for additional competitiveness

Edited by Vellron2005, 06 August 2018 - 05:50 AM.

[Marius Evander]

Joshua McEvedy, on 06 August 2018 - 02:24 AM, said:

That's been tried a couple of years back and it failed miserably. The separation of queues lasted less than a week, resulting mostly in ghost drops in both queues.

What was tried did not bare ANY SEMBLANCE to splitting solo and grouped, please refer to my previous posts page 10 onwards, read a thread before you post in it please.

[Ensaine]

Hanky Spam, on 06 August 2018 - 04:13 AM, said:

50 is way too low.
If a hard-limit should be introduced I hope that it will be at least at 100 members.

Why? Fielding up to 4 complete teams isn't enough? LOL ......

Hanky Spam, on 06 August 2018 - 04:13 AM, said:

500k Cbills?
That really isn't much. You earn this money even by loosing a FP match or win 2-3 QP matches (without premium time) which should be about the same payout...

Not the point. The fact that I have the $$, and YOU have the $$, how friendly is this to newer players? This cost is one reason Units died off, the overall game mode aside.......the cost to recruit a new member should be 0. Taxing a player over what should be a core element of the game is not good.. at all......

[Horseman]

Joshua McEvedy, on 06 August 2018 - 02:33 AM, said:

That's not entirely true. I'm an old drop caller and have had clueless PUGs whine, complain, argue, or simply ignore the calls altogether. During the last PUG match I called last fall, an obviously drunk or high team member who got himself slaughtered actually berated me for his own failure. I don't need that kind of negativity in a game, so I refuse to call PUG matches any more

PUGs are always salty... Yesterday had one whine several sentences along the lines of "worst team ever, don't try to defend it" because he took a barely mobile deck to a Conquest match (which for reasons that should be self-apparent had most of us going light / medium and going for early caps).

Rizzi Kell, on 06 August 2018 - 02:57 AM, said:

i have seen so many FP-games with 12 Anihilator or Assins... nobody can solve such dropps, just allow max 3-5 Assaults, 4-5 medium ad heavy and 3-5 ligts same time at the battlefield of each fraction. If there are only 12 assaults left in the drop, 7 have to wait until an other one died.

Monochassis waves are typically one-trick ponies - they depend on the map and mode, and may be quite vulnerable to certain enemy compositions.
Let this sink in for a moment: if you're facing a group with 12 identical mechs, you're most likely up against a 12-man premade and the reason they're kicking your teeth in is because they know how to coordinate their efforts, not because they run identical mechs.
You can no more hope to nerf teamwork than you can hope to nerf skill.

Ensaine, on 06 August 2018 - 03:39 AM, said:

3: Rewards - Some kind of Salvage reward would be nice on top or present rewards......Loken had a good idea ......

Salvage is currently abstracted into C-Bills.

Quote

Trial Mechs - should either NOT be allowed, or, re-made so as to be competitive.....

The current trials should not be allowed, period.

Quote

My Unit is up to 500k to invite someone new. That needs to stop.

Last I've heard, my unit pays about 20 mil for each invite ticket.

Paul Inouye, on 03 August 2018 - 04:27 PM, said:

I thought I mentioned the issues with a unit inventory system and after going back through all my posts.. I didn't.
The idea isn't a problem. It's something we discussed very early on in development. The technological impact/development time on backend systems is the problem. [insert picture of that guy with fuzzy hair holding his hands apart]... the backend systems that control player inventory/store purchases/transaction services/player profile data etc is a massive nest of hardwired connections. While this may seem like something that is just as simple as adding a database row to the Unit ID, it's really a lot more than that.
Let's walk through the notion that you want to buy a 'Mech for a Unit's Inventory.
Issue 1: Who's buying the 'Mech? Simple answer.. Unit Leader. Well, here's the problem... the backend services says player "Uber General Leader Guy" has just bought a Urbie K9. I'll put it in his inventory. Well that's no good.. it has to go into the Unit Inventory. There's no itemID injection path for this behavior.
Issue 2: Did Uber General Leader Guy buy it himself out of his pocket? Did you want to use Unit Coffer Money? There's no interface or transaction path (both store and the actual currency tracking/payment system) for this decision tree either.
Issue 3: Who owns the 'Mech? UnitID owns the 'Mech! UnitID does not have an inventory like a PlayerID does. On top of that, CSRs will need detailed audit information for who bought it, for what Unit, what currencies were used, time of transaction etc etc.

Okay, that's a definite "no" on the subject of "unit-owned mechs" - with the emphasis on the ownership and inventory being the actual issue.
Do the same problems prevent "unit-defined trial mechs" that would only be accessible to unit members?
(Yes, I can see issues with such a setup, with a few ways to mitigate them. For now just wondering if that would be at all possible before going into details )

[Peter2k]

Horseman, on 06 August 2018 - 05:58 AM, said:

The current trials should not be allowed, period.



Okay, that's a definite "no" on the subject of "unit-owned mechs" - with the emphasis on the ownership and inventory being the actual issue.
Do the same problems prevent "unit-defined trial mechs" that would only be accessible to unit members?
(Yes, I can see issues with such a setup, with a few ways to mitigate them. For now just wondering if that would be at all possible before going into details )

Totally agree on the first one

On group mechs and inventory
A few pages ago I was saying have custom FP trial mechs, if they want to keep the trial mech idea
Just have the community provide the codes for the mechlab

Optimally the unit leader could pick a deck from FP optimized mechs
Most optimal for each map (even mode)

Unit coffers could be used to set a standard camo and colors the trial mechs will appear ingame
Also having more decks saved up for personal preferences

For instance as a workaround around to the inventory not keeping track of such things, unit leader could pick a mech in his inventory that will be used as a template for the camo and colors

Edited by Peter2k, 06 August 2018 - 06:41 AM.

[Joshua McEvedy]

Bishop Six, on 06 August 2018 - 02:57 AM, said:

So please focus on suggestions for a better future in FP instead of complaining about the past. One thing is sure: The past is gone and will never come back.

Heh. We'll see...

[Joshua McEvedy]

Cadoazreal, on 06 August 2018 - 04:42 AM, said:

What was tried did not bare ANY SEMBLANCE to splitting solo and grouped, please refer to my previous posts page 10 onwards, read a thread before you post in it please.

Yes, it did. I was there, and it didn't work. And I'll post when and where I feel like, thank you very much.

[Hanky Spam]

Ensaine, on 06 August 2018 - 05:51 AM, said:

Why? Fielding up to 4 complete teams isn't enough? LOL ......

No, but do you know any unit in this game that has 48 active players?
I don't know any, well maybe Mercstars can field so many active players, dunno about this...

Our unit has 62 players where ~60% of the players are inactive (either on short or long break or even buying a pack of cigarettes..).
However, some of them that became inactive are members since the very first hour and/or made the unit big. Under normal circumstances you won't boot them off and that's why I am against a hard-limit of 50 players per unit.

Ensaine, on 06 August 2018 - 05:51 AM, said:

Not the point. The fact that I have the $$, and YOU have the $$, how friendly is this to newer players? This cost is one reason Units died off, the overall game mode aside.......the cost to recruit a new member should be 0. Taxing a player over what should be a core element of the game is not good.. at all......

The Cbill flow & income is for new players generally a problem in this game. The grind is real, true.
With premium time it's much easier but for this you have to pay real money, unless you get some premium time from lootboxes. If you are very new and you first want to buy mechs then I can understand your point, but aside of this what are the benefits of being in a unit? Except for faction play (MC income per planet conquered) I see no mentionable benefits. It's also possible to do group drops without being in an unit, so what are the real mentionable arguments for new players to be in an unit that is not doing faction play?

[Leone]

Cato Zilks, on 06 August 2018 - 04:24 AM, said:

Or to put the Boreal Vault problem very simply. Paul, literally everybody that plays FW says some variant of "aw, ****!" when they see they are assigned attack on Boreal Vault. It is universally agreed upon that it is not a balanced map. If you can spare some resources to make map adjustments let us know and we can get a thread going specifically on what slight modifications would best help balance that map out.

Wait, what? No. You lie. Boreal Vault is one of my favourite brawling maps. I mean, granted, Vitric forge and grim Portico are better for it, but Boreal Vault is just such a blast I always enjoy it when it comes up. Your opinions are not 'everyone's'.

Joshua McEvedy, on 06 August 2018 - 02:33 AM, said:

That's not entirely true. I'm an old drop caller and have had clueless PUGs whine, complain, argue, or simply ignore the calls altogether. During the last PUG match I called last fall, an obviously drunk or high team member who got himself slaughtered actually berated me for his own failure. I don't need that kind of negativity in a game, so I refuse to call PUG matches any more.

One question. That match, did you only have one player being an ******? Cuz if so, that means ten other players at least didn't mind the drop calling. Heck some might've enjoyed it. Don't let one bad apple ruin the bunch my friend.

There're always going to be those who put themselves in front of the team, and there're always going to be those who want to blame everything else under the sun for their own failings.

I mean, I've had entire four mans being belligerent, giving poor advice and whatnot. That's what mute is for. You gotta roll with it.

~Leone.

Edited by Leone, 06 August 2018 - 07:22 AM.

[C H E E K I E Z]

C H E E K I E Z, on 03 August 2018 - 06:58 PM, said:

i know the exact amount about coding as i do the amount i know of nuclear physics, so im sorry if the answers i have seem like its coming from someone who has no idea how things get coded but...

Issue 1: There could be 2 solutions to this, no idea how much coding work it would take... but is there a way to treat a "unit mechlab" kind-of-like the normal mechlab? Only the leader/approved officers have access too. it could be a tab under unit coffers? Which is where they build the mechs that they want to be able to basically "purchase" and copy-paste to another unit-members inventory. So the Transaction would go Unit ID-purchased from the in-game store, and you could use the same Alerts system as when you get invited to a unit. it would read like "superawesome unit requests you to use this mech". Then they click accept, and as long as they have the mech-bay for it, it permanently becomes their mech, if they do not have the mech-bay for it, they get an error msg saying you need to buy a mech-bay just like buying a regular mech. Once this person has this mech, it becomes theirs just like any-other mech, HOWEVER, it would be locked, Just like the trial mechs, you cant change the load-out or anything. You can use it any any-mode, Quick play/faction/scouting/solaris. It would just be under a new tab, so you would have "owned" "trial" and "faction warfare" or something of those sorts.

Issue 2: As said in issue 1, There would be a new entire tab, under the unit interface called unit-mechlab, that once you go into this, you no longer pay anything from Your pocket, it comes right out of the unit coffers. And in order to get back to the Leaders Mechlabs/store, he would have to leave the faction warfare tab.

Issue 3: Im not 100% sure what this means, but the entire transaction would be exactally like a regular purchase from any ordinary player, under the new faction warfare mechlab/store tab. It would bascially be like a regular player buying a mech, it would go into the "Player name-Superawesome unit", where you can use your UNITS MC, or UNITS cbills to buy mechs, So say you want 10 Warhammer 6D's. The unit leader would use the MC to buy 10 Mech-bays. He then used the UNITS Coffers to go into the Faction Warfare store, and purchase 10 Warhammers for xxxxx C-bills. Unit "superawesome unit" now can give out 10 Warhammers that have been paid for by the unit coffers. Transaction ID-what currency was used-time date etc. Also, once one of those warhammers have been given away, since they purchased 10 mechbays, they now have 1 more mechbay they can add XXXXX mech for.

Issue 4: So, using the new unit store/mech-lab the new player would own the mech, it would be his, forever, 100%. He will just never be able to adjust anyting on the mech, just like the trial mechs. It would forever be what ever it was given to him. Now in-game behavioral issues, Technically unit leaders right now have the ability to Take 100% of the MC that the unit has, and give it to himself. I am 100% un-aware of any unit that has taken planets where this has happened (i could be wrong) (outside i think Merc-Star)? i think?. The easy answer to that would be the Unit leader/officers are not allowed to take out C-bills, they can already take MC so thats a possibility that we have right now that can happen. However the only possibility that i could see happening, in the case you bring up, is The unit-leader spending all the cbills on mechs he wants, and then transferring them all to himself. That is a possibility, However in almost every game i play that has a Guild/Unit/Warband/what ever you want to call it, the Guild/unit/warband leader has the ability to kick everyone out of the guild and take 100% of the guild/unit/warband's coffers. This is a risk World of Warcraft/Starwars Knights of the Old Republic/Warhammer 40k/Everquest/ those are just the games i have played where the Big leader has the ability to kick everyone out and steal all the riches for himself. It may happen in small guilds/units where little are effected, however Say for example, Xavier decided one day to just ban everyone from MS, and steal all of the resources, or Hobbles from BCMC, or whoever leads HHOD/Arc7/Evil/420/JG-X/EMP/D5, there would be a large community out-cry in-game and on the forums. The way you deal with large-scale ones like that, which i think you are referring too, you simply ban the person who kicked everybody and took the Mc/mechs. In the case that he tried to be sneaky, and knowing he will be banned, sends every mech to an alt-account, you will have the normal purchase logs of who the unit leader send the mechs too, and who accepted them. So you could also ban that account, and the currency would never make in to the game. It would suck for the unit-members who donated all of those C-bills, and the way PGI could cover themselves from an angry mob saying its their fault they let this be possible, is add a warning when you donate C-bills, saying that you understand you are donating them to your unit, and you may never see them again, and may not send in tickets to be refunded if one day you decide you don't like the unit anymore. Almost every single unit leader in this game, being a unit leader, sacrifices hours and hours and hours ontop of the hours they play on the game, doing things outside of the game, be it maintaining a website, helping new members in the mech-lab, teaching them how to download teamspeak/discord. The units are like their children, and they would rather see it burn then ever even think of personal profit like that. They put blood sweat and tears building it.

Issue 5: Trust me, You can ask anyone in the game who knows me. On any drunken night my CareBear stare will make your Engineers cower in fear.

Edit: if you have any other concerns on my idea, outside of "we just cant develop that" let me know, like i said at the start i have no idea what it takes to code things like that, so its easy for me to see it, but on your end im sure its way harder than the way im thinking it could be.

Just reposting since it's mondays and old if Paul Wil read 7 pages back

[SilentFenris]

Cadoazreal, on 05 August 2018 - 03:12 PM, said:

You man not have noticed, the "im dreaming solution" dropzone is an out of bounds zone with a 3 minute countdown, 4 exit paths, 2 of which should probably be clear of concentrated enemy forces should allow people to exit the spawn safely without being penalized for going through a choke.

The idea of an out-of-bounds phasing in and out seems very hazardous to the defenders as well as attackers. Friendlies riding your tail and preventing you from properly manuvering is a problem in gameplay already. Just imagine loosing friendlies because the piled up in a cluster when out of bounds comes back in-phase.

Cadoazreal, on 05 August 2018 - 03:12 PM, said:

Dropships coming every 30 seconds whether there are people to drop off or not could be a possible solution to helping stop spawn camping with the additional defensive firepower that brings, although my PC would probably hate it.

No, my suggestion was to make dropships drop off everyone spawning at a given time at the same spawnpoint regardless of their lance or original spawnpoint. This would help spawn camping in two ways:
1) enemy camping a dropzone only has a 1/3 chance of an target showing
2) when mechs do respawn, it will be all teamates at the same spawn, 1-12 mechs, not 1-4 mechs, making for a better fight rather than an easy slaughter

Edited by SilentFenris, 06 August 2018 - 08:03 AM.

[Joshua McEvedy]

Leone, on 06 August 2018 - 07:11 AM, said:

One question. That match, did you only have one player being an ******? Cuz if so, that means ten other players at least didn't mind the drop calling. Heck some might've enjoyed it. Don't let one bad apple ruin the bunch my friend.

No, it was a pretty common occurrence (witnessed repeatedly by my unit mates) over the past two years, and the "saltiness" tended to be over the top, laced with all manner of profanity and insults. Despite popular belief, I'm actually pretty easy to get along with in-game, and tended to win more than lose, but I just got tired of the toxic negativity, which made the game decidedly not fun for all concerned. So I don't do it anymore outside of my unit.

Edited by Joshua McEvedy, 06 August 2018 - 08:34 AM.

[fenomeno]

Bishop Six, on 06 August 2018 - 02:57 AM, said:

I also vote for a better protecting of the drop zones.

There is this argument: "If you have to defend the Drop Zone the match is lost anyways."

Thats true if you only look at pro gamer matches. But there are matches i have seen where you could manage a comeback after 2nd or 3rd wave, even if you already were in your DZ defending after the 1st wave. It is possible. But more important, you can give pugs the chance to not get totally ***** and the possibility that they have more fun even in probably loss.

And thats the way i think we have to go: That casuals can have more fun, not the premades pro gamer.

Bishop is spot-on here (and with most things, when it comes to FP).

With regards to the suggestions to buff drop zones or 'tilt' dropzone walls, there is obviously the argument that pilots who are being camped in their own dropzone probably lost already, which a whole other discussion around player skill and playing solo vs in a unit.

I think improvements to dropzones and dropships would still be worth it for those instances where one particular dropzone is isolated and camped (Crimson Strait and Tourmaline spring to mind), a situation which can snowball an otherwise evenly matched game, and which the 'defending' pilots have no control over.

A more general / over-arching objective here I think should be making FP more fun for newer, less-skilled, solo players... it's just that the players from 'big' units, who drop 12-man premades, who pilot (mostly) meta-mechs are the ones with the experience and knowledge in the game mode. A lot of suggestions coming in from people who don't even play FP, who are clearly out of touch with the reality of the mode in 2018.

Cadoazreal, on 06 August 2018 - 04:42 AM, said:

Please refer to my previous posts page 10 onwards, read a thread before you post in it please.

Noone can be bothered doing that, my dude... just because you played 7000 hours (not that I ever see you in FP), doesn't mean you need to write 7000 words

Edited by fenomeno, 06 August 2018 - 09:33 AM.