1169 replies to this topic

[UnKnownPlayer]

Paul Inouye, on 17 August 2018 - 04:28 PM, said:

A lot of what you're suggesting requires some significant investment into increasing the size of maps to allow proper pathing. The idea isn't bad... hell.. I even wanted to look into getting Rush game mode into FP.. but the size of maps would be a critical issue along with the number of respawns required to make Rush work.

I'd say that the idea isn't off the table.. there's a lot of map rework requests. It's going to be a fairly big pull on resources to drastically change the size of a map. Due to that fact, this thought process might need to take a bit of a back burner to other suggestions already made.

But that being said, that's what this discussion is about. Let's see what's on the table. We'll have to make cuts, but we'll do the best to accommodate what we can for the biggest bang for the buck. Even just now (like literally about 10 mins ago), I spoke with Russ on some of the items and we even brought up more items to think about. We just want to make sure we can get it all done in a timely manner.

Rush mode would be awesome, farm it out to the community, loads of people would be willing to build maps for it, PGI could QA them and implement from the basic wireforms and events. Everyone wins.

[Khobai]

I have an idea for improving incursion that would be fairly easy to implement.

Give each base very powerful turrets (like the calliope turrets from MW4 with large lasers/LRMs) that would discourage base rushing.

The only reasonable way to destroy these turrets should be to call in your dropship to destroy them using the air tower.

That would discourage base rushing in the initial stages of incursion and make it more about collecting energy pellets to weaken the enemy base's defenses.

I dont think you necessarily need to give buildings more HP. There just needs to be a reason not to base rush at the immediate outset of the game. Super turrets could be that reason.


Also I agree that FP needs more depth in its higher level design. We should be able to spend cbills to fortify planets or buy NPC assets/vehicles to help us attack/defend planets. There should be more ways to influence the match before it even begins. The 4v4 scout mode should also have more of an impact on the 12v12 games. I feel the scout mode abilities are way too weak and dont have enough of an impact on the 12v12 matches. Im not saying longtom should be brought back, but winning scout mode should give you something really good.


And the last thing I wanna see is contract payouts even on a loss. If youre going to allow pugstomping in FP then the rewards for losing need to be greater so pugs dont leave the game feeling as bad.

Edited by Khobai, 17 August 2018 - 05:33 PM.

[Marius Evander]

Bombadil, on 17 August 2018 - 03:49 PM, said:

The Faction Play podcast with Paul was really long, so the editing process has taken me longer than expected. It'll go live Monday morning, and thank you for your patience!

Edited by Cadoazreal, 17 August 2018 - 08:44 PM.

[Wing 0]

Any chance you can find out as to why were witnessing the old desyncing coming from the server? holy crap. its been happening a few times today

[50 50]

Paul Inouye, on 17 August 2018 - 04:28 PM, said:

A lot of what you're suggesting requires some significant investment into increasing the size of maps to allow proper pathing. The idea isn't bad... hell.. I even wanted to look into getting Rush game mode into FP.. but the size of maps would be a critical issue along with the number of respawns required to make Rush work.

I'd say that the idea isn't off the table.. there's a lot of map rework requests. It's going to be a fairly big pull on resources to drastically change the size of a map. Due to that fact, this thought process might need to take a bit of a back burner to other suggestions already made.

But that being said, that's what this discussion is about. Let's see what's on the table. We'll have to make cuts, but we'll do the best to accommodate what we can for the biggest bang for the buck. Even just now (like literally about 10 mins ago), I spoke with Russ on some of the items and we even brought up more items to think about. We just want to make sure we can get it all done in a timely manner.

Oh absolutely, I don't deny that any changes need to be weighed up and evaluated.
Exploring the position of the drop locations and objectives may make some of the maps feel bigger. There tends to be a lot of areas that don't get used. Having some level of randomness to those locations combined with a fog of war would also shake up the maps and modes so there might be some smaller answers first before needing to make the larger scale design changes.

I do feel the community would love to see some significant and invested development in the mode which as you have said is exactly why we are having these discussions and asking the questions so I really appreciate you taking the time to respond and share with us.

I'm looking forward to listening to the pod cast.

Edited by 50 50, 17 August 2018 - 10:29 PM.

[Bishop Six]

Ok, for an unknowing person like me:

What is Rush game mode?

[UnKnownPlayer]

Bishop Six, on 18 August 2018 - 12:47 AM, said:

Ok, for an unknowing person like me:

What is Rush game mode?

It was a mode introduced by Unreal Tournament, one team attacks a pair of objectives, the other team has to defend them for 20 minutes or however long. If the objectives are destroyed then the map opens up to become larger / longer and 2 more objectives are revealed for the attacker to destroy. There can be anywhere from 2 to 5 pairs of objectives depending on how easy the map is to attack.
Team Fortress 2 also did something like this where the objectives were like a small domination point so there are lots of different ways of capturing or destroying them which could potentially be used.
The down side is that this would require some engine modification so might not be on the table from PGI's side.
The up side is that you could do all kinds of cool things like tie rewards to the number of objectives you destroy so even losing could be rewarding if you get far enough, you could alter the number of reinforcements for the defenders, play with static defenses, have dynamic maps and loads of other cool stuff.

[xX PUG Xx]

Paul Inouye, on 17 August 2018 - 04:28 PM, said:

I even wanted to look into getting Rush game mode into FP.. but the size of maps would be a critical issue along with the number of respawns required to make Rush work.

Bishop Six, on 18 August 2018 - 12:47 AM, said:

Ok, for an unknowing person like me:

What is Rush game mode?

UnKnownPlayer, on 18 August 2018 - 01:11 AM, said:

cool stuff.

I absolutely LOVED Rush in the Battlefield game series, it felt like a true "war" mode and I even suggested it as a mode for CW MANY years ago. I would be so excited if it were a possibility and could see it generating a lot of interest.

[Marius Evander]

Sounds awesome

[Tarteso]

Separate queues for pugs and premades

[Tarl Cabot]

Tarteso, on 18 August 2018 - 03:06 PM, said:

Separate queues for pugs and premades

And how would that be determined? Never mind that one could still sync drop and get almost the same results since there is only one bucket with two sides...

[INVIICTUS]

can someone please tell me what in the F%&@ is "Counter ECM a mech and get locked damage 1 time"???????????????????

[Horseman]

This thread is about PGI accepting player feedback regarding the current state of Faction Play and improvements that can be made to it. If you have questions related to the current event, please take them to another thread (perhaps "Short Question, Short Answer"?)

[MW Waldorf Statler]

The best (and for balancing ) a real FW with fights between the Houses as regular battles , not as events who the most not can play FW when not switch to a other Fraction ...a FW like the Visions of the beginning

[Tarteso]

Tarl Cabot, on 18 August 2018 - 07:12 PM, said:

And how would that be determined? Never mind that one could still sync drop and get almost the same results since there is only one bucket with two sides...

That may work or may not. Anyway, if all this aims to gain more people playing FP, separate queues should make a big improvement in the PUGs interest for it.

[Tier5ForLife]

Paul Inouye, on 17 August 2018 - 04:28 PM, said:

A lot of what you're suggesting requires some significant investment into increasing the size of maps to allow proper pathing. The idea isn't bad... hell.. I even wanted to look into getting Rush game mode into FP.. but the size of maps would be a critical issue along with the number of respawns required to make Rush work.

I'd say that the idea isn't off the table.. there's a lot of map rework requests. It's going to be a fairly big pull on resources to drastically change the size of a map. Due to that fact, this thought process might need to take a bit of a back burner to other suggestions already made.

But that being said, that's what this discussion is about. Let's see what's on the table. We'll have to make cuts, but we'll do the best to accommodate what we can for the biggest bang for the buck. Even just now (like literally about 10 mins ago), I spoke with Russ on some of the items and we even brought up more items to think about. We just want to make sure we can get it all done in a timely manner.

Here is a semi-easy map fix. Move the one base in Crimson Strait. I've seen one base taken 100's of times and the other maybe 6-8 times. Things like this make me wonder if anyone related to the game, plays the game.

I just find this Unreal.

[Tier5ForLife]

Tarteso, on 18 August 2018 - 03:06 PM, said:

Separate queues for pugs and premades

They would have to do it by player's Tiers and the way I understand it, the player base is way too small. If the reasons are that this supposed computer software company cannot do that then they need to hire better people. Like in Quickplay, if you group with 3 friends, you are going to face a team and get stomped.

I know I'll be burned at the stake for this but OMG, wake up and add NPC units to the game. Some to help the lesser players and some to stand up on their own. Then there would never be another ghost drop. You would be given an option, play possibly against NPCs or you will find it hard to get a game, like a number of factions now are not getting drops.

I'll be 58 years old this year. PGI is making a classic mistake I've seen companies make. They do not work to attract new players, instead, they cater to the old "whales" or whatever. I remember listening to a Podcast a year or more ago where it was Russ and 3-4 players they think represents the player base. In other words, to the leaders of a couple of the best Units at the moment.

FW has been as still a place for teams to have a good time and stomp some new players. That is all it is.

It reminds me of the Victora Secret story I read this morning. They still roll out 6'1" models wearing $2 million dollar bras and there stock is down 45% in the last year.

Paul Inouye, on 17 August 2018 - 03:35 PM, said:

The biggest issue is the Flash<>Scaleform pipeline. Two devs, like a UI artist and a UI programmer cannot work on the same screen/element at the same time because you cannot merge the changes like you can with a text file (code, xml, etc). What you see in flash doesn't translate to the exact output you will get from Scaleform. This is all slightly exasperated by the way CryEngine renders the HUD/screens.

Unreal can handle output from Scaleform a bit cleaner but at the same time, Unreal has it's own UI systems built directly into the engine for better asset management and performance. At the same time, Unreal doesn't have the flexibility in terms of features that Flash/Scaleform do. It's a trade off mechanic that you find in all varieties of game engines.

I have zero idea of what you just said.

Edited by LikeUntoBuddha, 19 August 2018 - 04:38 AM.

[Tier5ForLife]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 17 August 2018 - 05:33 AM, said:

From the perspective of an officer of the 228th IBR ...

When the match payout rewards were based on faction population, we would chase the CB, switching factions every two weeks, alternating between IS and Clan, and joining the faction that paid the best.

For major FP events ...

... When the best rewards are specific to the winner of the event, we will usually go with the faction we believe to be most likely to win. We don't always guess correctly.

... When the rewards are geared towards participation, we will usually go with the faction that we believe to be underpopulated so that we have less waiting time in queue. We have seen some units switching factions mid-event immediately after a string of losses to us. We have switched factions mid-event in order to reduce our own queue times.

Our experience as a unit with global presence is that we need about 24 members in the Oceanic region -- extrapolate that out to about 150 globally, based on a very rough approximation of player distribution -- to maintain 24-7 presence in large FP events. Add in inactive players, new recruits and trainees, and alts and family friends and this number is closer to 200.


When the rewards were for the "best unit" (thanks for the [228] dog tags, by the way ... still my absolute favorite hanging cockpit item), that's when there needs to be some limitation on unit size.

Speaking personally, a unit size cap of roughly COMSTAR Level IV (216) size would be flexible enough to allow global events without becoming a logistics nightmare for unit leaders. Once you get down to Regiment (108) or Cluster (75) size, though, you're going to marginalize and alienate units with presence outside of the NA Prime Time (even more so than they already are).

The Asia-Pacific-Oceanic team leaders are some of your most dedicated fans ... don't forget them. Give them the opportunity, and they will #MakeMech_ConGreatAgain

OBTW ... if competition has taught me anything, it is that we will find a way to bend the rules to our advantage, given the opportunity.

"Sniff", that brought a tear to my eye. You poor teams...."sad"....

P.S. my bad! Those were my eyedrops I need for my Glaucoma.

Edited by LikeUntoBuddha, 19 August 2018 - 05:23 AM.

[Tier5ForLife]

Paul Inouye, on 16 August 2018 - 01:02 PM, said:

Hmm.. will have to ask. Flash <> Scaleform -> CryEngine isn't fun.

Have you heard about this new thing called "Texts" to send out an alert? All the cool companies are using them.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

for FW

bind great Units to the Planets as Garrison for a Timespan (1 Month) in this time only little 4 Man groups can explore new targets
make regular IS/IS Clan/Clan fights ...helps more as each IS/Clan Balancing Buffing/nerfing

make Planets only for fights with little groups or Singleplayer , official singleplayer Merc Contracts for fights -Planet yx want you as merc