357 replies to this topic

[Paul Inouye]

Note: This video for MM is giving me grey hairs. Almost complete. But a video does not stop me from creating wireframes/images... so let's move on to a second clarification.

Clarification 2:

Selecting Faction/roles in Faction Play.

When first entering Faction Play, you will still see the IS map and other fidget bits on the screen. What will likely disappear are things like the main Factions button and the Career Selection button. Faction info will have to move to a more 'encyclopedia' information page for each of the Factions.

As per normal, on the map would be conflict information and clicking any of the conflicts (when first entering FP during a FP event) will result in a screen like the following appearing:

*NOTE: These are wireframes and not indicative of what the screen looks like with art assets



You will be presented with the planet(s) in question and which Factions are involved with the conflict. You will also be given the background story as to what is going on in the conflict. At this point you will choose which Faction you wish to fight for for the duration of the event.

Upon choosing your Faction (for this example we pick Kurita), you are presented with the following screen:



This is where you choose your role as a Freelancer, Merc Unit or Loyalist. When it comes to Units, the Unit Leader or his assigned officers will be able to align the unit with the chosen Faction.

Once the selection is made, a confirmation will let you know which Faction and what Role you will be locked into the event with.



Once you click okay, you will be returned the IS map and participate any of the given conflicts in the Faction and Role you have chosen for the duration of the event.

Next Flow Update: What happens behind the scenes once you start playing.

[Nightbird]

Been jumping back and forth between sides in a conflict to even out the population and avoid long waits. If only loyalists will be locked in, great, but if Mercs will also be locked in, it'll create pop issues.

Flip side is that pugs jumped to the winning side the last few events, this can fix that.

Maybe if the population indicator was accurate and didn't count inactives..

Edited by Nightbird, 28 August 2018 - 05:09 PM.

[Cato Zilks]

Population indicators won't be that useful any more because we will all just be piling into 2 factions. People will wait and try to stack the side that is already winning/has the better teams.

[McGoat]

Cato Zilks, on 28 August 2018 - 05:46 PM, said:

Population indicators won't be that useful any more because we will all just be piling into 2 factions. People will wait and try to stack the side that is already winning/has the better teams.

lol, "teams"

You're funny.

There are a few "teams" and one or two "groups". Most of which can't drop less than an 8 man or they lose.

[slide]

Looking at Pauls wire frames above I can't help but think that there will need to be some enforced limits on how many can stack one side.

With Loyalty now being decided on a per event basis there is nothing to stop even long term loyalists stacking on one side. If the mercs do the same by chance you could literally have more than 3/4 the population on one side of the conflict with no ability to change.

PGI may well have to limit the percentage difference between sides to <10%.

So a tally of people pledging their allegiance (per event) needs to be kept as running total. If a single player or a unit pushes the total players (so far) on a given side to 60% of the total then you can't join that faction. This will force units onto different sides of the conflict. One problem though is for larger units, when numbers are low (ie at the start of the event) the units numbers might blow the count out no matter which side they choose. Maybe a time limit to get things started will be needed.

[justcallme A S H]

Nightbird, on 28 August 2018 - 05:05 PM, said:

Been jumping back and forth between sides in a conflict to even out the population and avoid long waits. If only loyalists will be locked in, great, but if Mercs will also be locked in, it'll create pop issues.

Flip side is that pugs jumped to the winning side the last few events, this can fix that.

Maybe if the population indicator was accurate and didn't count inactives..

It won't create population issues if the populatuon is accurately calculated. The calculations currently are very much inaccurate and has been shocking to work out population balance even by those that play the game and can 'feel' what going on as you can change by the minutue now and that, IMO, is causing more havoc than good.

I've highlighted this a number of times now about the calculation needing to be fixed as a key problem since FP3.0 was launched.

justcallme A S H, on 09 August 2018 - 12:09 PM, said:

Hey Paul - Good list man. I forgot one pretty big thing.

Population reset / dynamic numbers.

If you look at Clan Diamond Shark vs Davion as example here, the population differences are like 3% vs 12%. Meaning you earn more as a Merc going with the new factions created as the population counts legacy accounts/loyalists/Mercs from, as far as I can tell, inception.

If these numbers were dynamic rather than going back to inception that will help population balance a little. Effectively a player does not count as active until they have played 5 games of FP in say a 3 month period, if they go inactive they no longer count (up to you to work the legnth out). This would mean the population numbers will change regularly rather than be static and skewed like they are now. Should be a fairly easy coding change based on tables and data I'd imagine you already have.

I strongly believe an active population calculation - inline/based upon with what I've posted above - is critial to letting the players balance the population themselves.

It doesnt have to show how many are playing, just a live (15mins would be enough) perercentage. Then units/players can decide where to go from the outset. You won't pick a side that has +10% over the other because it's accurate. Right now the side that might be +10% might be the lowest populated because of how it's calculated.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 28 August 2018 - 06:47 PM.

[Cato Zilks]

Ash, those numbers will be irrelevant. Nobody stays a loyalist between events. We pick how we relate to the faction for each event.

Its like gender fluidity but with factions.

Edited by Cato Zilks, 28 August 2018 - 06:56 PM.

[justcallme A S H]

Cato Zilks, on 28 August 2018 - 06:55 PM, said:

Ash, those numbers will be irrelevant. Nobody stays a loyalist between events. We pick how we relate to the faction for each event.

Its like gender fluidity but with factions.

If people move around for an event, a dynamic and live-update, would then reflect those movements. You also assume people leave loyalist outside of events, that doesn't happen. I'm usually a loyalist outside of an event at the moment.

Unless there is a way to to visualise for the playerbase then sides will stack and you won't even know it. Causing more problems, no one wants that.

[Cato Zilks]

justcallme A S H, on 28 August 2018 - 07:02 PM, said:

If people move around for an event, a dynamic and live-update, would then reflect those movements. You also assume people leave loyalist outside of events, that doesn't happen. I'm usually a loyalist outside of an event at the moment.
Unless there is a way to to visualise for the playerbase then sides will stack and you won't even know it. Causing more problems, no one wants that.

From what I get from Paul thus far, we don't "stay loyalist outside events." FP is driven by events, instead of IS v Clan with the occasional event (as we have had these last few weeks). So at the start of each event all the units pick a side and go play. In a Wolf v. Falcon event the only way to "stay" a davion loyalist is to not show up.

As for the accurate number counter: it will be great if we finally get accurate numbers on the population. But getting numbers about how people are signing up thus far is not terribly useful. Look at any of the Davion events recently. While I don't doubt their population was inflated inactive "loyalists," they had a ton of craptastic pugs. Those terrible pugs fill up the population queue as much as good teams. I think we are going to see terrible talent clumping on a scale that we have not seen before and we will have no ability to self correct. This system is not practical. If we want good matches we need to be divided roughly evenly in talent and pop. This is why we should not be self selecting which side we fight on in each round but try to come up with a way that we can become more evenly distributed so PGI can divide us sensibly.

Edited by Cato Zilks, 28 August 2018 - 07:28 PM.

[justcallme A S H]

Yeah I under what Paul is saying - however - at no point does it tell you WHERE the population is or is not. This is a major issue.

The same key point overloooked in past FP patches which then led to the band-aid fix of allowing Mercs to swap every 2mins if they wanted, which kinda hasn't been helping either because it makes a mess for loyalist if Merc suddenly swap over and the queue volumes change in the duration they were ina single game.

If you don't let people self-select what side they want to play on you are losing the entire point of immersion that people are wanting and Paul is trying to deliver. Letting the game decide "where you go" is no better than now, there is no immersion there with a forced choice.
You could add another layer and have a box saying 'Kurita currently has an overflow of forced, CBill/LP/XP earnings will be reduced if you choose this side'. Further encouraging population to balance.



Your Davion PUG issue is entirely different issue. That will be addressed by this SSR match maker which will sort people better than nothing. I played Davion for most of the event, solo dropping, didn't have a major issue outside of the usual. What we are getting is better than what we have now. Is it ideal? It looks like it will be the best that is possible though taking into account all the issues that surround Faction Play.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 28 August 2018 - 07:37 PM.

[50 50]

Cato Zilks, on 24 August 2018 - 09:02 PM, said:

Also, Weagles, he does say its about Loyalists, but the system he lays out seems to gut faction loyalty from the game and essentially make us all mercs that hop around from one story to the next or (and this is what a loyalist seems to be in Paul's proposed system) just don't play FP except when our favorite faction happens to have an event. So as a Davrat, you would probably get a Davion event every... what... 3 weeks? More stories than average focus on Davion, so you will be in luck. As Marik I would be looking forward to Marik FP events probably every 5-6 weeks.

I don't quite get that either.
It sounded like the system was moving towards:
A.) scripted events that PGI was going to have to setup.... ie. it needs someone on staff to actually open FP as ongoing events.
B.) dual faction events that even if you are loyal to another faction can still participate in.... but it brings up the question of 'way bother having the career paths and selecting a faction at all?'.

These points seemed to go against the other suggestions of trying to make FP more automated and building depth into areas like the loyalty system.

Chados, on 26 August 2018 - 05:08 AM, said:

Cooperative PvE.

I can understand the desire here and there has certainly been requests to have more of an AI presence in the modes, but a detailed story based PvE experience is not going to happen in MWO.
That you will have to go to MW5 for.

When we look around at different areas of the game, in particular some of the basic scripted challenges in the academy, the AI in Escort and even the turrets and the drop ships, it seems like there could be some sort of option that might work as a PvE mode and I personally wouldn't mind it for ghost drops and just to get a match to shoot something..... even in quick play.
A survival mode.

It's a pretty big task and the feedback from PGI is that it's not going to happen..... at least not with the current effort.

The other part of it is that you want something like this to have an impact in some way and right at the moment there is no continuation from one match to the next. There is no benefit or penalty given to the players for completing a mission.
ie, if you lost the mech or it was damaged in one mission and you had to carry that into the next then there is a risk that goes along with a ghost drop.
As it is right now, we don't even get a drop because when there was the ghost drop in Siege mode, it was just a time waster for the players that prevented them from getting a drop against an opponent. You could just throw mechs at it with no regard for their value.

To me, this is related to how we are using the drop decks in Faction Play.

[Cato Zilks]

justcallme A S H, on 28 August 2018 - 07:35 PM, said:

Yeah I under what Paul is saying - however - at no point does it tell you WHERE the population is or is not. This is a major issue.
If you don't let people self-select what side they want to play on you are losing the entire point of immersion that people are wanting and Paul is trying to deliver. Letting the game decide "where you go" is no better than now, there is no immersion there with a forced choice.
You could add another layer and have a box saying 'Kurita currently has an overflow of forced, CBill/LP/XP earnings will be reduced if you choose this side'. Further encouraging population to balance.

If we self select into factions and make it so mercs can't switch sides of a conflict while the conflict is ongoing, PGI can select the alliances between factions that make the two sides. You still pick Liao, you just don't get to pick which side of a Marik/Steiner conflict Liao will back.

justcallme A S H, on 28 August 2018 - 07:35 PM, said:

Your Davion PUG issue is entirely different issue. That will be addressed by this SSR match maker which will sort people better than nothing. I played Davion for most of the event, solo dropping, didn't have a major issue outside of the usual. What we are getting is better than what we have now. Is it ideal? It looks like it will be the best that is possible though taking into account all the issues that surround Faction Play.

The MM will only work if we end up with roughly equal talent. If your good teams are all on Side A, it will only take about 2 hours for the teams on Side B to clear out. People don't like getting shellacked repeatedly. At that point it will be top teams vs puggles.

[justcallme A S H]

Cato Zilks, on 28 August 2018 - 07:55 PM, said:

If we self select into factions and make it so mercs can't switch sides of a conflict while the conflict is ongoing, PGI can select the alliances between factions that make the two sides. You still pick Liao, you just don't get to pick which side of a Marik/Steiner conflict Liao will back.

Still won't work without an active population calcuation being done, which currently, does not happen.

You are also relying on PGI then, each event, go in and work all of this out. Doesn't sound viable honestly. Better off building it into the game.

[Monkey Lover]

Being a loyalist means you are willing to stay with your faction for 1 conflict lol

Sounds more like a merc to me.

[Cato Zilks]

...I mean, Paul is kinda proposing that PGI is heavily be involved with the development of each of these events. The entire gamemode is going to be based on them sitting down and deciding what event is next and whatnot. I am just saying they pick teams while they are at it.

[Rustyhammer]

What if only loyalists are locked in the faction and mercs getting faction assigned automatically for every drop? I.e.:

• If there are 2 incomplete loyalist groups in the queue, the queued mercs will fill up the remaining spots in both groups.
  
• 12 man pre-made merc group will be dropping on the side that has lower number of queued players.
  
• pre-made mixed group (loyalists + mercs) will be queued as usual, on loyalist' side.

This way, merc will be used for automatic population balancing and this won't break any immersion, due to merc's definition.
This will however require mercs having 2 drop decks ready (one IS another Clan) before they can queue.

---------
Honestly, I am not sure why we still have freelancers and mercenaries when these 2 can be easily combined into one.

[Horseman]

Cato Zilks, on 28 August 2018 - 02:06 PM, said:

But you don't know who you face until after the drop selection. So would you gladly ton down to Assassins and Cicadas to face EVIL, MS, etc? No. When facing competent people, you want to play with full tonnage. You are offering an irrational gamble. Staying at full tonnage gives me the chances for the win in all scenarios and especially once we have this MM, it be most likely to keep my C-Bill payout the highest over time.

• If I stay at full tonnage, I will win against pugs and get a million cbills.
  
• If I stay at full tonnage, I will win against a good team and get a million cbills.
  
• If I drop tonnage, I will win against pugs and get 1.5 million cbills.
  
• If I drop tonnage, I will win against a good team and get 500k cbills.

It doesn't have to be as extreme as playing 100 tons underweight. If the bonus scaled based on your remaining deck tonnage, decks that only drop 10-20 tons would still get something - just not as much as decks that drop 50-60 tons under cap.
So... where does YOUR greed end? This is why I said it's risk vs reward.

Quote

These are issues because "self-regulation" is not going to cut it in a video game (where we are dealing with a closed system).

Hence why the appeal to greed!

Yes, not EVERYONE would take it, but some people will and others will follow. Note how currently there's no motivation to drop under tonnage, which means that more often than not even Scouting ends up with max tonnage mechs fighting it out.

[50 50]

Paul Inouye, on 28 August 2018 - 04:33 PM, said:

Clarification 2:

Selecting Faction/roles in Faction Play.

When first entering Faction Play, you will still see the IS map and other fidget bits on the screen. What will likely disappear are things like the main Factions button and the Career Selection button. Faction info will have to move to a more 'encyclopedia' information page for each of the Factions.

As per normal, on the map would be conflict information and clicking any of the conflicts (when first entering FP during a FP event) will result in a screen like the following appearing:

*NOTE: These are wireframes and not indicative of what the screen looks like with art assets

You will be presented with the planet(s) in question and which Factions are involved with the conflict. You will also be given the background story as to what is going on in the conflict. At this point you will choose which Faction you wish to fight for for the duration of the event.

Upon choosing your Faction (for this example we pick Kurita), you are presented with the following screen:

This is where you choose your role as a Freelancer, Merc Unit or Loyalist. When it comes to Units, the Unit Leader or his assigned officers will be able to align the unit with the chosen Faction.

Once the selection is made, a confirmation will let you know which Faction and what Role you will be locked into the event with.

Once you click okay, you will be returned the IS map and participate any of the given conflicts in the Faction and Role you have chosen for the duration of the event.

Next Flow Update: What happens behind the scenes once you start playing.

Well, I suppose this is one direction to take.
But given the example provided I fail to see the reason to select a career path or have them at all.
If each time the player goes into faction play they pick a side, effectively it has made everyone a free lancer and we are answering a call to arms.
In that sense, why even have a selection and not just auto balance the sides for each match.
And if that's the case, why even have units or groups.

Heading further in that direction I would begin to think that the aim might be to turn it into more of a continuous battle with players able to drop in and out of a battle.

Not quite sure I understand the direction.

[Will9761]

Paul Inouye, on 28 August 2018 - 04:33 PM, said:

Note: This video for MM is giving me grey hairs. Almost complete. But a video does not stop me from creating wireframes/images... so let's move on to a second clarification.

Clarification 2:

Selecting Faction/roles in Faction Play.

When first entering Faction Play, you will still see the IS map and other fidget bits on the screen. What will likely disappear are things like the main Factions button and the Career Selection button. Faction info will have to move to a more 'encyclopedia' information page for each of the Factions.

As per normal, on the map would be conflict information and clicking any of the conflicts (when first entering FP during a FP event) will result in a screen like the following appearing:

*NOTE: These are wireframes and not indicative of what the screen looks like with art assets



You will be presented with the planet(s) in question and which Factions are involved with the conflict. You will also be given the background story as to what is going on in the conflict. At this point you will choose which Faction you wish to fight for for the duration of the event.

Upon choosing your Faction (for this example we pick Kurita), you are presented with the following screen:



This is where you choose your role as a Freelancer, Merc Unit or Loyalist. When it comes to Units, the Unit Leader or his assigned officers will be able to align the unit with the chosen Faction.

Once the selection is made, a confirmation will let you know which Faction and what Role you will be locked into the event with.



Once you click okay, you will be returned the IS map and participate any of the given conflicts in the Faction and Role you have chosen for the duration of the event.

Next Flow Update: What happens behind the scenes once you start playing.

Paul, there is something else I want to suggest to you. Make claiming reward descriptions more interesting like saying that the reward is a salvaged mech, or the MC were valuable resources from the planet. I think when you claim a reward, there should be a unique description behind it like a message pop-up window explaining how you got the reward. Just to add some flare to claiming rewards. Let me share with you a few examples.

If the reward is MC:
Message - "The planet we raided had some valuable resources left on the world. Here is your share of the valuables."

If the reward is C-bills:
Message - "You handled yourself well in the field. As promise here is a bonus for a job well done."

If the reward is a Mech:
Message - "One of our techs had salvaged an enemy chassis off the field. We were able to repair most of the mech, We have no need for it, but the mech is yours if you want it."

Message - "The enemy commander was killed in the aftermath of the battle from a hit to the cockpit. However the mech is still in good condition. We will give you the mech if you want to use it."

If the reward is a Cockpit Item:
Message - "As our techs scavenged around for battlefield salvage, we found some cockpit items in one of their Mechwarrior's Battlemechs. Apparently this pilot really liked to be classy, however I want to ask if you want stuff this stuff before we dispose of it? The items are yours if you want, but I don't see the point of keeping it."

If the reward is a Decal:
Message - "In honor of your service to our group, we would like to make you an honorary unit of our faction. As a reward, we bestow you the honor to wear our logo. As an honorary unit of ours, you will fight as an independent unit on our behalf, but with more freedom than any units available."

Message - "We want to add your unit to our Mercenary unit. So as a nice housewarming present, we decided to give you our unit decal. Welcome to our little group."

If the reward is a color:
Message - "The planet we raided had a factory with some paint left over. If you want to color up your mech, I'll get it to you right away. It doesn't hurt to add a little vanity every now and then."

Edited by Will9761, 29 August 2018 - 08:47 AM.

[Marius Evander]

Paul "This is where you choose your role as a Freelancer, Merc Unit or Loyalist. When it comes to Units, the Unit Leader or his assigned officers will be able to align the unit with the chosen Faction." Should the last word be "role" ?

Wish your example had used Clan vs IS and you explained more clearly if Mercs are going to be mercs (auto assigned side by the game to get better matches) or acting as loyalists to a side.......

Would Loyalists being the larger groups and mercs the solo groups not be better for filling out queue's ?

Edited by Cadoazreal, 29 August 2018 - 01:19 AM.