357 replies to this topic

[Marius Evander]

Cato Zilks, on 23 August 2018 - 10:29 PM, said:

Seriously, command wheel is not an FP priority at all.

Agreed its not a priority, This thread is called FP discussion, not FP priority issues only, but more options would be beneficial from my experience solo dropping.

I use it, it helps in 95% of games when not a premade 12 man, and even in a premade 12 man you get people repeating "where did you say to rally up for the next wave?" a marker on the map reduces the amount of times that is heard, a good commander has the skill to remove the markers before they begin blocking information on the map.

I had a game this afternoon, 12 random mostly new skittles against a CSPS / Kcom premade, we lost 38 - 48 it would probably have been 22 - 48 or worse if not for organising defensive positions with command wheel.

"PUG team's don't listen" must be an issue with the person making calls, I find more than half of them do listen, want to work together to win and want to learn.

I do agree that not being able to mark/see enemy spotted markers of targets once the red target marker decays would be an improvement.

Edited by Cadoazreal, 24 August 2018 - 03:33 AM.

[Bishop Six]

We use the command wheel permanently, its a useful tool.

[Weagles]

Excited to see in game:

Clear the landing zone via massive artillery bombardment = change in play tactics = good. AFK mechs and slow to leave the drop zone mechs would suffer = bad. Experiencing disconnects would be even more hazardous. Not having to wait 3 drops to clear out a pilot who never connected = priceless.

Add Nightbird’s crater landing zone layout with no LOS into the drop area = change in play tactics = good. The drop ship should have LOS to any enemy mech on the slope and be able to shoot them. The bombardment clears out the crater and rim. Make farming exciting.

YES Loyalty means something:

Love the Prestige Ranks for Loyalists, special content unlocks, and being able to spend LP concepts.Warhorn Suggestions to fit all three. Unlock by attaining a specific Prestige rank and can only be purchased with LP.

Horn of Gondor - customized to each faction. Every pilot hears it when a killing blow is delivered.

Sting Warhorn - glows blue when enemy are near.

Great Horn of Helm Hammerhand – in addition to killing blows where it behaves as a normal warhorn, a trigger key can also set it off and all pilots can hear it. Customized to each faction. Wait for the signal then charge.

Dog whistle – only enemy pilots can hear it. Killing blow and trigger key activated. Does show warhorn’s mech location for duration of sound when trigger key is used. Going to want to kill that trolling *******.

Hand signal – only friendly pilots can hear it when trigger key is used.

Gobbler War Horn – reminder - Nov is just around the corner. This is more for the turkeys in general population then a prestige item.

If we are going to get more decals by earning ranks please give us the ability to have a favorite list in the filter.

It is about meaning:
The more FP becomes a story the better. Events is the right direction.

Edited by Weagles, 24 August 2018 - 06:42 PM.

[Weagles]

Wish for next year

New Faction Game mode and maps: Overlord

Max Duration: 25 minutes

Mission: Denial of resources

Each side gets an overlord drop ship. Mechs spawn out the Overlord staging Room. The overlord has the turrets of lore. They are bad ***. Farming will be hard.

Why did both sides send an overlord?

A dropship carrying 10 tactical nukes crashed and both sides want to keep them out of the other's hands.

Recovery tech crews are looking into the three primary crash areas. Every 3 minutes randomly one of the sites find a nuke. Recover the nuke and return it to the Overlord.

The overlord has an open door and a staging room capable of holding 12 mechs. This is where you spawn and this is where you drop off tactical nukes. If your Overlord leaves this is where you need to be to not get left behind.

Picking up and dropping off Tatical Nukes:

Like incursion you stand by the populated pick up point then bring the nuke back to the drop off room in the dropship and stand by the drop off point.


Victory Conditions:
1. Destroy the enemy Overlord.
2. Get the enemy overlord to leave the battle.
3. Kill all enemy Mechs.
4. Side with most enemy mechs destroyed when time runs out.
5. Side collecting the most Tactical Nukes.

Destroy the Overlord:

Like siege there are three well protected generators on the Overlord that need destroying to take the shielding down. When the shields drop the Overlord engine core is exposed to damage. If the core is destroyed the match is over.

If a Tactical Nuke goes off in the staging room the Overlord is destroyed.

Get the Overlord to Leave:

If a side gets behind by more than 12 mechs, a two minute timer begins. If the loses are not narrowed to below a company by the end of the two minutes the overlord for the side that is down takes off ending reinforcement for that side. After an overlord leaves a new two minute timer starts so the remaining overlord side can clean up those mechs left behind. At the end of the time surviving mechs from the overlord that left surrender and the match is over.

Overlords are valuable and can’t be risked.

A two minute timer begins if all the Overlord shielding generators are destroyed. There is no stopping this lift off.
A two minute timer begins if there are less than 6 mechs left. Overlord captains are nervous nellies.

Tactical Nukes:

Overlord should only excite a few (the ones who vote Terra Therma Conquest) and inspire dread in the rest of the MWO FW population. You should remember every Overlord drop. They are that intense.

Please click the link below for background or search “MWO b33f long tom suicide squad”.



Long Tom Fails:
· Can’t equip on Mechs
· Dependent on other game modes to get
· Only one side gets targeted
· Predictable timing allowing exploitation.
Long Tom value:
· Results can change battles.

I want the Long Tom equipped on mechs think directed arty shell explosion, so lets call the old Long Tom results and weapon Tactical Nukes to make this a separate result.

Is there lore to support this, not exactly but it does make the game significantly more challenging and fun.

Tactical Nukes are controlled by the carrier, the mech that picks up the nuke from the crash site. If the carrier mech drops off the nuke at the Overlord, the Overlord will send out a recon areo fighter which will lay purple smoke in the largest cluster of enemy mechs. 5 seconds later the incoming Tactical Nuke arrives with all the destructive power as seen in the video. To warn all pilots when the purple smoke is placed a verbal warning of say “incoming” repeated three times should sound off along with a hud warning like override. The warning stays up until the Nuke goes off.

Please note the carrier mech controls the timing of when nukes are fired. Load, blast, load another if there are two carriers on the same side. Carriers can only carry one nuke at a time.

Nukes fired from Overlords are air bursts and represent maximum damage. If a carrier mech is destroyed even by ejection or overheat then a ground burst occurs immediately. The damage radius of a ground burst is half that of an air burst.

Turrets can be damaged by Nukes, generators and cores can’t.

The carrier mech pilot gets all the kills, kmdd, damage, components, and turret kills caused by their nuke. They also get all the team damage caused. If a nuke kills a carrier setting off another nuke each nuke is a separate even scored for each carrier.

At most 9 nukes will occur in a match. Overlord is a random game in FW. It should create fear and loathing for most pilots as it promises horrible instant death at any moment. There are so many ways to win that matches should be shorter than the 25 minutes.

Overlord would benefit from new maps to achieve the balance and make them special to FW. New maps are not required but if new ones are made they should not be made available in testing grounds or QP or scouting. The only experience anyone can get is on the FW invasion battlefield.

[kuma8877]

justcallme A S H, on 23 August 2018 - 08:56 PM, said:

I can't think of anyone that uses the command wheel.

Anyone that does in game is generally more of an annoyance... Esp as you can't see enemies on the map where 'markers' are put etc. The whole info-wars thing should really be removed. Especially target-spotted, it's ridiculous. Any 'features' put into that is going to be - overall - wasted development time to make a couple of people happy esp when PUG team's don't listen anyway and Actual Teams don't need it.

I would have to disagree. I use it all the time, but it doesn't have enough options to be really useful. I also think it would be a nice QOL change for all modes of play and helps on the accessibility front.

Personally, I don't use my mic very much because I don't like subjecting other players to my giant dog that often barks at everything and nothing (and I'm not the most social or vocal in the best of situations if I'm not familiar with you). But that doesn't mean players like myself don't want more options to help be able to relay more pertinent info to others. It's not a huge development load as the basic framework for the UI and audio system is already there. It's low hanging fruit that could help the overall picture and goal of an improved FP experience.

Edited by kuma8877, 24 August 2018 - 07:38 PM.

[Cato Zilks]

Weagles, on 24 August 2018 - 06:35 PM, said:

Dog whistle – only enemy pilots can hear it. Killing blow and trigger key activated. Does show warhorn’s mech location for duration of sound when trigger key is used. Going to want to kill that trolling *******.

Ok, this would be funny. But it is hardly a FP issue. This list of goodies is your nerdy/trolly wet dream list. It has nothing to do with FP per se.

Weagles, on 24 August 2018 - 06:35 PM, said:

Gobbler War Horn – reminder - Nov is just around the corner. This is more for the turkeys in general population then a prestige item.

Only if it starts with the sound of a rooster...

Weagles, on 24 August 2018 - 06:45 PM, said:

New Faction Game mode and maps: Overlord

No! Bad Weagles! Go back in your cage Weagles! We aim for simple and stoopid when pitching ideas, you know better!

kuma8877, on 24 August 2018 - 07:32 PM, said:

I would have to disagree. I use it all the time, but it doesn't have enough options to be really useful. I also think it would be a nice QOL change for all modes of play and helps on the accessibility front.

You are already laying out the reason why you need to take this elsewhere. You want more command wheel, fine go ask for it elsewhere. It is an all game-mode issue. FP has a lot of unique issues and we players who care first and foremost about FP don't want PGI distracted by QP improvements when they ask us about fixing FP. So please, all of you, keep it focused on things that need fixing specifically in FP.

[Cato Zilks]

Weagles, on 24 August 2018 - 06:35 PM, said:

YES Loyalty means something:

It is about meaning:
The more FP becomes a story the better. Events is the right direction.

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.

[Mochyn Pupur]

slide, on 22 August 2018 - 04:46 PM, said:

I disagree completely with this statement and most of your post. Here's why.

IMO the single biggest issue with getting new people involved with FP is fear. Fear of the "boogey man" 12 player pre-made that is going to stomp the crap out of us pugs. This is a legitimate fear.

You make me smile . . . you "disagree with my post", then immediately affirm the content and reason for it. Are you certain you understand what disagree actually means? For the last two years plus, I have put forward various arguments, suggestions and observations designed to try and encourage new players, so the CW/FP population could be healthy.

You then go on to talk about worst case scenarios which is again what I have highlighted and again something you agree as being a potential issue.

Sad to say your response is not unexpected or unusual; it is something common to a lot of posts across all subjects, where time is not taken to read and digest what has been written. the approach is not particularly supportive of looking at ways of improving the MWO experience as a whole and tends to originate from longer/hardcore players unwilling to change. Online games have to be re-evaluated regularly to keep new player enticement and retention healthy to fund the game's ongoing existence.

Paul's invite for suggestions is a breath of fresh air. Rather than criticise people for suggesting and highlighting potential issues, try coming up with positives for a change. Works wonders.

[Horseman]

Paul Inouye, on 20 August 2018 - 02:54 PM, said:

• Objective play reward increase.
  
• Earlier win conditions based on team destruction (stomps)

Here's something to consider with regards to stomps: winning team has no reason to cut the match short if they have time left on the clock.


This also ties into the discussion about spawn camping. Incentivizing objective victory and time efficiency would go a long way to discourage it: if players were rewarded just as much for winning by objective (bonus for each surviving mech on the other side if the player still has at least one mech alive - think equal to assist + 1/12th of Kill/KMMD/Solo Kill bonuses combined) and saving time on the clock (bonus for time remaining), they would have better reasons to finish the game quickly with an objective victory than waste time on killing off the remainder of the losing side's mechs.

As for spawn camping when it actually happens, having an option to delay one's drop would permit a team to drop several mechs in sync, giving them a fighting chance instead of being fed one by one into enemy guns. It's not a hard counter, but it's simple, makes a meaningful difference and should not require a substantialy effort to produce

Edited by Horseman, 25 August 2018 - 10:20 AM.

[kuma8877]

Cato Zilks, on 24 August 2018 - 08:56 PM, said:

Ok, this would be funny. But it is hardly a FP issue. This list of goodies is your nerdy/trolly wet dream list. It has nothing to do with FP per se.

Only if it starts with the sound of a rooster...

No! Bad Weagles! Go back in your cage Weagles! We aim for simple and stoopid when pitching ideas, you know better!


You are already laying out the reason why you need to take this elsewhere. You want more command wheel, fine go ask for it elsewhere. It is an all game-mode issue. FP has a lot of unique issues and we players who care first and foremost about FP don't want PGI distracted by QP improvements when they ask us about fixing FP. So please, all of you, keep it focused on things that need fixing specifically in FP.

So, is this just about people that are currently playing FP? Or growing it, so others feel willing to lend their time to the mode and grow the queue? Being able to kill two birds with one stone (an improvement in both FP and QP QOL) isn't a blind waste of effort, it's smart design.

Edited by kuma8877, 25 August 2018 - 06:05 AM.

[kuma8877]

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.

Do we know how robust the event system is and can be made to be, if the queue grows and people start playing again, or biting in for the first time outside of past events (MC bribing)? If they are able to run and track multiple events or use alliances on top of multi events you could potentially keep factions engaged at a much faster cycle rate. PGI is going to have to accept that to have BT style narratives as the backdrop, they are going to have to be creative with the buckets.

[Weagles]

Actually love how many suggestions and counter suggestions are being offered. Very focused thread.
Have a question for Paul, how many rank 20 pilots are there?

Could the count of pilots be added next to each rank in the loyalty ranks? Davion may have 800 rank 20 grinders while being rank 20 in Liao may be one of 50 and something more special. The milestone date of when a rank was achieved might push a few to grind further.

Can some who shifts loyalty give thoughts on Paul's discussion of the negative loyalty. Safe to say I will probably never increase in rank in the clans or certain IS houses as my unit is Davion with short stints as Steiner and for some events as mercs. Killing Liao is just something fun to do when not killing clans. Any thoughts on negative rank awards where killing more of another faction drives the negatives to a negative rank 20? Every Davion pilot would love to be on the Chancellor's most wanted dead list rank 20. This way staying loyal to one faction earns positive and negative rewards in others.

The events that focus on Davion will give the 3 Marik pilots Paul hasn't banned an easier choice of which side to join if they are working on the negative ranks.

Edited by Weagles, 25 August 2018 - 07:28 AM.

[C337Skymaster]

I left a lot of comments on the YouTube video of the Podcast and just wanted to transcribe them here, where they're more likely to be seen:

My main reason for playing this game, and the hook that has held me (and so many other players) for the past several decades, is the fact that it has such a rich and storied history behind it, driving the existence of the universe, and providing reasons "why" things are the way they are. Story is why so many of us deserted MWO to go play Battletech (though I, personally, am a sucker for free MC, so I only just finished the Battletech Campaign a week ago), and why we're so eagerly awaiting MW5.

One thing that I've always wanted to see, is specific 'mechs being restricted to use by specific factions. For example: Bushwackers are FedCom 'mechs, so only Steiner and Davion should be able to use them. Same thing with Uziels. Jenner-K is Kuritan, but Jenner-D was more widely available. Dragons are specifically a Kuritan design, and so are Maulers. Fafnirs are FedCom 'mechs. Atlas-K is specifically a Kuritan design. Atlas-S was Steiner. Atlas-D is the universal design from back in the days of the Star League. Victor-9K was a Kuritan design (although apparently there was a -9D that was the exact same weapons, but sourced from different manufacturers). At the same time, the Victor was despised by Kurita and Steiner because it represented Davion. Jagermechs and Blackjacks were also fairly unique Davion designs. Catapults were almost exclusive to Liao and Kurita. Orions were only seen in the Free Worlds League for nearly 200 years. The Zeus and Commando are uniquely Steiner 'mechs that other factions didn't have or didn't want access to. Et Cetera.

Ooo! Carrot idea! Rank 20 Faction Play Reward (because by that point, 50 million CBills is probably worthless to you): unlock that faction's pattern for every 'mech chassis. So I reach rank 20 in Davion, and I get Davion camo pattern for EVERY 'mech. I reach rank 20 in Ghost Bear, and I get the Ghost Bear pattern unlocked for EVERY chassis. Please?! Pretty please?!

I'm actually in favor of smoke-diving in Scouting. It allows the use of 'mechs other than 50-55 tons, and encourages players to actually collect intel, vs the players who just want to "Hulk Smash!" and leave the map with a single intel collected among the entire team, not moving the scouting slider any meaningful distance. That said, Stealth Armor has dramatically skewed the smoke diving difficulty (I've used it, myself, and had a guy not realize I was in the smoke until I accidentally ran into his leg). The combination of a 'mech being super small and maneuverable (hard to hit with anything other than lasers and lock-on weapons) and at the same time, you can't get a lock for lock-on weapons...

Instead of a text warning, there should be a 5 minute video which cannot be skipped which describes all of the unique objectives, goals, and limitations of Faction Play. (That way we also don't get a guy asking what he's supposed to do in a Scouting match, and having to explain how to capture intel, etc).

Edited by C337Skymaster, 25 August 2018 - 01:56 PM.

[Cato Zilks]

kuma8877, on 25 August 2018 - 07:07 AM, said:

Do we know how robust the event system is and can be made to be, if the queue grows and people start playing again, or biting in for the first time outside of past events (MC bribing)? If they are able to run and track multiple events or use alliances on top of multi events you could potentially keep factions engaged at a much faster cycle rate. PGI is going to have to accept that to have BT style narratives as the backdrop, they are going to have to be creative with the buckets.

He answered point blank in the other thread that the game code is written with the only "teams" beyond an individual faction as either Clan or IS. So we won't see any faction "teams" except in how the loyalty points are assigned. He has also been very clear that he is looking at single queue so there will not be a background Clan v IS fight you can join (and no multi-events or alliances). It is either the matchup of the week/day or don't play. Also, as far as I have gleaned from Paul, if a Davion "loyalist" picked the Clan Wolf side in a Falcon v. Wolf event, they would drop in clan mechs basically as Wolf.

For every single event, loyalists for more than 10 factions will get the option to fight someone else's fight, or go play QP.

[kuma8877]

Cato Zilks, on 25 August 2018 - 04:42 PM, said:

He answered point blank in the other thread that the game code is written with the only "teams" beyond an individual faction as either Clan or IS. So we won't see any faction "teams" except in how the loyalty points are assigned. He has also been very clear that he is looking at single queue so there will not be a background Clan v IS fight you can join (and no multi-events or alliances). It is either the matchup of the week/day or don't play. Also, as far as I have gleaned from Paul, if a Davion "loyalist" picked the Clan Wolf side in a Falcon v. Wolf event, they would drop in clan mechs basically as Wolf.

For every single event, loyalists for more than 10 factions will get the option to fight someone else's fight, or go play QP.

Any chance on a heads up of which other thread you are referring to?

We've had more buckets before, correct? So the underlying system is there for multiple simultaneous fronts (reduced to account for population in FP). Was he speaking of the event system or the in game match itself? We've known from before S7 that we couldn't do multi team matches (for FFA) but what about the actual event system? What about a "Fill the ranks" or "Choose your side" option for each stage of the conflict/narrative (to allow for betrayal (mercs)) that doesn't commit you to either faction but allows you to participate. Limit it to likely allies of whatever active faction is the brunt of the storyline and then it could allow for loyalists to remain loyalists, like a decree to assist. Could allow loyalists and Mercs to get in on the action while continuing to accrue exp in their chosen profession.

So there would only be two factions as far as the match was concerned but the event system could allow for multiple participating factions to be a part of the queue and outcome.

Edited by kuma8877, 25 August 2018 - 05:45 PM.

[Cato Zilks]

kuma8877, on 25 August 2018 - 05:35 PM, said:

Any chance on a heads up of which other thread you are referring to?

Sure, here are some links.

I ask:

Quote

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__6144334
Now what would make perfect sense is if you and the rest of our glorious overlords at PGI decided that during a Steiner/Marik conflict that Kurita would drop with Marik, or during a Jade Falcon/Steiner war that Kurita drops with Jade Falcon. That latter case does not mean that Kurita drops in Clan mechs, they just use IS tech while dropping alongside Clanner scum. If you don't want to have a PGI person just decide the alliances (which I would strongly prefer for balance reasons), we could always have some kind of voting for which way a faction's politics go. But please, don't make factions more meaningless. The forum seems quite unified in a desire for the game mode to go the other direction.

I ask again:

Quote

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__6145396
Paul, can the system allow us to rework the "alliances" we have at the moment? Could we have events where the say Wolf and Steiner fight on one side against Kurita and Ghostbear? Or are we looking at a hard coded clanforce and isforce?

I discuss the topic with ppl some on pages 18-20. Paul responds:

Quote

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__6146192
Not possible at the moment. The queuing system was never meant to do that. Originally it was just IS vs IS, then Clan vs IS.. always 2 faction front, not combined/alliance stuff. This is one of the investigation points I'm looking into though.

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__6144334

Edited by Cato Zilks, 26 August 2018 - 12:44 AM.

[Cato Zilks]

kuma8877, on 25 August 2018 - 05:35 PM, said:

What about a "Fill the ranks" or "Choose your side" option for each stage of the conflict/narrative (to allow for betrayal (mercs)) that doesn't commit you to either faction but allows you to participate. Limit it to likely allies of whatever active faction is the brunt of the storyline and then it could allow for loyalists to remain loyalists, like a decree to assist. Could allow loyalists and Mercs to get in on the action while continuing to accrue exp in their chosen profession.

So there would only be two factions as far as the match was concerned but the event system could allow for multiple participating factions to be a part of the queue and outcome.

If the system cannot read Clan Nova Cat as a "techbase=clan" team fighting on the "IS alliance" then it rules out limiting choosable sides to "likely allies". We will all have the choice to join either side in every conflict (which makes us all mercs in my book), and you are defined as loyalist by how you choose to fight. If PGI can make malleable "alliances", much of this problem goes away because they can force sets of populations into each side of the conflict essentially forcing a rough balance of pop and talent.

Edited by Cato Zilks, 26 August 2018 - 12:52 AM.

[Chados]

I’m cross posting this from the thread in the FW board asking why new players leave. You all aren’t going to like it. But there’s a reason new players don’t stay on and transition into the FW game.

It’s because it’s just not much fun. Having tried it in the last event, I saw a lot of spawn camping, a lot of getting power focused down while dropping out of the dropship by seven enemy mechs, a lot of “git gud scrub,” a lot of toxic salt in all-chat, and no real reason to fight in the first place. Dropping after the event, well, Clans as a whole out-power IS mech for mech in group combat still, because their equipment is lighter and cooler when you can stuff more heat sinks per ton and crit in, and their lasers are far more powerful in groups. That’s just how it is.

How do you save FW? You’re not going to want to hear it.

Cooperative PvE.

Co-op PvE, with a focus on lore and story-driven campaigns, giving the team something to fight for. Player control over the universe. Back in the day, my intro to Mechwarrior was a game called Multiplayer Online Battletech, on the GEnie Online service. It was EGA, based on the original Mechwarrior game from 1989. I played in 1991-93. It was co-op PvE only. The year was 3025, at the end of the Third Succession War. The game had the original Battlemaster, Rifleman, Warhammer, Locust, Shadow Hawk, Phoenix Hawk, and Jenner, as I recall. You started as a pilot in one of the great houses, in the Mechwarrior academy learning how to pilot light mechs. Once you qualified, you could run in open matches as part of a House military unit. The hierarchy were established players and I can’t remember how one became the head of the house. I do remember that I was in the Federated Suns when I qualified as a light pilot, and got recruited by the commander of the Ninth Benjamin Regulars to defect to Kurita and join the Dragon. I qualified as a medium pilot and then a heavy pilot in the 9th and became a lance leader, promoted by my Commander. We fought Davion in the Draconis March, and dropped as a unit into 4v4 PvE matches, with planet control by faction determined by number of victories in 24 hours.

Role play was common, and it was custom to greet other Kuritans in drop lobbies with “konnichi-wa,” and we used Japanese words for yes (hai) and no (iyeh). When the head of the house actually would drop with us, we respectfully called him “tono,” Lord. The opposition dropped from the same lobby and during fights for a planet there was much trash talk back and forth. Davions were pretentious, hewing to old British custom and language like we did Japanese. I later went with my Commander to the Rasalhague district when he became Warlord, and worked for his girlfriend for awhile, then tried the mercenary life (sucked) before taking over the 17th Rasalhague Regulars as Commander. Steiners were very Teutonic, very ego driven players who considered themselves elites and made sure you knew it. We had message boards on GEnie where the House leadership engaged in politics both inside and outside the faction, and as a lance leader and later company commander I had to post action reports. I moved lance and company to worlds in accord with the Warlord’s strategic directives. It was a lot of fun.

Current FW is essentially team deathmatch x10, only instead of the usual quick drop craziness it’s much more organized and serious. Oddly, the same team that will roll you 48-29 in FW will be a team you can whip 12-6 in a QP match on the same map and why that is I have no clue. I think it has to do with the way FW works, you reinforce at different rates, it’s harder to reverse a deficit, you have mix tech on a mech for mech scale, and QP doesn’t have spawn camping. I note that in games like War Thunder they prevent spawn camping with mechanics that prevent a team from entering the enemy spawn. Sometimes that works, and overall, WT map design is better as well. In Armored Warfare, My.Com gets around the problems with a viable PvE mode that is more popular than their PvP modes. World of Warcraft’s PvE modes are what keeps that game relevant and keeps players in the game and returning to the game despite a long series of changes and nerfs that are as bad as PGI’s worst efforts.

If you all want FW to prosper, PGI is going to need to get some AI that’s workable and get some PvE experience into the game. It’s going to need some lore and story and a reason to fight, and a hook to keep players that aren’t up for a harder deathmatch in the fight. That simple.

Edited by Chados, 26 August 2018 - 05:18 AM.

[kuma8877]

Cato Zilks, on 26 August 2018 - 12:51 AM, said:

If the system cannot read Clan Nova Cat as a "techbase=clan" team fighting on the "IS alliance" then it rules out limiting choosable sides to "likely allies". We will all have the choice to join either side in every conflict (which makes us all mercs in my book), and you are defined as loyalist by how you choose to fight. If PGI can make malleable "alliances", much of this problem goes away because they can force sets of populations into each side of the conflict essentially forcing a rough balance of pop and talent.

Thanks for pulling that up. Now, I'll take Paul with a grain of salt here as he says "not possible now". The weird thing to me is that the structure of MWO/FP over time has had parts of these proposed feature sets used, but not threaded together like we're asking for now (multi bucket/multi front). Granted, this means that he's right in that it can't be done immediately but seems something they can actually tie together given a little time and minimal effort, as the majority of the hard work is done already.

[Peter2k]

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

snip

I think we all know, and Paul as well
gonna go down that list

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

I saw a lot of spawn camping

We try to address that
instead of saying it sucks please provide an idea on how you would curb that behavior, because we know, really we do

as far as I'm aware of we had:
- a change to the walls around the drop zone
- a shelling of the drop zone before reinforcement
- a way to delay the drop so the whole group can at least drop as a whole

and the note that its a kinda normal thing in games


I'm sure more had ideas, that is just what I'm aware by skimming

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

a lot of “git gud scrub,”

You might not like that, but Paul reinforced the idea about it.
FP is supposed to be group play that means something (which is funny as we all know it doesn't mean anything beyond team death match).

What we came to agree on (sort a) is better tools to group up and getting into groups.
Not to buff singles.
Removing unit tax and talking about unit size ties directly into that.

Also the match maker should take care of that, if we have population of course, by pitting teams against each other first and filling up as needed (supposedly a skill rating is included).

At the bottom you would have single and not so good players
which some are already whining about as well, but important here is how many cry for or against playing with terrible/new players.

I mean seriously, cracking 100 dmg should be doable with 4 mechs, except if you picked a knife for a gunfight 4 times.

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

a lot of toxic salt in all-chat

I get it, its not nice.
That being said default for all-chat is off.
And trust me the rants in some groups in TS are actually way worse.

A reason why I left MS, making fun of the seals became tiresome to listen to, while getting completely destroyed by competent 12 man.
"Your averaging 4-5k damage in FP? So why you did sub 500 against a good 12 man?"
Its not something some players where keen on answering.

There will always be people that will make fun of you, its the internet.
PGI provides a checkbox so you wont have to read it.

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

and no real reason to fight in the first place.

We are trying to address this as well.

At the moment it hinges around:
- making loyalists be important/mean something (would hopefully address Mercs switching)
- more lore
- better events
- bribing to fight anyway
- and match making

since those are additions that PGI probably can implement in a timely fashion

I think that was a complete run down as far as I am aware
BTW, we all would love a complete rewriting of FP, that's just out of the question.

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

Clans as a whole out-power IS mech for mech in group combat still, because their equipment is lighter and cooler when you can stuff more heat sinks per ton and crit in, and their lasers are far more powerful in groups. That’s just how it is.

That is a matter of debate for a different sub forum
Nothing the Clans have can 1v1 my Anni, nothing.

Basically you need to play to each sides strength.

Clan are long range glass cannons, push them hard and see them faulter;need to cool off which they can only do if you let them.
They can't sustain the fight because the tech is not just smaller but also hotter on average.
If you want to trade with them it better be really good trades with mechs that are actually quirked for it.

IS are DPS tanky mechs (except if they are quirked in a way, like my Battlemaster is made for long range trades, and better than clan mechs), get in close to clans and rip them to bits, best go for legs if you are that close ready anyway.
Legs can be hit from any angle back and front.


But lets just say that a rag tag band of players doesn't stand a chance against a 12 man unit no matter the side

A 12 man will coordinate/optimize the mechs (on IS that means most favorable quirks) and load outs, what mechs they bring in each drop (like all Assault), and general direction and so on.

If those groups bring LRM you can bet your a** that they bring 2 or 3 TAG/NARCs spotters.
You can't beat that with half a team of players that just put a drop deck together because it fit into the tonnage restrictions, didn't bring at least a UAV, have not skilled up the mechs yet, put half the armor in the back and have generally speaking no idea how to actually play in a group.


Again MM would be your friend here.
As it would put big groups against each other first, then small ones and lastly singles.
Singles that are rather good (what Paul refers to SSR) would be filler, while players with low SSR would most likely have to face each other.

Also Paul is listening to gating, which spells trouble for a certain type of players.
- my idea on the issue would be pre build drop decks "trial mechs" build by the community explicitly for FP
at least you would still allow newer players to join while giving them a fighting chance, because half the victory is picking the right mech and load out for FP.

So the "git gud" attitude might be over the top a bit, but its not exactly far off either

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

Cooperative PvE.

Paul shot that down because of AI reasons
would love the idea personally

Edited by Peter2k, 26 August 2018 - 06:54 AM.