74 replies to this topic

[Nightbird]

If it's done with the new queue system: countdown > vote > lobby, I think it's a good idea. You shouldn't get to see the other team during the so there's little chance at abuse. If there you have a large group, you should be able to get the map of your choice every 2 to 3 drops maximum due to multiplier.

[Tier5ForLife]

Quckplay is "quickplay". Two made up teams picking a map than a game. It does not count as anything, no one remembers it.

Faction Warfare is attacking or defending a planet. I think you are looking at this wrong. What PGI has to figure out is what each planet is like. Is it Cold planet where the only maps would be Frozen City, Polar Highlands, and Alpine Peaks? Is it a Forest planet or maybe a Desert planet.

Part of the chess match of playing FW is not knowing the map and having to plan on the fly. We are being sent to attack or defend a planet, we should have no say in the matter.

One thing you should be able to do is see what each planet is like and when you vote on a planet, you know you will get certain maps.

I'd also like to have more than one planet under attack at one time. The excuse not to would be lack of players but that is one reason I want NPCs added to the game. There would be no Ghost Drops, instead, you would battle against anything from a local militia to a well made and outfitted Clan, House or Merc unit.

That way if one overpowering 12 man team is on one planet, you can choose to go to another.

I remember when a planet would have the tag of a unit that won the most there. That seemed like it would not allow PUGs to take it.

It does not matter, nothing is going to change.

[TWIAFU]

Baaaaad idea.

This is how it will go;

With the possible upcoming Surrender option, if a side does not get what they want they will surrender.

Voting will be pointless because the enemy will just surrender because they didn't get what they wanted.

Example;

One side votes for Alpine because they want to LERM, other wants to Brawl so they vote for a Brawl map and loose. Brawlers loose the vote and surrender the match. Everyone's time is wasted. You know it will happen.

[justcallme A S H]

Nimnul, on 07 September 2018 - 08:09 AM, said:

What prevents you from saving a multiplier for an interesting card + mode? I want to miss many times playing on my favorite maps. Than many times I play on maps that I do not like.

The fact that 20-25mins games means to build a useable multiplier for your group means you'd need to play for 3hrs+ just 'ensure' you get the map/mode you want with a 6-7x++ multi.

It'll end up being the same as QP. Playing all the silly NASCAR favoured maps - HPG/Canyon etc and none of the better maps.

At least now you get what you are given, I'd rather than than playing the same crap game in/game out.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 16 September 2018 - 06:21 PM.

[K O Z A K]

so we can play polar highlands, after polar highlands, after polar highlands because "lurm specialists"? just no

[Ch_R0me]

Hazeclaw, on 17 September 2018 - 09:14 AM, said:

so we can play polar highlands, after polar highlands, after polar highlands because "lurm specialists"? just no

Thankfully I showed my usefulness by doing AMS challenge in Polar. But to be honest -> SRMs and ATMs.

I wish we had the Mech Mortars - More fun, yet no stigma of being ez pz "I WIN" button weapon...

[Nimnul]

Guys, I do not understand why you vote against. You against democracy? Followers of Kim and north Korea. You are happy to force players to get what they do not want. And on this lose the players. Have a low online and ghostdrops. What could be better than a free of choice. And the guarantee that at least once a day you will play on the map + mode that you like.

Edited by Nimnul, 17 September 2018 - 11:25 AM.

[TWIAFU]

Nimnul, on 17 September 2018 - 11:24 AM, said:

Guys, I do not understand why you vote against. You against democracy? Followers of Kim and north Korea. You are happy to force players to get what they do not want. And on this lose the players. Have a low online and ghostdrops. What could be better than a free of choice. And the guarantee that at least once a day you will play on the map + mode that you like.

You do not seem to understand what that word means.

[K O Z A K]

Nimnul, on 17 September 2018 - 11:24 AM, said:

Guys, I do not understand why you vote against. You against democracy? Followers of Kim and north Korea. You are happy to force players to get what they do not want. And on this lose the players. Have a low online and ghostdrops. What could be better than a free of choice. And the guarantee that at least once a day you will play on the map + mode that you like.

Your version of democracy is like the rich 50% of a country voting together for the party that will make them richer while the poor 50% are voting for 5 different parties simply because they don't know what everyone else on their "team" voted

The result of what you want to introduce is ****** 12 mans that like to roll pugs are going to just repeatedly run full LRM teams and vote polar, or repeatedly vote incursion and assassin rush, and since they have a 12x vote they will win the vote most of the time. This will discourage solos and small groups from playing and finish the mode off

[Nimnul]

Hazeclaw

I do not see a problem here. Imagine we 12 people want an siege. But 4 want to Polar. We knock out 3 times the siege. But other guys accumulate a multiplier. And in the end, for the fourth time, we'll get to the polar. It is right!. Or do you think that 12 people should play the polar, because 4 want it?

Edited by Nimnul, 17 September 2018 - 01:52 PM.

[K O Z A K]

Though generally I'm all in favour of almost anything that will result in more siege drops, I'm afraid that's not what's going to happen here. All I see is just a way for 12 mans to abuse pugs even more

I don't think 12 people of a mixed team should be forced to play polar repeatedly because the opfor 12 man wants to. Your "knock out" phase is like 1.5 hours. Right now it's random so nobody can really blame anyone

[Nimnul]

But the fact is that there are those who suffer playing this game, but do not get pleasure... I generally do not want to see conquest or invasion. I do not want to see the Polar or the Alpine more often than 1 time a week. 70% of the game I want to siege. The rest I'm ready to suffer. However, I am ready to suffer more if there is a vote. I'm ready to respect a certain voice, unlike you. According to my data, 80% of players left immediately after adding QP maps to FP. Large units have disintegrated. And the skill players left. All of them are those who are dizzy from Nascar. FP was the only mode for them. Where Evil, IREX, MJ12, 77BW and many many others ? I wear flowers on their graves...

Edited by Nimnul, 17 September 2018 - 02:24 PM.

[K O Z A K]

I'm with you, I'd like to be playing mostly siege, and almost never alpine and polar. But you have to consider the other consequences of your idea.

Honestly, if you're suffering though a video game more than enjoying it, perhaps it's a good idea to do something else for a while

Plus at the end of the day this is all pointless conversation that will go nowhere. PGI isn't going to do anything requiring programming at this point, sorry, but this game is getting very close to the end of its life cycle, we just have to accept that and enjoy what's left while it's here.

[Nimnul]

Are you a telepath? Do you know what's on the minds of the developers? Just because now you do not support the right idea...

[K O Z A K]

.....Yes

[slide]

No. No. Thrice damned NO.

Map vote IMO ruined QP, because it removed all semblance of variety. The same 4 or 5 maps get chosen over and over (usually the colder maps).

Additionally with the Devs knowing this, it gives them an excuse for not making any more maps, because they know if they don't meet the very specific criteria that makes the above 4 or 5 maps popular then it wont get used. Wasted money.

Personally I like the challenge of being presented with a random map and a random mode. More variety is better and we all know that if voting happens the choices will be reduced to 2-5 options over and over again.

The OP argues that people will quit if voting doesn't come. I'll quit if it does because boredom will trump choice in this case.

Edited by slide, 17 September 2018 - 04:37 PM.

[Marquis De Lafayette]

As Hazeclaw aptly points out.....the side with an organized 12 man (Vs. PUGs or small groups) on it generally has the advantage (just due to superIor organization and often overall skill). Put in voting and that advantage increases more, as the 12 man will control the vote. So, while I would like to play Siege more and avoid things like incursion I don’t think we can put in voting without those negative consequences.

Edited by Marquis De Lafayette, 18 September 2018 - 10:19 AM.

[Spheroid]

Let this topic die. The community has indicated its not needed or desired.

Do not add additional replies to this topic. Now lets see who is incapable of following this simple instruction....

[Fuerchtenichts]

Nimnul, on 17 September 2018 - 02:22 PM, said:

Are you a telepath? Do you know what's on the minds of the developers? Just because now you do not support the right idea...

No, I think its called "voice of reason".

[Captain Caveman DE]

yes - and no;

while it'd be great to have some modes/maps -not- in fw, it -is- great when you drop on a map/mode you like that's not really popular;
I love my terra therma, and the only time I get to see it is in fw (which is great, just saying: it's non-existant in QP thx to votes).
having a vote in fw might kill TT there, too.
can't.
have
that!

Spheroid, on 18 September 2018 - 11:49 AM, said:

Let this topic die. The community has indicated its not needed or desired.

Do not add additional replies to this topic. Now lets see who is incapable of following this simple instruction....

*cough*
sorry ;D

Edited by Captain Caveman DE, 19 September 2018 - 06:29 AM.