536 replies to this topic

[Paul Inouye]

Faction Play Update - Post MechCon

Discussion and Planning

As announced at MechCon, the Faction Play Update has been discussed and has a target of early 2019 (March/April). During this time I'd like to continue the discussion that was underway previously and in the same casual manner.

Below is the list of items covered from the main discussion with community members and now has color coded priority assigned.

Yellow - This is a primary feature and will be included in the update but it's a major undertaking and will take the longest.
Orange - Under immediate investigation and has a higher action priority/capability than other items currently open.
Blue - Needs serious re-consideration as it has a split acceptance from the community or has severe technological issues behind it.
Green - Complete and in a future patch.

I will be updating the color coding and priorities as development moves along to make sure you are all aware of the states of specific items on the list. Please keep in mind, if an item is not color coded, it does not mean that item has no value, it means that in order for certain sub systems to come on line, the prioritized stuff has to come first.

Make faction alignment meaningful and rewarding

• Faction specific rewards (Colors/boltons/cockpit items/skins/etc)
• LP used as a currency
• Story/Lore/Faction driven choices to cement a desire to stay loyal
• Expand on the Loyalist path drastically
• Expand on lore in global descriptions in FP

Map Alterations

• Revisit sightlines
• Revisit pathing
• Look at generator positioning

Game Mode/Hooks

• Tug-of-War adjustment for less punitive win condition flips.
• Removal of Tug-of-War mechanic for smaller events with different win scenarios.
• Incursion base building health adjustments.
• Drop Zone wall angle adjustments.
• More reward kickers based on player behavior.
• Bring back queue count.
• Planet/event specific map selection.
• Objective play reward increase.
• Conquest score adjustment.
• Adjust launch countdown.
• Earlier win conditions based on team destruction (stomps)
• CalltoArms timer change.
• Unit based objectives.
• Queuing integrated into LFG
• Reward group play at a higher level than solo
• Scouting mode end condition investigation (diving)
• Rewards for CalltoArms participation
• Battlefield based tonnage restriction (e.g. only 4 assaults at a time)

Systems Update

• More than 4 drop decks
• VoIP prior to drop

UI

• Refresh on friends list
• Favorites on friends list
• Status indicator (drop type/game area)

Coffers

• Unit management taxation removal/change.
• C-bill transfer between players.

Misc

• Tool for players to enter planetary data

[Geg]

Yes... great. But what about all the stuff in light blue (teal?)

Those out of scope? Still being assessed?

[Paul Inouye]

Geg, on 06 December 2018 - 01:40 PM, said:

Yes... great. But what about all the stuff in light blue (teal?)

Those out of scope? Still being assessed?

Quote

Please keep in mind, if an item is not color coded, it does not mean that item has no value, it means that in order for certain sub systems to come on line, the prioritized stuff has to come first.

[roboPrancer]

But what about the droid attack on the wookies?

Edited by roboPrancer, 06 December 2018 - 01:49 PM.

[Geg]

Paul Inouye, on 06 December 2018 - 01:48 PM, said:

Damnit! Next time bold the REALLY import stuff...

[Paul Inouye]

roboPrancer, on 06 December 2018 - 01:48 PM, said:

But what about the droid attack on the wookies?

This was NEVER agreed upon. 9 out of 3 units were against it.

[Felbombling]

Paul [Russ], you should think about a ranking system that rewards players according to the difficulty of the engagement. For example, the old BattleTech game had a rating system for units, listing them as Elite, Veteran, Regular or Green. You could rate the units based on win percentage, perhaps. Say Elite units have an 85% + win rate, Veteran units have a win rate between 60% and 84%, etc.

If a collection of players meets an Elite unit and loses, perhaps grant them greater bonus rewards for taking on the challenge. That also has a by-product of producing unit recognition/pride and rivalries, while also promoting good play and advancement up the ranking network.

Edited by Felbombling, 06 December 2018 - 01:55 PM.

[Paul Inouye]

Felbombling, on 06 December 2018 - 01:54 PM, said:

Paul [Russ], you should think about a ranking system that rewards players according to the difficulty of the engagement. For example, the old BattleTech game had a rating system for units, listing them as Elite, Veteran, Regular or Green. You could rate the units based on win percentage, perhaps. Say Elite units have an 85% + win rate, Veteran units have a win rate between 60% and 84%, etc. If a collection of players meets an Elite unit and loses, perhaps grant them greater bonus rewards for taking on the challenge. That also has a by-product of producing unit recognition/pride and rivalries, while also promoting good play and advancement up the ranking network.

Won't promise anything along these lines. However it would make for a interesting talking point internally because it uses the same principles as Elo. Elo has a prediction algorithm that says player A or team A has an X% chance of winning. If it's right, it reduces the gains of the winner and reduces the loss of the loser, But if the underdog wins, the gains/losses are bigger.

[Kompleks Ognevoi Podderzhki 320]

How about to remove all accumulated reputation and give incentive prizes to those who saved it for a long time and still remain in the game for this game mode? This will emphasize the importance of the old players for the company and will balance between the new ones, and most importantly, will motivate their reputation knowing that even in the case of a new patch, their achievements will not disappear.

[Nightbird]

I don't see anything to allow teams of unequal skill to have a fun match. Everything else IMHO is tweaks on the icing without addressing the core experience.

It doesn't have to be what is suggested in the link below, hoping helps get my meaning across.

https://mwomercs.com...n-in-one-month/

[justcallme A S H]

Paul, Thank you SOOOO much for doing this mate (and for buying us lunch on Wed).

Definitely helps out things into perspective to see what is coming up and what not. If you ever wanna do a podcast about it with NGNG, hit me up!

CUinBC next year!

[Navid A1]

Paul Inouye, on 06 December 2018 - 11:18 AM, said:

Map Alterations

• Revisit sightlines
  
• Revisit pathing
  
• Look at generator positioning

This is the most important part.

Realistically looking at things, no matter how many UI/meta game improvements are put in place, at the end when you launch into a match, it is a corridor map, with a couple gates and same old choke points. 100% same thing that we have now.

A team gets rolled 3 times, they quit FP queue, and there goes FP for the night.


The maps themselves need... I would say a compete overhaul (I know it will not happen...sadly).
Lack of dynamic capturable hot drop-zones for next waves have turned FP maps into 4 times of repeated charging in, which either ends in winning/losing by attrition, or a successful gen-rush.

Design maps with multiple attack vectors and dynamic battle lines. You know... make things exciting. AVOID CHOKE POINTS!... PLEASE!

I can assure you... lore does not matter, planet name does not matter. Amount of loyalist rewards do not matter if loyalists continue to get rolled in said choke points non-stop.
People who are steam-rolling FP right now will continue to do so with even better rewards as loyalists.

MAPS, MAPS, MAPS... PUT RESOURCES ON MAPS IF YOU ARE SERIOUS ABOUT REVITALIZING FP.!!!!


Funny thing is that in the past some of those FP maps have been the basis of balance changes to weapons/quirks that were completely fine in every other situation (e.g., boreal vault)

Edited by Navid A1, 06 December 2018 - 02:40 PM.

[November Juliet]

a step in the right direction to be sure.

[Davegt27]

some of the things I would do

1) problem the large amount of fire power at a focal point can be a problem for FP matchs
solution- asymmetrical combat drops

for example a lance is dropped close to a gate the defenders have to go out the gate turn on a beacon
then rush back in so the base gates can close

but in close proximity an attack lance is also dropped
a engagement of two lances in advance of the main force would happen
this allows the type of smaller engagements to happen like you sometimes see conquest
(asymmetrical combat drop)


2) campaign mode for units
this is just a path you enter like a train on a train track and units most complete points along a path
for example I am a loyalist everything I do revolves around FP rep points and after years of work I am almost to Col
I really don't get much out of this but its something I do

for units this might be combat awards (we could even have it give access to advance jump ships and equipment)

3) the ultimate for FP would be a FP economy (you spend assets/money or whatever to push yourself along a path)
the big thing is you want some type of movement along some path



JMTCW

[Nema Nabojiv]

No-invasion solo Q or dont bother.

[DarklightCA]

Can't really imagine anybody would have any problems with those changes, they seem pretty solid to me. The whole faction specific rewards are long overdue and depending on the rewards for clicking call to arms could actually help populate it some.

However I don't really see this bringing back too many players or maintaining interest beyond a specific point. The core issue of faction play is the skill difference between teams and some individual solo players against solo play formed teams.

Stomps regardless of which side of it you are on is extremely boring and suck the fun out of the game. Players that stop trying or playing because they are fighting X team sucks the fun for both sides and the fact at some point they just stop re-queuing because they don't want to keep fighting X team just kills the population.

I know that it's pretty impossible at this point to separate the two but coming up with something that makes it more fun for those people to fight more organized and sometimes more skillful teams would go a long way to helping refill the population pool of Faction Play.

Going as far as treating Units with high winrates like Rogues from The Division and giving teams/players bounties for winning games off of them could help with that issue. The more successful you are as a unit the more people want to kill you kind of thing would be fun for those units and giving teams/players a significant reward for killing them could make it more viable for solo teams to interact and try against the teams they hate fighting.

Not saying the above mentioned is the solution to that but more as an example of something the makes interactions in game between organized groups and unorganized solo players more interesting and rewarding for both sides would go a long way to bringing more fun into that game mode.

[Peter2k]

Nema Nabojiv, on 06 December 2018 - 02:54 PM, said:

No-invasion solo Q or dont bother.

I think with the FP population we have had since long tom, and the maybe dwindling playerbase as is, all we can do is try and MM both sides as good as can be (with an incentive for 12 man teams wanting to face 12 man teams)

[Peter2k]

DarklightCA, on 06 December 2018 - 03:12 PM, said:

snip

They are solid and welcome, but I think we all agreed months ago that those changes wouldn't bring in new players, because that list is obviously not new.
We knew bumping the conquest timer from 1250 to 1500 or having 6 drop decks instead of 4 wouldn't bring in players.
Frankly I thought that most were supposed to be fast easy changes to help us out endure till something major comes.

I'll take what's on the list, but I dont think it will invigorate FP.

Edited by Peter2k, 06 December 2018 - 03:16 PM.

[DarklightCA]

Peter2k, on 06 December 2018 - 03:16 PM, said:

They are solid and welcome, but I think we all agreed months ago that those changes wouldn't bring in new players, because that list is obviously not new.
We knew bumping the conquest timer from 1250 to 1500 or having 6 drop decks instead of 4 wouldn't bring in players.
Frankly I thought that most were supposed to be fast easy changes to help us out endure till something major comes.

I'll take what's on the list, but I dont think it will invigorate FP.

To sum up what I said, I said they were decent changes but wouldn't bring back players or attract new ones without resolving the one issue that has always haunted Faction Play, the difference between organized teams and unorganized solo players.

Being you can't split the two without killing what is left of the population, the best change they could make to fix Faction Play is creating a better interaction experience between organized units and solo players.

[Nightbird]

DarklightCA, on 06 December 2018 - 03:21 PM, said:

To sum up what I said, I said they were decent changes but wouldn't bring back players or attract new ones without resolving the one issue that has always haunted Faction Play, the difference between organized teams and unorganized solo players.

Being you can't split the two without killing what is left of the population, the best change they could make to fix Faction Play is creating a better interaction experience between organized units and solo players.

What do you think of my suggestion?