Jump to content

Faction Play Update - Post Mechcon 2018


534 replies to this topic

#481 Paul Inouye

    Lead Designer

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 2,815 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 02 March 2019 - 09:04 PM

Still catching up but I see one thing needs to be addressed immediately:

Solo Queue in FP.

First and foremost, Faction Play has always been a part of MWO that was meant for the mercenary corps to partake in larger scale battles to influence the Inner Sphere. That is, grouping up with friends/acquaintances and working together in big fights.

QP and Solaris are the playgrounds of the more squad ("lance") based smaller team and solo play. Solaris is the area specifically designed for solo players to show their mettle in 1v1 gameplay.

With that being said, splitting the queue in FP right now would severely hamper the game's ability to kick off matches, let alone matches that are 'equal' in skill. What has to be kept in mind is that every decision point along a path to creating a match is what causes a "bucket". Bucket 1, solo vs group. Splits the available players. Bucket 2, solo player but has to match Elo bracket... again splitting available players, Bucket 3, tonnage selection/drop deck configuration which again splits available players. and that's just from adding solo queue. The dilution of players is almost exponential. We do not have the playerbase to support that.

#482 Shadowomega1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 987 posts

Posted 02 March 2019 - 09:41 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 02 March 2019 - 09:04 PM, said:

Still catching up but I see one thing needs to be addressed immediately:

Solo Queue in FP.

First and foremost, Faction Play has always been a part of MWO that was meant for the mercenary corps to partake in larger scale battles to influence the Inner Sphere. That is, grouping up with friends/acquaintances and working together in big fights.

QP and Solaris are the playgrounds of the more squad ("lance") based smaller team and solo play. Solaris is the area specifically designed for solo players to show their mettle in 1v1 gameplay.

With that being said, splitting the queue in FP right now would severely hamper the game's ability to kick off matches, let alone matches that are 'equal' in skill. What has to be kept in mind is that every decision point along a path to creating a match is what causes a "bucket". Bucket 1, solo vs group. Splits the available players. Bucket 2, solo player but has to match Elo bracket... again splitting available players, Bucket 3, tonnage selection/drop deck configuration which again splits available players. and that's just from adding solo queue. The dilution of players is almost exponential. We do not have the playerbase to support that.


With the way things have been in Quick Play in the last month I don't think there will be many people left to play FP, or willing to play FP.

#483 slide

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,768 posts
  • LocationKersbrook South Australia

Posted 03 March 2019 - 03:43 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 01 March 2019 - 05:44 PM, said:

So let's jump into the current progress of the FP update:

First off, as mentioned before, all old systems that were not compatible with the current plan for the update have been removed. Re-engineering is well underway for the event driven combat system which utilizes a more distinct story telling system when triggering conflicts in Faction Play. Most of what is left is administrative interface items that will allow us to write and plan 'campaigns' that will play out during a FP conflict. This is a cross over point of development as some systems required by the UI team are blocked waiting for a few more nuggets of code to be completed. This is actually a good thing as the UI aspect can look at potential other items on the list in the OP to start moving forward on.

That being said, it's critical that the event system and the match maker update are completed before any further work is done in the update. This is why it's kind of quiet when it comes to FP information. The systems being worked on and the UI development don't really have anything glitsy to show nor does it allow any type of feature trickle as we move toward the FP patch date. We are still tracking toward the April patch for the major update and the engineers involved feel comfortable of getting there.

UI Components are well on track since a lot of UI widgets can be reused from current FP screens and screens found elsewhere in the front end.

In a nutshell, what's happening right now is:

Backend/Server Side
- Backend data management for the event driven FP system is nearing completion.
- Administrative authoring tools are up next. This allows us to enter events into the automated system.
- Matchmaker integration will follow the above.
- UI integration for the administrative tools are the final items for these major components.

UI/Front End
- War log screen updated for dynamic changes that track on a per event basis. This means that as events progress through their 'story', the war log can reflect that.
- Tug of War components have been removed from all screens and will be better reflected by statistical display rather than the arbitrary progress bar.
- Match making information will be displayed appropriately with the new incoming match making system.
- Communication between all new back end components will be connected to all UI elements that require information from the back end/server side packages.

This is the internal update for now. As you will see, nothing changes on the OP color coded list yet, but it will. I'll be back in tomorrow (Saturday) to talk on the points raised here in this thread to keep the communication moving forward.

Sorry for the unintentional gap in notification/updates. I'm going to try (not promise... being realistic) to be here at least once a week addressing your discussions. Again, I want to thank all of you for your efforts and talking points that have been relayed since the first FP Update post.



Thank you Paul for the update.

I appreciate that you have taken the time to make this post. To be honest it is communication like this that is all we have really wanted here on the forums. We don't need glitzy photos to be assured that work is being done. Understanding the process is perhaps more informative for some anyway. It is being kept in the dark and treated like mushrooms that really fosters resentment.

For me I will not be playing until the update as I have only ever really wanted to play FP and the effort involved in doing that right now is just not worth the reward (ie games played v time waiting). I look forward to grouping up with old and new friends as well as just kicking around with some random pugs.

#484 Horseman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 3,898 posts
  • LocationPoland

Posted 03 March 2019 - 10:15 PM

View PostEatit, on 24 February 2019 - 04:51 PM, said:

#soloquickplayforFW Tweet that to Russ and Paul if you want solo quick play with respawns.

Weep.

#485 Jman5

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 4,914 posts

Posted 04 March 2019 - 06:39 AM

Hey Paul,

Maybe you covered this already and I missed it, I have one small suggestion that I hope you can sneak in for the April release. Can you adjust the matchscore system in faction play so that it's not inflating massively when a player has multiple mechs left alive? It makes the matchscore kind of useless. A player on the winning team who sat 1500 meters in the back and did minimal damage can have a wildly high score because he never lost his first mech. Meanwhile a brawler who burned through all his mechs for the win is going to have a very modest score comparatively.

Edited by Jman5, 04 March 2019 - 06:41 AM.


#486 Grus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Devil
  • Little Devil
  • 4,151 posts

Posted 04 March 2019 - 07:11 AM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 01 March 2019 - 05:44 PM, said:

So let's jump into the current progress of the FP update:

First off, as mentioned before, all old systems that were not compatible with the current plan for the update have been removed. Re-engineering is well underway for the event driven combat system which utilizes a more distinct story telling system when triggering conflicts in Faction Play. Most of what is left is administrative interface items that will allow us to write and plan 'campaigns' that will play out during a FP conflict. This is a cross over point of development as some systems required by the UI team are blocked waiting for a few more nuggets of code to be completed. This is actually a good thing as the UI aspect can look at potential other items on the list in the OP to start moving forward on.

That being said, it's critical that the event system and the match maker update are completed before any further work is done in the update. This is why it's kind of quiet when it comes to FP information. The systems being worked on and the UI development don't really have anything glitsy to show nor does it allow any type of feature trickle as we move toward the FP patch date. We are still tracking toward the April patch for the major update and the engineers involved feel comfortable of getting there.

UI Components are well on track since a lot of UI widgets can be reused from current FP screens and screens found elsewhere in the front end.

In a nutshell, what's happening right now is:

Backend/Server Side
- Backend data management for the event driven FP system is nearing completion.
- Administrative authoring tools are up next. This allows us to enter events into the automated system.
- Matchmaker integration will follow the above.
- UI integration for the administrative tools are the final items for these major components.

UI/Front End
- War log screen updated for dynamic changes that track on a per event basis. This means that as events progress through their 'story', the war log can reflect that.
- Tug of War components have been removed from all screens and will be better reflected by statistical display rather than the arbitrary progress bar.
- Match making information will be displayed appropriately with the new incoming match making system.
- Communication between all new back end components will be connected to all UI elements that require information from the back end/server side packages.

This is the internal update for now. As you will see, nothing changes on the OP color coded list yet, but it will. I'll be back in tomorrow (Saturday) to talk on the points raised here in this thread to keep the communication moving forward.

Sorry for the unintentional gap in notification/updates. I'm going to try (not promise... being realistic) to be here at least once a week addressing your discussions. Again, I want to thank all of you for your efforts and talking points that have been relayed since the first FP Update post.


What I look forward to after this goes live the most, is that their will be a bunch of people in FW trying it out... so many targets...

#487 metallio

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 194 posts

Posted 04 March 2019 - 07:28 AM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 02 March 2019 - 09:04 PM, said:

Still catching up but I see one thing needs to be addressed immediately:

Solo Queue in FP.

First and foremost, Faction Play has always been a part of MWO that was meant for the mercenary corps to partake in larger scale battles to influence the Inner Sphere. That is, grouping up with friends/acquaintances and working together in big fights.

QP and Solaris are the playgrounds of the more squad ("lance") based smaller team and solo play. Solaris is the area specifically designed for solo players to show their mettle in 1v1 gameplay.

With that being said, splitting the queue in FP right now would severely hamper the game's ability to kick off matches, let alone matches that are 'equal' in skill. What has to be kept in mind is that every decision point along a path to creating a match is what causes a "bucket". Bucket 1, solo vs group. Splits the available players. Bucket 2, solo player but has to match Elo bracket... again splitting available players, Bucket 3, tonnage selection/drop deck configuration which again splits available players. and that's just from adding solo queue. The dilution of players is almost exponential. We do not have the playerbase to support that.



Paul, you're good at what you do but I think everyone up there continues to miss why the game isn't there for FP...it's *always* needed the solo players to fill in the gaps and to fight when no one else was playing. It doesn't need a solo queue and one would honestly kill FP group play even more.

All you need is a "solo queue" that fed into existing groups that were short people. When you're dumped into the group the group commander gets to decide if that person fits their group or not and move forward or boot them and get the next solo player.

All you need is a group to enter the FP queue which means you've crossed the most basic bar for FP: Coordination. If you're bad at drop calling and organizing you lose. If you're good enough you move on to individual player decks, loadouts, and skills. It doesn't even matter if it's a two man team taking solo players.

I swear to you this one simple thing would drastically increase interest/participation in faction play. Yeah, long queue waits suck no matter what the end result is and if we don't fix other things there won't be anyone wanting to stay...but literally the whole thing about FP is the coordination. You don't force it on anyone right now and it's a gigantic failing. When you do try to force it you lose the massive predominant group of solo players here...all you need to make these people take a look and *actually* get a taste of FP is to force them into a group with a drop caller. Even if it's just typed, having someone in charge shows you the potential for the game and the mode.

I'm sure there'd be more to fix, but "this one simple thing!" ™ gives you: Solo players can jump in easily without initially forming a bond with people on the internet (you'll never force that as a first thing), Corps and loyalists who are short easily get filler solos so they can drop, and maybe most importantly you get a very easy way for low and medium skill teams to compete.

I, like many people, could expound on other changes all day of course, and there are definitely other things that need tweaked for it to work "well", but it's tweaking the system at that point and not rebuilding it. You guys actually made a pretty darn good system to start with and this is just the biggest "tweak" that needs made.

I still think that a persistent lobby chat window would keep more people in the game and improved commander/drop caller controls would massively increase the capability of low skill players to get experience. A hotkey for every single call normally given to a team needs to exist...maybe giving us the ability to put them on the command wheel even. "Attack my target" or even just the one your mouse is over and it calls out the data you see above everyone's heads: Mech, name, etc. Just dumps it as text into the chat window. "Follow me!" and calls out the grid coordinate closest to your line of movement (yeah, maybe hard, but throw something in there to hold the place). Etc. The problem is that communication and coordination are both clunky and something internet strangers don't really want to do. Make it easy, and make it so no one plays who doesn't get vetted into a group by someone ostensibly in charge. There are obviously ways to put together a bad team...which is part of why I want a persistent chat window (I mean, you can turn it off, but you can leave it there on the side of your screen all game as well.

We *really* need a system that supports drop callers being seen like raid leaders in an MMO...you join up and if they suck they've wasted your time, but the easiest way to get people is to LFG in chat and see if people are actually interested because they'll be far better at the game.

The solo queue would also have a normally checked box for "willing to join existing battles" so if someone drops or gets kicked (for D/C only maybe?) you get a replacement who has to modify their deck to bring the tonnage and number of mechs that person had left when they dropped out.

But please please please put in some sort of solo queue so solo players will actually try to join...they're already just dumped into a PuG anyway, shouldn't be much harder and it would let anyone play a little "lone wolf" when they don't want to play their faction's mechs or run with their clan etc.

...and this is NOT the current system where you have to be in some kind of one man unit, choose a career path, etc. Just give the noobs a button to push so they can be cannon fodder and know it but that they'll be cannon fodder with someone in charge.

Edited by metallio, 04 March 2019 - 07:30 AM.


#488 Sixpack

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Galaxy Commander
  • Galaxy Commander
  • 244 posts

Posted 04 March 2019 - 10:35 AM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 01 March 2019 - 05:44 PM, said:

So let's jump into the current progress of the FP update:

First off, as mentioned before, all old systems that were not compatible with the current plan for the update have been removed. Re-engineering is well underway for the event driven combat system which utilizes a more distinct story telling system when triggering conflicts in Faction Play. Most of what is left is administrative interface items that will allow us to write and plan 'campaigns' that will play out during a FP conflict. This is a cross over point of development as some systems required by the UI team are blocked waiting for a few more nuggets of code to be completed. This is actually a good thing as the UI aspect can look at potential other items on the list in the OP to start moving forward on.

That being said, it's critical that the event system and the match maker update are completed before any further work is done in the update. This is why it's kind of quiet when it comes to FP information. The systems being worked on and the UI development don't really have anything glitsy to show nor does it allow any type of feature trickle as we move toward the FP patch date. We are still tracking toward the April patch for the major update and the engineers involved feel comfortable of getting there.

UI Components are well on track since a lot of UI widgets can be reused from current FP screens and screens found elsewhere in the front end.

In a nutshell, what's happening right now is:

Backend/Server Side
- Backend data management for the event driven FP system is nearing completion.
- Administrative authoring tools are up next. This allows us to enter events into the automated system.
- Matchmaker integration will follow the above.
- UI integration for the administrative tools are the final items for these major components.

UI/Front End
- War log screen updated for dynamic changes that track on a per event basis. This means that as events progress through their 'story', the war log can reflect that.
- Tug of War components have been removed from all screens and will be better reflected by statistical display rather than the arbitrary progress bar.
- Match making information will be displayed appropriately with the new incoming match making system.
- Communication between all new back end components will be connected to all UI elements that require information from the back end/server side packages.

This is the internal update for now. As you will see, nothing changes on the OP color coded list yet, but it will. I'll be back in tomorrow (Saturday) to talk on the points raised here in this thread to keep the communication moving forward.

Sorry for the unintentional gap in notification/updates. I'm going to try (not promise... being realistic) to be here at least once a week addressing your discussions. Again, I want to thank all of you for your efforts and talking points that have been relayed since the first FP Update post.


Ok, and what do you hope to be able to achieve with these back end changes and information flow?
Some theoretical examples would be nice here.

#489 Rhent

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,045 posts

Posted 04 March 2019 - 10:42 AM

View PostSigmar Sich, on 02 March 2019 - 08:43 PM, said:

Thank you for the update. If you'd be so kind to give some more answers:

1. Promotion.
It is not enough to make CW great again, you need to communicate this change to retired players. Without playerbase it will go nowhere.

Once PGI was great at making trailers for the game. I guess it is out of the question now, due to low resources. But a cost-effective video (like one with the matchmaker explained) explaining why player would want to give the CW/FP another try, may be of benefit. Not right now, but closer to the patch, to saturate the video with screenshots.

Also, please consider renaming the game back to "MWO the battletech game". This may get retired players to wonder why the change again. And older design was just better, IMO.
And you can easily return the S7 theme when/if you next update Solaris mode (hopefully with free-for-all mode, or with 2v2v2v2v2v2 like in MW4 Mercenaries. Please!)

2. The event system. Will it have story input from the developers, or it will be a generic construct like "Red team attacks Blue team, because Blue team didn't behave properly." ?

It would be great to have some series of themed events, like ISvIS 4th succession war or war of 3039, and some Clan rivalry at the same time, to provide scenarios for IS-only and Clan-only players.
And the other week a Clan invasion theme of 3050 or operation Bulldog. Then maybe FedCom civil war (bloody hell, long time overdue! Only the tech came in with that update, but no scenarios).

Maybe some time event can have forced stock mode, or be played only on frozen maps, or tropical maps, or moons. Key idea - diversity, both in background theme and in gameplay factors. Without diversity it will get old fairly soon.

3. Factions.
Right now they mean nothing. There is no faction identity, there is no reason to be attached to a faction. This needs to change.
Faction should feel differently. This is why players often talk about faction specific mechs.
Here is another take on the subject, with player-friendly solutions:

A) Add quirks for mechs to increase Loyalty points to a specific faction.. With few grades varying from somewhat common mech to a faction pride mech. Grade examples: Zeus +100% Steiner LP, Commando +75% Steiner LP, some Griffins and Thunderbolts +50% Steiner LP.
Lists of faction specific mechs were often discussed on the forum, and could be easily brought up by community.

B ) Add unique mech variants as rewards, obtainable only through CW/FP.
Something like loyalty / hero mechs with unique pattern - this pattern does not need to be compatible with other chassis, so it is a feasible task.
For example Commando COM-5S for Steiner - same hardpoints as COM-2D, just give it different quirks and pattern. Or Grand Dragon for Kurita - you'll only need to change Dragon's arm ballistic hardpoint to energy. Clans have preferred mechs too. Mercs too.
This is not neccessary to do all at once, but a few mechs at a time, depending on ongoing events.
It will be both a trophy to achieve, and the next round of "oh poo, i have to grind the skill tree for new mech", which equals more playtime in the game.

C) Add Loyalty store, for players to spend loyalty points.
Spendable LPs are generated after reaching top rank with a faction.
To buy faction specific mechs for LPs, if player missed certain events.
GXP boost in faction play. Titles / badges. Faction patterns (i mean existing ones), and faction-specific decals / warhorns / cockpit items, etc.


The only faction warfare that I've seen work in the past for Battletech was Multi-Player Battletech when it ran on GEnie. It required each faction to have a house leader and then to have mechs assigned to your company and you ran the company as a commander with some pilots. If you lose a mech it gets downgraded. The leaders would plan operations to push to the other team.

I get how that would be difficult with faction play but it could go with a mech upgrade for your unit mechs and a mech downgrade as your units rankings go up or down.

#490 justcallme A S H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • 8,643 posts
  • LocationMelbourne, AU

Posted 04 March 2019 - 11:03 AM

View PostJman5, on 04 March 2019 - 06:39 AM, said:

Hey Paul,

Maybe you covered this already and I missed it, I have one small suggestion that I hope you can sneak in for the April release. Can you adjust the matchscore system in faction play so that it's not inflating massively when a player has multiple mechs left alive? It makes the matchscore kind of useless. A player on the winning team who sat 1500 meters in the back and did minimal damage can have a wildly high score because he never lost his first mech. Meanwhile a brawler who burned through all his mechs for the win is going to have a very modest score comparatively.


Agreed.

This is extremely critical to a match maker due to the match score bonus you get for having spare mechs if the rest of your team has used all of theirs etc.

Being able to farm match score from spare mechs shouldn't be a thing.

#491 Domenoth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 452 posts

Posted 04 March 2019 - 01:21 PM

View PostJman5, on 04 March 2019 - 06:39 AM, said:

Hey Paul,

Maybe you covered this already and I missed it, I have one small suggestion that I hope you can sneak in for the April release. Can you adjust the matchscore system in faction play so that it's not inflating massively when a player has multiple mechs left alive? It makes the matchscore kind of useless. A player on the winning team who sat 1500 meters in the back and did minimal damage can have a wildly high score because he never lost his first mech. Meanwhile a brawler who burned through all his mechs for the win is going to have a very modest score comparatively.

View Postjustcallme A S H, on 04 March 2019 - 11:03 AM, said:


Agreed.

This is extremely critical to a match maker due to the match score bonus you get for having spare mechs if the rest of your team has used all of theirs etc.

Being able to farm match score from spare mechs shouldn't be a thing.


I also cannot stress this enough. Rewarding people for not using Mechs is akin to rewarding them for ammo they _didn't_ fire. Would you leave a system in place for years where people with all Laser Hardpoints were packing 10 tons of MG ammo so they could farm match score?

If you can't do anything else, please at least divide Match Score by 4 instead of the number of Mechs used. Everyone's scores may be lower, but at least they will be uniform/consistent/fair.

#492 Pihoqahiak

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Defiant
  • The Defiant
  • 359 posts
  • LocationU.S.A., West Coast

Posted 04 March 2019 - 02:37 PM

View PostSigmar Sich, on 02 March 2019 - 08:43 PM, said:

Thank you for the update. If you'd be so kind to give some more answers:

3. Factions.
Right now they mean nothing. There is no faction identity, there is no reason to be attached to a faction. This needs to change.
Faction should feel differently. This is why players often talk about faction specific mechs.
Here is another take on the subject, with player-friendly solutions:

A) Add quirks for mechs to increase Loyalty points to a specific faction.. With few grades varying from somewhat common mech to a faction pride mech. Grade examples: Zeus +100% Steiner LP, Commando +75% Steiner LP, some Griffins and Thunderbolts +50% Steiner LP.
Lists of faction specific mechs were often discussed on the forum, and could be easily brought up by community.


The quirks for using House/Clan appropriate mechs sounds like a decent idea, however the Loyalty Point bonus should be far less than you suggest, maybe between 5%-10%.
Another addition to that quirk could be to lower the drop deck weight for a House/Clan appropriate mech. This should also only be by a small amount, but enough to make it worth modifying a drop deck to fit in a little extra tonnage worth of mechs you might not normally have used in your drop deck. I would say probably not having the quirk modifiers for the mechs total more than maybe 10 tons over the spread of a 4 mech drop deck. It might be best to have the system only apply the highest single quirk tonnage discount from the mechs within your drop deck. That would should make it easier to implement and adjust the quirks as needed.

Edited by Pihoqahiak, 04 March 2019 - 02:39 PM.


#493 Appogee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 10,966 posts
  • LocationOn planet Tukayyid, celebrating victory

Posted 04 March 2019 - 04:37 PM

Paul, thanks for the informative update. It is much appreciated.

#494 Horseman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 3,898 posts
  • LocationPoland

Posted 04 March 2019 - 10:02 PM

View PostPihoqahiak, on 04 March 2019 - 02:37 PM, said:

The quirks for using House/Clan appropriate mechs sounds like a decent idea, however the Loyalty Point bonus should be far less than you suggest, maybe between 5%-10%.
What was suggested at one point was faction-specific versions of a chassis (similar to the <S>, <I>, <R>, <O> etc special editions) with a LP boost for the given faction.

#495 Paul Inouye

    Lead Designer

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 2,815 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 05 March 2019 - 02:48 PM

Working on some infographics as to what the new event system will allow us to do. There's some clarity that needs to be defined as to what it does and I think that will answer a lot of the questions that have been bouncing around. I'll post this and the link to the MM update to keep it all relevant to the discussion.

As for Match Score adjustments, I'll look into it with the team to see what can be done in the time we have.

#496 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 6,923 posts

Posted 05 March 2019 - 02:50 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 05 March 2019 - 02:48 PM, said:

Working on some infographics as to what the new event system will allow us to do. There's some clarity that needs to be defined as to what it does and I think that will answer a lot of the questions that have been bouncing around. I'll post this and the link to the MM update to keep it all relevant to the discussion.

As for Match Score adjustments, I'll look into it with the team to see what can be done in the time we have.


Don't divide it by the number of mechs we've used should fix it.

#497 VulcanXIV

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 61 posts

Posted 05 March 2019 - 05:21 PM

This is some stellar communication. Balance change quality is always debatable but so long as there is authentic communication, something will always come out ok. I don't even play FP but I sure wish I did (I don't want to try my luck out with my phoenix hawk roc though...)

#498 Geewiz 27

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Death Wish
  • The Death Wish
  • 94 posts

Posted 05 March 2019 - 06:20 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 28 February 2019 - 03:36 PM, said:

What the heck is going on in here?!?!?

Kidding.. writing an update today.. looking into the comments here and updating what I can tomorrow. What I mean by what I can, there are the two big components to the FP update... the match maker and the event driven FP system. These two items are 'mission critical' and have top priority. These two things are well under way, however, it also means there's not much to show/tell you guys on this front because it's a code strip then re-write. Nothing flashy to show, nothing to quickly pop into a patch. Once these two things are complete is when we have the chance to add a prioritized selection of what's listed in the OP. I'll go into more detail tomorrow and will talk on some of the points being raised in this thread.

And quit bickering... does nothing to move this discussion forward.

Now pick a reason from the list below as to why it's been a while since I last posted.


1) Decided to pick up binge drinking and have been blacked out.
2) Got locked in a Super Pod and just got released.
3) Had a nervous breakdown and have been eating crayons since.
4) Keeps looking in here and freaks out and runs away.
5) Silenced by client-attorney privilege.
6) Cannabis is legal in Canada now.
7) Was hacked and could not log in.
8) All of the above.

Will check back tomorrow.

Paul thanks for the update and other subsequent posts there was growing concern that the updates to FW wouldn't arrive or be substantial enough in April. CheersPosted Image

#499 Triaxx2

    Rookie

  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 9 posts

Posted 05 March 2019 - 11:10 PM

I'd like to see some more cross-unit interactions. Formal alliances so if I want to get together with some people from an allied unit, I don't have to get an invite should the game crash me out. Or since my unit is merc, allow us to fight for our allies under their banner so our wins count for them and vice versa as the situation calls for it. So we can be literally contracted as mercs to fight for other units.

#500 Sigmar Sich

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 1,058 posts
  • LocationUkraine, Kyiv

Posted 06 March 2019 - 06:42 PM

View PostRhent, on 04 March 2019 - 10:42 AM, said:

The only faction warfare that I've seen work in the past for Battletech was Multi-Player Battletech when it ran on GEnie. It required each faction to have a house leader and then to have mechs assigned to your company and you ran the company as a commander with some pilots. If you lose a mech it gets downgraded. The leaders would plan operations to push to the other team.

I get how that would be difficult with faction play but it could go with a mech upgrade for your unit mechs and a mech downgrade as your units rankings go up or down.

Personally, i would love to play that. A mode with logistics and resource management, a war of attrition, etc. But i doubt there is a good implementation for this in MWO. Most players will be more attached to their owned mechs, and will frustrate by not being able to use them.

View PostPihoqahiak, on 04 March 2019 - 02:37 PM, said:

The quirks for using House/Clan appropriate mechs sounds like a decent idea, however the Loyalty Point bonus should be far less than you suggest, maybe between 5%-10%.


Numbers were just an example. Too high, i agree. I think they should be similar to hero/champion mechs, around +50% and +35%.
5-10% wouldn't have a significant impact, to encourage players, IMO.

View PostPihoqahiak, on 04 March 2019 - 02:37 PM, said:

Another addition to that quirk could be to lower the drop deck weight for a House/Clan appropriate mech.

Yes, this is an interesting idea. There were some discussions of similar ideas, for faction quirks.
For example as a Liao, you could bring an Urbie for 5 tons less. Or get a +5 tons to the deck limit.

Also there's another, super-easy implementation of encouragement to use faction mechs: current event system, give goals to play X matches in CW, or to achieve Y score there, in a certain mechs. Rewards may be loyalty points, or small amounts of MC or whatever. And loop it as regular weekly challenge.
The more i think about it, the more i like this implementation - easy to do, and easy to modify.

I suspect PGI is afraid to touch this, because they already have enough tasks, and this task looks bigger than it really is.
I'll try in near future to assemble a list of faction allegiance for every model, but even using my old research it is a hard slog.

Though i believe to count each model is an overkill. A simpler, more generalistic approach would be better, IMO. Just name only the iconic mechs of each weight class for each faction.
However there is a problem, not every faction have a distinct mech for each class, so per-model dive may be necessary.

Working on the list, i think i understand why PGI doesn't want to bother with this, however once the research is done, i hope devs will change their mind.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users