538 replies to this topic

[Spheroid]

I would like to see hot keys for comrose commands. There currently is no method of creating macros without incorporating mouse movement.

[SirHavan]

my $0.02

I liked when we could pick what planets we were attacking/defending
I would like fighting IS vs IS/Clan vs Clan in addition to IS vs Clan (could be based on planet)
I would like to know how many groups of what size are in que

I like some of the other suggestions, would like some consistent progress on FP every patch moving forward.

[Blockwart]

Nightbird, on 08 December 2018 - 10:44 AM, said:

Consider all the effort PGI made this year in MWO.

lol, you are kidding', aren't you?

[Rebel Ace Fryslan]

Reduce QP-maps in a teambased FP.


PS: With the amount of players lost in MWO, i don't see how the problem of enough FP can be solved.
I think it is too late. Good try.

Edited by Rebel Ace Fryslan, 09 December 2018 - 03:02 PM.

[50 50]

BearFlag, on 08 December 2018 - 10:20 PM, said:

Automatic Victory
"Game over, man, game over!"
Borrowed from wargame design, AV is not a solution to stomps. It's a mitigation.

With no MM to fix it, AV can soften it. AV is also one of the easiest to implement mechanisms to truncate stomps. It simply ends the game at some kill spread. Suicides don't count. Numbers from the teens into the twenties have been suggested. Because it's automatic, AV avoids the problems inherent in "Surrender" buttons and the like.

End game screens would reflect what happened. The winner sees something like "Victory - Enemy Withdraws", while the loser gets "Defeat - Mission Aborted." The victorious side gets a nice perk for having achieved AV. The defeated get what they earned and are spared the full "defeat in detail."

A possible objection is the abruptness of the end. The condition is met and, boom!, the game ends in the middle of your ERL blast. Programming an in-game transition (like trying to make an extraction point) would need significant effort. Cheap and easy would be adding a voice message warning the number is close. "You're taking too many casualties, we may pull you out" or "The enemy is collapsing, keep up the pressure."

Details aside, AV is pretty easy to do ... periodic or event-driven checks for the condition, an altered end game screen, and maybe a couple of DB fields for AV stats.

This is a solid idea.
A game can be ended quickly by hitting the objectives hard, but in those instances where a team finds itself overrun and getting farmed, there is no alternate way of ending the match in a situation that has been lost.
There is that argument of fighting till the end and trying to pull a win out of the fire so finding that point of no return might be challenging and a team might be going for the objectives and not the kills would need to be taken into consideration.
ie. How should it play out if a team has taken down 2 or 3 gens on their first wave on Invasion, but not a single enemy mech?
It would need to weigh the progress towards the objective victory against the number of mechs killed/lost.

I had always thought that we needed a way to capture the drop zones so there was the chance through player action to force an enemy out and essentially do what you have described above to provide an alternate victory condition.
This would be particularly useful should we ever get the ability to select drop zones as it would allow the modes to have a way to push the lines forward and to retreat from locations that were overrun.

Bad_Wolf, on 08 December 2018 - 01:59 PM, said:

What if there was just no IS vs clan. First two full teams in the bucket be it IS or clan drop against each other. You could drop against a IS group one match then the next one could be clan. I am sure someone can come up with a way for teams to take a planet out of it.

Tried suggesting something along those lines here and allowing any faction to fight another by treating the conflict as more of a free for all.
Vote who we are directing our efforts against and also which planet.
Use a tally system to add up all victories be it against the chosen enemy or from defending the border against anyone else with the overall effort working towards achieving the faction goal.
https://mwomercs.com...ht-be-possible/

However, when attempting to bring back the individual faction conflicts we have to consider that this would mean not having mixed teams and we need to allow for that division in the player pool across multiple factions.
This would likely make it harder for casual players to form the full 12 player team.
Units would be less affected as by their very nature all members of a unit will be aligned with a single faction which makes it easier to form a team.

The biggest problem is in making sure that limiting teams by faction does not affect wait times and we must allow for situations where one faction might have enough to field a full 12 player team but no other faction has that many players online and dropping in faction play.
That means allowing smaller matches.
So for example:
If there were 12 players on for Marik but only 4 for Clan Wolf, 4 for Kurita and 4 for Davion...... we could still get a combination of 4v4 matches and allow players to still get games.

However, this brings to light another problem. That of groups.
If those 12 players from Marik were all in a single group they would not get a game while the 3 other factions mix and match as 4v4.
Therefore groups must be limited to a maximum of 4 players to allow modular grouping for the teams.
As soon as another faction gets more players online the battle will escalate and we would start to get 8v8 and then 12v12 battles.
But in the mean time. Everyone gets to play.

[MadC4t]

I will try not to be to salty.

I played a lot of CW/FP Matches.

First what would need to be done:
Map Overhaul. The Choke stuff was nice in 1996, but even Tomb Raider had better level design.

Why does it need an overhaul?
Simple: Most times its a premade or atleast a bunch of mates against a PUG Team and/or unorganzied Team.
Doesnt matter if the premade attack or defend, around 90% the premade gets a seal hunting.
Which was at its best shortly after steam release (players came, got stomped a few times, deinstalled game, "clap clap clap")


Second:
Rework on the Loyalty/Mercenary System in combination with the Unit coffer.
Seriously, why is it still not implemented to do something usefull with the Unit Coffer?
We are waiting over years now since the coffer was impemented to do something with it. (buy tickets for invitations doesnt count.)

What should we do with the Unit Coffer and why?
Units can already buy few more Slots, but in current system kinda useless.
Units should be able to declare a "homebase" which means a Unit should be able to set a Planet as there "Home Planet"
And should be able to invest the Unit Coffer to "buff the Planet" with stuff like:
1.) Radar System
2.) ECM
3.) Arty Strike (which is absolutely the same like the one you could buy for 40.000C-Bills. (No need to bring back the Nuke!) Means same size, same dmg.
4.) Player who defend that Planet gain 5% more Loyalty/Mercenary Points or 10% more C-Bills or instead of 30 Seconds drop-windows, 20 Seconds drop-window


Third:
I know, you need the money from Mechpacks etc to pay for everything, but please consider to invest more time and effort to generate more quality content like maps. reworking of maps, gamemodes, CW/FP.

I am tired of buying Mechs just to play them on the same old maps in the same old spots. Just for collecting... That ship has left the harbor long time ago.


And last Point and most important:
If you do a presentation, be prepared.

Edited by MadC4t, 10 December 2018 - 01:33 AM.

[TheCaptainJZ]

It would be neat if the type or number of turrets could be affected by how much resources were pumped into that planet. Or if the weapons on the dropships could be increased as well so the defenders have something they could bring to the table. Maybe they bring an artillery piece which can be destroyed that grants them a consistent supply of artillery. Well, this is not a simple fix though so it won't be implemented.

[Warning incoming Humble Dexterer]

Darakor Stormwind, on 07 December 2018 - 11:12 PM, said:

I have never played faction warfare. And none of these changes - aside from a decent matchmaker, allowing me to drop with people of my own skill level and not have long wait times- will motivate me to try it.

I am beginning to think people in the faction bubble have lost sight of what can attract new people to the feature,

I checked the list, and indeed nothing remotely addresses the issue of making new players keep playing Faction Play for more then a few stomps. It's like they're not wanted and even less welcome to stay.

[standarderror]

My humble idea is to change the faction play into direction of lore. Meaning, clans have their firepower according to lore and IS is in superior numbers.

Then add events where the unitcount per drop is managed spiced up with some intro lines of lore story. This gives not only more feel but also more purpose. Battletech is about the stories of battles.

And especially when an battle emerges like in "Helm's deep", when few players have to make use of choke points against an enemy in superior numbers...

[Windscape]

standarderror, on 10 December 2018 - 12:28 PM, said:

My humble idea is to change the faction play into direction of lore. Meaning, clans have their firepower according to lore and IS is in superior numbers.

Then add events where the unitcount per drop is managed spiced up with some intro lines of lore story. This gives not only more feel but also more purpose. Battletech is about the stories of battles.

And especially when an battle emerges like in "Helm's deep", when few players have to make use of choke points against an enemy in superior numbers...

Problem is PGI will never do 10v12



Or any other thing that’s not 12v12, 4v4, 1v1, 2v2, or 8v8

[justcallme A S H]

And nor should 10 v 12 happen. Balance is hard enough, doing that breaks it entirely.

Thus - never gonna happen.

[Grus]

standarderror, on 10 December 2018 - 12:28 PM, said:

My humble idea is to change the faction play into direction of lore. Meaning, clans have their firepower according to lore and IS is in superior numbers.

Then add events where the unitcount per drop is managed spiced up with some intro lines of lore story. This gives not only more feel but also more purpose. Battletech is about the stories of battles.

And especially when an battle emerges like in "Helm's deep", when few players have to make use of choke points against an enemy in superior numbers...

Would be nice but it will never happen. Not just because of the inherent game build/mechanics but also as a balance standpoint. Also going to a "battle rating" system woundnt work either.

Edited by Grus, 10 December 2018 - 02:13 PM.

[starscream75]

please fix the bug that drops you without the HUD in invasion matches ty

[Nightbird]

starscream75, on 10 December 2018 - 02:42 PM, said:

please fix the bug that drops you without the HUD in invasion matches ty

While you're waiting for the fix, just hit Tab once. Fixes it.

[Weagles]

Paul,

Need your feed back on some of the discussions. How much effort and what is the likely hood of pursuit of the following ideas to either reduce stomps or the bad effects of stops. [color=#222222][font=&amp][/font][/color][/left][color=#222222][font=&amp]

If you tell us what is more likely a possibility it would help greatly focus the discussion.

[/font][/color][/left]

Assumption: able to determine a miss match in teams before the match starts and identify it as a stomp with a stomper and stomped.

Solutions: Each are independent with the ability to be stackable.

1. Drop deck weight penalty, a reduced max target weight for the drop deck for each member of the team identified as stomper and a penalty in rewards for the individuals on that stomper team who do not reduce weight down to at or below target.

2. Hazard pay for the team identified as about to be stomped. Increase by percentage in awards plus a bonus increase to the base pay of the match. Would it be possible to announce the bonus increase during the 1 minute countdown to the team about to be stomped to let them know they have a good team facing them but it still worth playing well because of the bonus.

3. When stomp is identified limit the match game type to those where strategy plays a bigger role, conquest and incursion, and overlord (yes I want a new game mode for FW and it has the long tom).

4. Upset bonus. When a stomp is predicted and the side that is supposed to be stomped pulls an upset win they get a bonus.

5. The individuals on the team about to be stomped gets to vote on map and game mode.

Again thanks for gobbler. I love hearing it on the battlefield, even when it kills me.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

GweNTLeR, on 09 December 2018 - 12:16 AM, said:

@PGI
@Paul
Please consider simplifying command wheel for at least lance commanders (or at least adding "simplified command wheel" or customization option). As a player who use it frequently,I think that right now it is too complex and hard to use during heavy action(easy to miss the desired command).
The commands I consider useless are marked red:

Why:

• flank left/right is best suited for battlegrid, not for real time action. It is extremely hard to pinpoint the exact location in movement. No to mention there are also "Move" and "Hold" commands that should in theory give more precise orders;
  
• request Artillery/Airstrike/UAV are also best suited for battlegrid. It is extremely hard to pinpoint the exact location in movement;
  
• capture is useless since we have "Move" and "Hold";
  
• affirmative/negative are way less useful for a commander;
  
• enemy spotted is replaced with attack;
  
• protect is mostly the same as follow.

Battlegrid commands should remain as they are now. Although the way you order them could use some optimization as well (like, adding hotkeys for battlegrid to do it faster).

Thats bound one the ugly useless minimaps...most a smash of mud colors with nothing tactical or geographic infos

[DarklightCA]

Darakor Stormwind, on 07 December 2018 - 11:12 PM, said:

I have never played faction warfare. And none of these changes - aside from a decent matchmaker, allowing me to drop with people of my own skill level and not have long wait times- will motivate me to try it.

I am beginning to think people in the faction bubble have lost sight of what can attract new people to the feature, instead concentrating on what would improve the experience of the people already in it. And there are so few people still playing this feature, that I wonder whether this is the approach to take.

Faction Play is so far gone from what it should be that no one set of changes is going to ever fix it, it's going to take a series of changes to ever get this content to become actually enjoyable but a lot of those changes listed seem like a step in the right direction for once at the very least.

The increase in rewards especially for call the arms may be the ticket to helping bring back some players, the addition of a match making system that prioritizes matches groups together so there is more group vs group combat and less group vs solo's might actually make the action more enjoyable if enough groups are available to queue. The focus on loyalists and loyalist rewards might bring in some people as well.

The fact planets still don't mean anything limiting any form of unit vs unit competition over planet control which seems like a core principle of this content (taking over planets) is a pretty huge problem but maybe if PGI keeps making steps in the correct direction they will eventually address that and other issues with it to the point where it actually becomes playable and would attract more players to it.

[Knight Captain Morgan]

Request feature that lets me disable the “reinforcement needed” notifications.

[Nightbird]

Andres Gomez, on 11 December 2018 - 08:17 AM, said:

Request feature that lets me disable the “reinforcement needed” notifications.

Already there in settings, uncheck Call to Arms

[frumpylumps]

How about being able to look at your mechs stats and things while you are in que for faction play? There is nothing more boring than staring at a "searching" screen. I'm sure a lot of guys alt+tab and then forget that they had a game.

Also please reduce the frequency of "Defend" and "Assault". It feels like we have to play this mode twice as much as others because they are considered to be two different modes and the gameplay isn't as interesting. The winter assault is an awful design that requires you to expose yourself to destroy the generators, giving clan an advantage.

Edited by frumpylumps, 11 December 2018 - 11:18 AM.