32 replies to this topic

[BROARL]

thankyou PGI for trying, thankyou for listening, thankyou for not talking about LuRMs!
*please fix the horns

[xX PUG Xx]

Paul Inouye, on 05 April 2019 - 04:25 PM, said:

So here it is.. end of day...

Engineers are still trying to figure out what is sending a non 1 or 0 to the win condition value that is tracked by the database. Essentially every match has 2 teams and which team won is set to -1 by default (correct behavior). When a team wins, it's supposed to be assigned a 1 and the losing team is supposed to be set to 0. Any other values are ignored. For some reason, matches will randomly set 1,0, or some odd number like 15. Stepping through code line by line is not giving any indication of where these weird numbers are coming from. This is causing the war log to not track anything which means there's no way to track progress of the conflict results. The story line system then gets blocked as it cannot determine a winner. This completely breaks the purpose of the PTS.

What this means, is that there will not be a PTS this weekend. Investigations will continue tonight but there's no time to push a new build. Engineering will pick-up again on Monday to investigate the cause of the issue. I'll once again be updating daily as we try to figure out what's going on.

Apologies for the inconvenience as I know some of you are organizing your units and friends to test out the new update. When 'stuff' happens (insert your favorite cuss word), it happens in a down pour.

-Paul

Edit: I don't mean there will not be a PTS before release of the feature... I just mean it's not going to happen this weekend. A full PTS is considered a REQUIREMENT before release of the FP Update.

ButPaul, thanks for the update and pushing this to happen. I look forward to trying it all out.

[TinFoilHat]

Thanks for the updates.

[Sixpack]

This communication cycle is preferred over months of nothing.

[Javin]

Thank you for the updates. Take your time, do it properly. We have waited for a while. We can wait a bit longer.

Can we make some FP maps for you? Give us the tools to make maps and you will have about 100 maps in a few weeks!

[VigorousApathy]

Javin, on 07 April 2019 - 05:48 AM, said:

Thank you for the updates. Take your time, do it properly. We have waited for a while. We can wait a bit longer.

Can we make some FP maps for you? Give us the tools to make maps and you will have about 100 maps in a few weeks!

Flashbacks of warcraft 3, and the amount of insane maps and modes you could play because of community created content. Games that allow that type of community input last forever. I still go online in frozen throne to play Risk every so often. 16 years after release....

+1 this is an excellent idea Javin.

[Grus]

VigorousApathy, on 07 April 2019 - 09:13 AM, said:

Flashbacks of warcraft 3, and the amount of insane maps and modes you could play because of community created content. Games that allow that type of community input last forever. I still go online in frozen throne to play Risk every so often. 16 years after release....

+1 this is an excellent idea Javin.

Easily one of the best qualities of that game.

[Sigmar Sich]

Javin, on 07 April 2019 - 05:48 AM, said:

Can we make some FP maps for you? Give us the tools to make maps and you will have about 100 maps in a few weeks!

As someone who did both modding and commercial gamedev for quite some time, including level design, i can tell you this idea is better on paper than in reality, considering the forced structure of multiplayer in this game.

Sure, you will get some good creations, you'll get even more okay-ish maps, but all of it will be buried under a metric crapton of poor quality content.
And considering you can't choose which map to play in CW (nor in QP, really, if all 4 maps will be crap), it will be a disaster.
It can work in custom lobby multiplayer, when players can just skip bad map by leaving the lobby, but not here, where map is forced.

So someone must test all of this, on a separate client, not to pollute the live version. Obviously, PGI's native QA would be overwhelmed with this new, perpetually huge task. So they would have to hire more staff (i'm sceptical), or to outsource this task to the community to do it for free (bleeding the Live population even more).
And community will fail to keep the garbage out - people have different taste and quality expectations. Meaning nobody will agree on anything (as usual).
Add to this certain groups who will push their agenda through alt account spam.
...No matter how you design the community approval system, community will not be able to filter bad content.

So we'll have either to accept to choke on rubbish content, or to dismiss the idea at all. Personally, i choose the latter.

[justcallme A S H]

Sigmar Sich, on 07 April 2019 - 12:54 PM, said:

Sure, you will get some good creations, you'll get even more okay-ish maps, but all of it will be buried under a metric crapton of poor quality content.

Well some of the current maps we have now could not possibly be any worse than something community created. Especially with META/Gameplay changes, some of the maps are super nasty to play and unbalanced from particular sides/spawns and so on.

You could easily setup a player-run review panel that filters maps before they even get to PGI to review. The level of skill, dedication and drive within this community is amazing. I think there would be plenty good that would come out..


That said we've been told many times it wont happen.

[Sigmar Sich]

justcallme A S H, on 07 April 2019 - 03:14 PM, said:

Well some of the current maps we have now could not possibly be any worse than something community created. Especially with META/Gameplay changes, some of the maps are super nasty to play and unbalanced from particular sides/spawns and so on.

At least the official maps have consistent visuals, and are mostly glitch-free. It can be worse, believe me.

Yes, with proper organisation it is possible to filter all the trash.

I think the most constructive investigation of this matter would be in form of experiment to create a sketch for a map, by multiple applicants if possible. Then the review system can be tested.
And if by any chance some good ideas were to surface, this will be a completely different case of "this will never happen". We were told that Flea will never happen. Also Urbie.

For example (and only for example, i know it's bad), a sketch:

Spoiler

https://mwomercs.com...ps-suggestions/

Anyways, i don't believe in success of this endeavor, so count me out.

[justcallme A S H]

Oh yeah look I don't disagree... There would definitely be some bad maps made, I guess the peer review or panel would have a lot of work at least I initially.

The official maps have so many graphics/disappearing terrain issues. I guess from where I play in terms of Comp, most maps have at least a half dozen places that have issues. Some maps have triple that. I mean it's annoying and I understand the dev time to fix it simply isn't worth it from a cost vs gain perspective so I'm at peace with those issues that only a tiny portion ever notices.

[BROARL]

when the faction/invasion patches will the scoreboards and stuff refresh/reset?

[Paul Meyers DEST]

And when do we get 2 minutes to setup a dropdeck`?