12 replies to this topic

[Theron Branson]

I've been playing MWO since day 1 and was a founder and most of the arguments I've heard is the Clans be over powering and/or Innershpere being OP. Why don't the admins make FP IS v IS and Clan vs Clan? Allow players to be both 1 clan and 1 IS house to boost FP numbers. Separate the IS houses into "Axis & Allies" example: Steiner and Davion vs everyone else and give the clans more territory towards Tukayyid and separate them into 2 groups to fight each other.

Also another idea is to change the drop deck tonnage to "Drop Deck Points". Keep the drop decks points at the current 265 tons/DDP's but make each house Mech and variant worth 5 DDP's less so it would influence the players to use more House correct mechs in battle.

Example: Playing as Davion but using a Kruita Variant Warhammer would cost me 70 DDP's while another Davion Player playing a Davion Warhammer variant would cost him 65 DDP's.

This is imho the best way forward as it makes everything equal except player skill and loadouts.

[justcallme A S H]

Theron Branson, on 08 May 2019 - 08:33 AM, said:

I've been playing MWO since day 1 and was a founder and most of the arguments I've heard is the Clans be over powering and/or Innershpere being OP. Why don't the admins make FP IS v IS and Clan vs Clan? Allow players to be both 1 clan and 1 IS house to boost FP numbers. Separate the IS houses into "Axis & Allies" example: Steiner and Davion vs everyone else and give the clans more territory towards Tukayyid and separate them into 2 groups to fight each other.

So adding more queues and splitting a dwindling population further.

And then adding "DDP" to further convolute a system where people with limted mechs do, what, exactly? (other than make things more convoluted than they already are)...



No thanks.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 08 May 2019 - 02:27 PM.

[Theron Branson]

It would be only 4 groups, 2 groups of clans and 2 groups of IS. The whole drop deck tonnage idea isn't that hard it's still the tonnage just you get 5 tons off due to using a house specific mech and or variant. This would make people use more house mechs. I also believe if you do IS vs IS then more people would play the game because your evening the playing field. You couldn't complain that the clan are OP and so on. Also clan players could play IS and IS players could play clan since they are not fighting each other.

Edited by Theron Branson, 09 May 2019 - 03:40 AM.

[justcallme A S H]

Only 4 is a doubling of what we have now.

If you don't understand the "thinning" of the queue that would occur from doubling the queue - then I'm sorry to say this - you just do not understand Faction Play or the overall game surrounding it.

[Theron Branson]

It wouldn't thin it too much due to the people coming from clans and playing IS and IS playing clans. Not everyone likes the whole invasion of the clans and actually I think most IS guys hate it so properly advertised it could attract new and old players back to the FP. The way it's going now no one but clanners want to play because IS units are tired getting steam rolled. What does PGI have to loose at least trying this method? More players? They are already doing that fine the way that it is.

[50 50]

The story events around specific houses or clans facing off against each other will give this outlet and provide that Clan vs Clan or IS vs IS engagement. (Like what has been on the test server where it is Steiner vs Marik)
Unfortunately many players doggedly refuse to swap contracts because their loyalty to their particular house or clan is paramount.

Sometimes when you go into the queue it's possible to see one side (clan or IS) heavily stacked and we could ask why is it not then possible that after X amount of time, those players fight each other which would require making changes to teams and groups to restrict players according to their house or clan.

It might be possible to break up the clans and houses into more combined sides as you have suggested but if we are going to move in that direction, I would suggest the player base would be happier to go back to representing their individual factions and not allow mixed teams at all.

Any division on the player base created by restricting the team compositions does raise queue and match making problems however.

Forcing separate queues, such as:
Clan vs Clan
IS vs IS
and Clan vs IS
... also splits what is already a small faction player base in what is already a small portion of a small overall game population.

Don't forget that we have 2 queues in faction play, scouting and invasion, so this would multiply that to 6.
And lest we forget all the demands for a separate solo and group queue that would push it up to 12.

It's simply not practical and we should be looking at ways to reduce the number of queues to bring the player population closer together to try and improve wait times and match maker experience.
ie. What about combining the Scouting and Invasion Queues instead?

However, I do see one possibility that could work by making it more of a free for all system.
That is:

• Ignore the map because the borders limit who can fight who.
  
• Enforce single faction teams and therefore groups so we do have that individual faction identity and loyalists can once again wave the flag.
  
• Take a leaf from group quick play and then let any one faction fight against a different faction.

We would not need to split the queue and therefore the population if this was the case, however there are a few important points that would need to be addressed.

• It is rarer than it used to be to see a full team (12 players) belonging to a single faction these days.Therefore if the team compositions were to be restricted we need a way to alleviate that problem and still allow games to commence. The number of active players will fluctuate, we need flexibility in the system to allow battles between smaller teams. Keep the lance structures and allow the match maker to launch 4v4, 8v8 or 12v12 battles according to the number of players ready in a faction. We have some semblance of this functionality in the Private Lobby.
  
• Allowing smaller team battles has a flow on effect for how we manage groups and we therefore need flexibility in the group screen, particularly for units, so that should a 12 player group form, they can drop a lance at a time. The new match maker options being tested may go some way to assisting with this and some enhancements to the group screen would be welcome. Think of it less like making a group of 12 and more like making a group of 3 lances.
  
• We probably do not want factions to fight themselves. ie. No internal conflicts where Davion fights Davion for example. This would only be a problem if we only had 24 players online and they were all from one faction (ie. Davion) but that is probably an unlikely scenario at this stage so I don't really see it as being a problem. Needs to be mentioned as a rule for the match maker.

What this should mean is that in a single queue, if you can get enough players together to form a group (combined with puggies) that you should be able to get a game provided there is enough players in any other single enemy faction.

This would therefore allow the Clan vs Clan, IS vs IS and Clan vs IS conflicts to occur albeit in a bit of a random manner depending on who is on and has launched their drop at the time.

The question might be asked about how that might affect capturing a planet for your faction and there are ideas about how that might be done but it all depends how much development work (*cough*unlikely*cough*) PGI is prepared to put in.

TLDR: It could be done without splitting the queue and enable the inter-faction conflict to return and potentially improve wait times.

[Theron Branson]

I agree with a lot of what you said and also believe just get rid of the whole "Scouting" part. Also as many have said before, transform "Quickplay" into FP as a Pub for a IS or Clan to fill the numbers. That should take care of all issues as far as numbers.

[Grus]

Theron Branson, on 10 May 2019 - 03:41 AM, said:

I agree with a lot of what you said and also believe just get rid of the whole "Scouting" part. Also as many have said before, transform "Quickplay" into FP as a Pub for a IS or Clan to fill the numbers. That should take care of all issues as far as numbers.

Yeah no, QP is where a lot of us skill up mechs FOR fw.. I'm gonna drop in a mech that isnt optimized in QP then suddenly I'm in a FW match? No thank you.

[Theron Branson]

But if QP was exactly like FP except it means that it counts towards winning/loosing a planet then why not? Many games that have a campaign system does this so it's nothing new. Besides it makes it a little more realistic then just trying to get your mech skilled up. Maybe you'd play a little more conservative at first. The match maker would put pubs vs other pubs and try to match the premades and fill in the numbers as it does now. Plus if everyone was in the same boat having to work to get their mechs up then it would be equal.

The biggest issue with this game is that the system is imbalanced due to tech. No matter what PGI does they are in a NO win situation when all you play is Clan vs IS battles. It's 2 different technologies and will never be equal despite how hard PGI tries because if they were Clan players would cry and IS players would cry. It's like playing a WW2 game one side has 12 Panthers and the other side has 12 mixed Shermans (76mm and 75mm). Some of the 76mm Shermans might do well but ultimately the Panthers are going to win. If you give everyone the Same access to the same tanks then it's an equal playing field. Then you can separate the more skilled and group players.

Also PGI could call it a 5th Succession War after the clan invasion or something. I just think PGI needs to move past the whole "Clan Invasion" theme as it's lasted longer then it did in the original lore.

Edited by Theron Branson, 10 May 2019 - 05:30 AM.

[justcallme A S H]

Theron Branson, on 10 May 2019 - 05:26 AM, said:

The biggest issue with this game is that the system is imbalanced due to tech. No matter what PGI does they are in a NO win situation when all you play is Clan vs IS battles. It's 2 different technologies and will never be equal despite how hard PGI tries because if they were Clan players would cry and IS players would cry.

That is the biggest strength actually, the fact it is different side to side. They are not meant to be equal. To have it equal would be stupidly boring.

Clan and IS have strength and weaknesses. You either play to the strength or expoit your enemies weakness or you lose. You cannot play both sides the same IMO. Too many people do and that is why their experience is poor - They simply do not understand the game.

Balance right now is not actually too bad overall. Certainly not perfect but a hell of a lot better than it has been. Pre KDK3 was the time the game was best balanced with all play styles viable - now some play styles are a little lacklustre but overall it's still pretty good and I know many higher skill players who agree (for the most part).

[Theron Branson]

It may be even or close to being even but maybe people want to play something other then IS vs Clan all the time. I say let's just try it and see what happens because it couldn't be any worse then it is now. They need new flavor to FP and things need to change. When pubs get steamrolled then they know it's not the mechs they are in (at least not because of Clan or IS) they would know now it's skill, loadout, or team play. It also gives FP something new to fight since we've been fighting the clans now for years. See if it repopulates and changes people's attitude for FP, if not change it back to the way it is.

[justcallme A S H]

Theron Branson, on 10 May 2019 - 08:05 AM, said:

It may be even or close to being even but maybe people want to play something other then IS vs Clan all the time. I say let's just try it and see what happens because it couldn't be any worse then it is now. They need new flavor to FP and things need to change. When pubs get steamrolled then they know it's not the mechs they are in (at least not because of Clan or IS) they would know now it's skill, loadout, or team play. It also gives FP something new to fight since we've been fighting the clans now for years. See if it repopulates and changes people's attitude for FP, if not change it back to the way it is.

I wonder - Have you even looked at the upcoming changes for May?

Because it sounds like you really have no idea of what is coming up and the changes.

And no we have not been "fighting the clans for years now"... There were plenty of IS v IS and Clan v Clan events.

[50 50]

Theron Branson, on 10 May 2019 - 03:41 AM, said:

I agree with a lot of what you said and also believe just get rid of the whole "Scouting" part. Also as many have said before, transform "Quickplay" into FP as a Pub for a IS or Clan to fill the numbers. That should take care of all issues as far as numbers.

Can't really do it with quick play and I don't believe it's a great idea to change that from the 'casual' mode.
For a start it would mean having to change the team compositions so they are valid for FP and do not have a mix of players.
QP functions well enough as the pick up and play part of MWO and I would leave that part of it alone.

I have some reservations about how Scouting is setup and integrates in the process but Scouting comes close to what you are thinking. If anything, perhaps having some other type of single drop missions added would meet that purpose and scouting is just a mode in that queue?
Let's call it the Raid queue and as it is, we could probably remove the weight restriction on Scouting and the drop decks, add in all the other QP maps and modes and boom. Done.
My reservation with this is it does nothing to help players get matches as instead of merging queues to bring the players together it's promoting a second queue and splitting the population.

Maybe it would work. Might even function as the 'solo' queue but in FP the groups need solo players to fill the gaps just as much as the solos need the groups. Without some flexibility in the system such as allowing smaller team sizes I would steer away from that and still focus on how to merge the two queues.

justcallme A S H, on 10 May 2019 - 02:13 PM, said:

I wonder - Have you even looked at the upcoming changes for May?
Because it sounds like you really have no idea of what is coming up and the changes.
And no we have not been "fighting the clans for years now"... There were plenty of IS v IS and Clan v Clan events.

Probably more of a reference to the one bucket/one border we now have compared to the individual faction territories from earlier. Outside of the events we have lost the choice.