Jump to content

Fp Weekly Report - May 21-2019


374 replies to this topic

#21 theplayerx4734

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 31 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 02:55 PM

This is actually worse then longtoms.

Say friday night a group groups up to do REAL fp; invasion. What do you tell them? "Oh sorry guys we cant play its scouting mode".

This was such a dumb idea. We dont care about lore or any other bullcrap, we just wanted FP with the FP events you had previously with the IS v IS and the Clan v Clan stuff with rewards

THAT brought the FP population up.
THAT was fun.

Rollback this update and bring us more events, not this lore crap.

#22 Paul Inouye

    Lead Designer

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 2,797 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 21 May 2019 - 03:20 PM

Phase 1 of this conflict was set to 24hrs... future conflicts will not have this long of a scouting phase.

#23 Ragnar Baron Leiningen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Soviet
  • The Soviet
  • 593 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 03:34 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 21 May 2019 - 11:41 AM, said:


For the duration of the conflict, correct. For example, this first conflict is 4 days long.. you cannot switch factions until the end of the 4th day.

Please change it so you can jump back and forth between sides. That way we can swap when a side is stacked as Is is right now. 0/12 right now. We need to able to swap faction to keep the sides balanced. It will also get us games faster.

Edited by Ragnar Baron Leiningen, 21 May 2019 - 03:35 PM.


#24 VigorousApathy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Thumper
  • The Thumper
  • 117 posts
  • LocationI have no idea. Im getting sky high in a spider 5v.

Posted 21 May 2019 - 03:34 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 21 May 2019 - 03:20 PM, said:

Phase 1 of this conflict was set to 24hrs... future conflicts will not have this long of a scouting phase.


Let us switch sides. Im not dropping another dime until you do.

#25 MechTech Dragoon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 284 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 03:39 PM

Please for the love of all thats holy set phases to 2-3 hrs

#26 Serial Number

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Heavy Lifter
  • Heavy Lifter
  • 152 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 03:44 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 21 May 2019 - 03:20 PM, said:

Phase 1 of this conflict was set to 24hrs... future conflicts will not have this long of a scouting phase.


So after you saw people asking to remove completely, you decided to do the opposite and just drive them off FP by doing 24hour scouting phase? You just love making people mad, dont you.

#27 MechTech Dragoon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 284 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 03:46 PM

Phases in the PTS were only a couple hours long, and that really gave the opportunity to have planets move. Was a great concept.
Keep it

#28 NeirSolon

    Member

  • Pip
  • Captain
  • 18 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 03:54 PM

I get that there are players who love LRMS and stock mechs and many more things that I do not.

I cannot believe there was any constituency for scouting at all. And what feedback I saw from PTS was to either eliminate being locked into it entirely or significantly limit it.

This is baffling.

#29 TheCallandor

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 41 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 04:05 PM

So, once again PGI proves they are not listening to the population... please remove the scouting aspect from the conflict, 90% of the faction play groups are here for the 12 v 12 matches not scouting...

#30 Paul Inouye

    Lead Designer

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 2,797 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 21 May 2019 - 04:07 PM

View PostSerial Number, on 21 May 2019 - 03:44 PM, said:

So after you saw people asking to remove completely, you decided to do the opposite and just drive them off FP by doing 24hour scouting phase? You just love making people mad, dont you.


Conflicts are pre-authored... once in motion they can't be changed. I didn't just flick a switch to make it scouting for 24hrs, the Phase and Duration were locked down long ago. I'm just making sure this doesn't happen again in the future.

#31 Rustyhammer

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 78 posts
  • LocationSydney, AU

Posted 21 May 2019 - 04:12 PM

This patch is truly special. It ticks pretty much all the boxes on how to upset a lot of FP regulars.

- Hardcore loyalists are forced to pledge loyalty to other factions.
- Players who prefer invasion are forced to play scouting.
- Players who prefer scouting are forced to play invasion.
- Forcing a single gamemode i.e. conquest or assault or incursion (!!!) for several hours non-stop.
- And on top of that, we're no longer able to self-balance the population.

All these issues were obvious during PTS. Feedback was given but ignored. Honestly, I really struggle to justify these changes by PGI's usual ignorance, it looks like they actively trying to sunset Faction Play.

#32 Paul Inouye

    Lead Designer

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 2,797 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 21 May 2019 - 04:30 PM

View PostRustyhammer, on 21 May 2019 - 04:12 PM, said:

This patch is truly special. It ticks pretty much all the boxes on how to upset a lot of FP regulars. - Hardcore loyalists are forced to pledge loyalty to other factions. - Players who prefer invasion are forced to play scouting. - Players who prefer scouting are forced to play invasion. - Forcing a single gamemode i.e. conquest or assault or incursion (!!!) for several hours non-stop. - And on top of that, we're no longer able to self-balance the population. All these issues were obvious during PTS. Feedback was given but ignored. Honestly, I really struggle to justify these changes by PGI's usual ignorance, it looks like they actively trying to sunset Faction Play.


Quote

- Hardcore loyalists are forced to pledge loyalty to other factions.


Loyalist should only be pledging loyalty when their faction is part of a conflict. This is why you can change your role every conflict cycle. If you're a hardcore loyalist for Davion and they're not part of a given conflict, you can select Freelancer or Merc for that conflict.

Quote

- Players who prefer invasion are forced to play scouting.
- Players who prefer scouting are forced to play invasion.


There's no happy balance here.. but a severe reduction on how long a scouting phase is will allow both to happen with a focus on 12v12 over the 4v4.

Quote

- Forcing a single gamemode i.e. conquest or assault or incursion (!!!) for several hours non-stop.


This is part of the story telling process. Lengths of phases will need to be adjusted but will have to wait until these first two test conflicts are completed. (FYI, there's no scouting in the next conflict).

Quote

- And on top of that, we're no longer able to self-balance the population.


Self-balancing would be ideal, but in the past this was not the case when it was allowed for side swapping. It was almost exploited in fact. I won't write off the idea completely but being able to swap between matches is not what FP and choosing your role in a conflict is about. Will keep an eye on this one as FP moves forward.

#33 Kageru Ikazuchi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Determined
  • The Determined
  • 1,184 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 04:42 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 21 May 2019 - 04:30 PM, said:

Self-balancing would be ideal, but in the past this was not the case when it was allowed for side swapping. It was almost exploited in fact. I won't write off the idea completely but being able to swap between matches is not what FP and choosing your role in a conflict is about. Will keep an eye on this one as FP moves forward.

For the most part, we just want to play the game, not wait in queue.

Perhaps give mercenaries or freelancers an incentive for signing up with the under-populated side (based on the number of players that have actually picked a side in the current conflict)?

#34 Bjorn Bekker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 202 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 04:59 PM

Speaking for the non-stop incursion, conquest and scouting cycles as part of this "storytelling process" (don't know how engaging a story it will be forcing players to play game modes they generally despise) but those modes aren't that conducive to enticing gameplay.

Incursion: The mode is basically an objective dunk right from the start as the community approach to this mode has changed to potato-teams and premades looking to get a quick win in while units and pilots looking for a regular 48 v 48 match are left seething. Our unit had to start dunking (which we hate doing) cause we couldn't trust opponents to actually fight it out and kept losing to objective rushes so that game mode has been a bust and one of the least liked of the FP rotation outside of Scouting. So forcing this on people is going to be detrimental to retaining interest.

Conquest: Generally the same thing. Long wait for a short match as units are forced to go for objectives. If you can keep a balance of 3-2 cap retention the match "may" be longer but still the point remains that pilots STILL aren't getting the game mode they want. It wasn't so bad under the last system as generally you'd only have a few of these matches sprinkled in here and there before getting a Skirmish or Siege game. So forcing this level of gameplay on repeat for hours once again, not ideal.

Scouting: As the majority of replies have shown, NOT what FP is about. And we appreciate that you guys are already nixing it from the next phase but the fact that it still may factor greatly in future cycles is concerning. We're here to play FP, not scouting and forcing that game mode on people when the majority of the population are against it is ANOTHER knock against keeping those of us who've been here all these years waiting for viable content active.

So I wouldn't be surprised if you see these phases being generally dead as for a good majority of us I feel are NOT interested in playing those game modes on repeat for hours on hours. We shouldn't have to wait for game modes that we enjoy in a game that we've spent years buying into.

In the old system, people hung around for Skirmish, Assault, Domination and Siege matches and suffered through the other modes so they could at least get SOME game play that they actually enjoyed. While it was far from perfect, we had the benefits of self-balancing queues with faction switching and "generally" playing game modes we actually enjoyed.

Edited by Bjorn Bekker, 21 May 2019 - 05:16 PM.


#35 BROARL

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Captain
  • Captain
  • 225 posts
  • Locationinvasion

Posted 21 May 2019 - 05:03 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 21 May 2019 - 04:30 PM, said:

being able to swap between matches is not what FP and choosing your role in a conflict is about.


may i ask, what is faction about (in PGI's eyes)?
nobody from PGI ever seems to play so i would hope that you are at least attempting to make money (trying to make the game better and/or maintain population).
i personally think it is good that we are discussing invasion instead of LuRMs but the patch kind of feels antagonistic...

#36 J a y

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Sho-sa-ni
  • Sho-sa-ni
  • 107 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 05:06 PM

I have been Kuritan loyalist since 2016.

With DOZENS of my unit members already in the final 5 ranks of Kuritan loyalty, this is a huge blow. Advancing towards rank 20 was a slow grind, and its about to get even slower. UNBEARABLY slow.

I could only imagine that older loyalist units like CGBI, HHOD, and RPTG/R79T are taking this very poorly as well.

Figure something out. Have multiple conflicts going on at the same time. ANYTHING but this.

PS

I see some long-time mercenary "enemies" (Neir, Callandor, Nightbird, etc) actively opposing this despite the fact that the loyalty issues don't affect them as much.

Cheers from ISMO. Keep fighting the good fight.

#37 Grus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Devil
  • Little Devil
  • 3,979 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 05:11 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 21 May 2019 - 04:30 PM, said:




Loyalist should only be pledging loyalty when their faction is part of a conflict. This is why you can change your role every conflict cycle. If you're a hardcore loyalist for Davion and they're not part of a given conflict, you can select Freelancer or Merc for that conflict.


.


Hold the fuvk up... so you're saying that since my unit is GB loyalist, and because BG isnt apart of this "story cycle" I dont get to play FW? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Did you guys forget how much flack you got for this crap last year when GB was locked out of FW for months?! Please link me PGI 's address so I can send you guys a big bag of gummy {Richard Cameron}...

#38 Paul Inouye

    Lead Designer

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 2,797 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 21 May 2019 - 05:14 PM

Some valid points here and I will be talking to some shot callers and devs who will have to let me know what can and cannot be done etc.

An immediate point will be the reduction of phase lengths (after this conflict as it's in motion already). Keep in mind, they can't be too short or very few people are going to see any type of gameplay/mode/story, but they don't have to be 24 or 48hrs either.

View PostGrus, on 21 May 2019 - 05:11 PM, said:

Hold the fuvk up... so you're saying that since my unit is GB loyalist, and because BG isnt apart of this "story cycle" I dont get to play FW?


Where do you get the notion of not being able to play FP?

#39 Bjorn Bekker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 202 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 05:15 PM

Thanks Paul. Our feedback is definitely intense at times I'm sure but a lot of us genuinely care about FP and have been here for years as it's been worked on since it's the only game mode a lot of us play in MWO. Appreciate the active communication and interaction with the community.

#40 Hobbles v

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sureshot
  • The Sureshot
  • 257 posts

Posted 21 May 2019 - 05:17 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 21 May 2019 - 03:20 PM, said:

Phase 1 of this conflict was set to 24hrs... future conflicts will not have this long of a scouting phase.


Even if its only an hour long that would be too long.

We do not want to schedule our lives around the game, I have a family to take care of and sometimes I only have time to log in at a random interval and play one match. I want access to the only mode I even play this game for at any time of day.

View PostPaul Inouye, on 21 May 2019 - 05:14 PM, said:

Some valid points here and I will be talking to some shot callers and devs who will have to let me know what can and cannot be done etc.

An immediate point will be the reduction of phase lengths (after this conflict as it's in motion already). Keep in mind, they can't be too short or very few people are going to see any type of gameplay/mode/story, but they don't have to be 24 or 48hrs either.



Where do you get the notion of not being able to play FP?


Random game modes is better. No one will want to play during times when they are locked into only one game type. Especially Scouting and Incursion or even conquest sometimes.

What's worse is you have made this exact mistake before. Back when the progress bar was added to FP, it had to be patched so that other game modes could be played during any spot on the bar rather than being locked into the one mode the phase was in. How can you be so ignorant to your own past?

Edited by Hobbles v, 21 May 2019 - 05:43 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users