429 replies to this topic

[slide]

Omniseed, on 10 June 2019 - 04:51 PM, said:

I also think that consolidating all of the loyalist trees into one reward path like the merc tree is a mistake. The current system is a grind to get all the way up a faction's tree, and at the higher levels it is rewarding and feels good to make a new rank. Without the rewards, the ranks are more or less nothing though.

Now I don't see it that way at all. I'll use myself as an example. Currently I am rank 17 (nearly 18) in Davion, 8 Merc, 12 Rasalhague, 10 Kurita, 10 Marik and 6 Liao. I did all of that before the Merc tree was added and am up to Level 8 in the Merc tree since then. (Never played clan on this account) If you total all of that then I am level 20+ in any one faction.

Why is this so, because my unit had identified itself as Merc since its inception and we moved around trying to get as many people free mechbays as we could. I think that system was good as I have not been able to add to any of those totals since the merc tree was added, I am a loyal merc if you will.

However the time of the mechbay tour is over and people want to switch at will so they can get games. in that case in makes a lot more sense to consolidate your LP in one place rather than spreading them all over. You will achieve more levels more often and ranks can be tailored to your faction. Ultimately you will get more and bigger rewards. Although to be honest by the time most people get to rank 20 now 50m Cbills is basically meaning less.

The other reason to consolidate is it makes the system so much less complicated, Alliance's would exist to balance population and provide story fluff, this means they could change depending on the event, but it doesn't mess with your personal accumulation of LP. Your not penalized in anyway for staying loyal and it would be easy to have minor LP loss should you want to change.

If needed we can still have separate Loyalist and Merc trees, these would emphasize stuff (paint, mechbays, cockpit items) for loyalists over Cbills for mercs.

A consolidated tree would not look like what we have now BTW.

[Half Ear]

Buyout at lower levels but once someone has reach a specific level, lets go with Lvl 15, said player can Separate/Retire from said faction w/o a buyout with MC.

Should we really have loyalists? Units are not canon units, and canon units and that setup, originally proposed way back in 2012, is not happening. And since there is a permanent storyboard FP now and not a once in a while FP event, does it really make sense to have a permanent loyalist status?

Would most active players be okay with a Badge type setup, instead of showing or in addition to showing Legendary Founder, WC 2017 Gold Champ, etc? Or at least use a Badge while finalizing or considering how to and whether or not to code for a perm Loyalist?

Get feedback when players log into the game, if that is feasible at all instead of just taking info from forum posters.

Do consider that several boats have already sailed so far....

PS A marquee/scrolling banner announcing the current FP storyline.

[Ovion]

Paul Inouye, on 10 June 2019 - 04:04 PM, said:

*Looks for can of worms*

*Finds a couple*

*Opens them*

There are some things that are coming up that I find a little surprising, but while they make sense, it seems to go against feedback from long ago.

1) What is your thought on MC to switch factions from being a 'permanent' loyalist? To be 100% honest, I personally think this is a bit heavy handed. I know it has precedence in other faction based games (mostly MMOs).

2) Reduce FP rewards to a single tree to prevent reward chasing and flip flopping Factions. e.g. You earn that small laser you've been grinding for in Smoke Jaguar. You switch your Faction to Steiner (dunno why but let's roll with it), and grind your way up to that small laser reward level but you don't get it cause you already did with Smoke Jaguar. Thoughts?

Some thoughts to think about as well:

3) If we increase Loyalist ranks by another 20 ranks (Hero of Marik I, Hero of Marik II, Hero of Marik III... Legend of Marik X) as well as expand the reward table accordingly, is this something that would be of interest? Remember, these are additional ranks past the current Rank 20 and each rank is higher on the LP requirement curve.

4) Faction LP gains being 100% when playing for an ally instead of being reduced. Thoughts? The 'permanent' loyalist still gets a bonus for playing while their Faction is in a Conflict.

With those questions thrown out there... I'll be summarizing what we have so far in the overall discussion in the next couple of days.

1) MC is fine if it's not the only option. Give the choice of C-Bills or MC and you're golden.

2) Honestly, what faction you choose should really be cosmetic. You have to balance lore and fun.
I would make Faction play rewards a single thing, then when you hit levels have choices of what to take. That 'small laser' could be a Small Laser or Machine Gun.
Cosmetic Choices have a list of all the factions. That way, you can stick 'loyalist' if you want, but it streamlines the whole thing and fixes a lot of things imo, and lets mercs get in on the fun.
The main thing faction gives you, is titles and stuff.

3) Sounds fine.

4) Yes, you should be able to choose your side (IS/CLan, or whatever) at the start of every conflict being it's a game. Bonuses for the faction being allied to the one you choose sounds good.
The absolute worst thing is to lock people out of playing, or remove incentive for them to play.

[Deathshade]

Paul Inouye, on 10 June 2019 - 04:04 PM, said:

*Looks for can of worms*

*Finds a couple*

*Opens them*

With those questions thrown out there... I'll be summarizing what we have so far in the overall discussion in the next couple of days.

I have done some analysis on this angle and hope you are checking your math.

What is the average per day score and number of battles for one Faction player? (crank up the SQL)

How long would it take that player to achieve those ranks at his current average match per day?

If the result is more than 90 days, the number is too large. It should be lower than 90 days. This game is getting down to existing in a per quarter basis as Russ put it. just saying . .

Now take the player that has the max on per average per day score and number of battles for one Faction player. If that number of days is doable, you got your range for them to achieve Hero.

Who is going to invest that kind of time? Most wouldn't. Gamers like stacking bonuses as you know. So lets try to FEED that need.

We need IMMEDIATE rewards for these conflicts that STACK up. If you continue to STAY in these conflicts and the next time it switches to another planet or Faction, you will be getting rewards that now have 5 percent more for example. 10 percent for the next planet. Do you see where this is heading? By reaching that max 50 say, you have achieved Hero status or Legendary ranks.

These are just example bonuses. Those bonuses could be anything. Even a way to push the button for a planetary long tom. The thing is that both winners and losers get bonuses. The winners get way more rewards and bonuses for winning the planet. I would say at least 50 percent more plus their individual stacked bonuses. Maybe later if it works, you create this stack effect for an entire unit of players under one team tag.

If you can't have economy or just one faction vs one faction, lets create a reason to continue fighting in these conflicts instead of just trying to get players to blindly play this game for rewards or individual goals that take months.

Edited by Deathshade, 11 June 2019 - 05:21 AM.

[Paul Inouye]

Cato Zilks, on 10 June 2019 - 05:52 PM, said:

Paul, we still need answers regarding two things:
a) Are loyalists forced to fight for their faction/alliance or only incentivized via LP earnings?

b ) There have been a lot of requests for alliances to shift for different stories/timelines. Are you giving this consideration?

a) Current plan is yes, you'd be locked into fighting for your Faction/Alliance. In the case of Clan VS IS, and you're aligned to an IS Faction, you'd be expected to fight for IS in the Conflict. You'd still earn a small amount of LP while doing so.

For example, we do not have plans to go into the Civil War era (mentioned by others) which means you'll never see a conflict between Steiner and Davion. Never see a conflict between Steiner and FRR. But you WILL see conflicts between Steiner/Marik, Steiner/Liao, Steiner/Kurita if there are border planets that would accommodate such actions.

b ) As mentioned in part a, we currently don't have a plan to have dynamically changing alliances. This isn't a snub to lore, but more of a technical issue. If you are in an alliance with X, Y and Z.. then that switches to X, Y, A... there's now a reward table clash that cannot be easily addressed when it comes to database management unless we explode the current dataset by 12 (13 Factions including the one you're in) for every player in the game.

[Cato Zilks]

Paul Inouye, on 11 June 2019 - 04:25 PM, said:

a) Current plan is yes, you'd be locked into fighting for your Faction/Alliance. In the case of Clan VS IS, and you're aligned to an IS Faction, you'd be expected to fight for IS in the Conflict. You'd still earn a small amount of LP while doing so.

For example, we do not have plans to go into the Civil War era (mentioned by others) which means you'll never see a conflict between Steiner and Davion. Never see a conflict between Steiner and FRR. But you WILL see conflicts between Steiner/Marik, Steiner/Liao, Steiner/Kurita if there are border planets that would accommodate such actions.

b ) As mentioned in part a, we currently don't have a plan to have dynamically changing alliances. This isn't a snub to lore, but more of a technical issue. If you are in an alliance with X, Y and Z.. then that switches to X, Y, A... there's now a reward table clash that cannot be easily addressed when it comes to database management unless we explode the current dataset by 12 (13 Factions including the one you're in) for every player in the game.

Thanks Paul!

[eddieb]

Paul Inouye, on 11 June 2019 - 04:25 PM, said:

b ) As mentioned in part a, we currently don't have a plan to have dynamically changing alliances. This isn't a snub to lore, but more of a technical issue. If you are in an alliance with X, Y and Z.. then that switches to X, Y, A... there's now a reward table clash that cannot be easily addressed when it comes to database management unless we explode the current dataset by 12 (13 Factions including the one you're in) for every player in the game.

The rewards table can be global... there's nothing that needs to be per-player here at all. We know that it's not much more difficult to make something a variable rather than a constant. Sorry, disagree that this is really a technical issue. All you need is a 2 dimensional changeable table that has two indices, both of which are faction, and have it return some reward multiplier.

[Bowelhacker]

1) No - not keen on the idea of charging people if they just want to sample manifold delights of the FP wonderland.

2) Not a bad direction to think about, but perhaps two trees - one for Clan and one for IS? Add the option to pick which house or clan to get specific rewards?

3) Also not a bad idea, but the rewards would have be pretty hefty AND likely to be achievable before this game's end of life...

4) Nah

Edited by Bowelhacker, 11 June 2019 - 09:58 PM.

[BaronDeath]

Gilgamecc, on 09 June 2019 - 09:52 AM, said:

I'd love to see a system where units can buy and build out mechs, either as a unit-locked Trial mech that certain ranks can modify and the rank-and-file can use as needed, or they could be awarded to specific unit members by leadership for whatever reason the unit has. It would give a purpose to unit coffers beyond invitations, and it would make on-boarding new players to Faction Play much, much faster for an established unit.

Lately we (CSPS) have been meeting and picking up quite a few players who have potential but haven't been playing for terribly long. Having a way for units to reward and encourage their new pilots with Faction-appropriate mechs would be an incredible mechanic for the community of a long-running game like this one.

Maybe it would be beneficial to PGI's side of things to lock unit-awarded mechs to Faction Play, to avoid disrupting the MWO economy too much. That would further differentiate FP from QP, and would give incentive and motivation to players who otherwise might be disinterested in learning the FP ropes.
HUGE AGREEMENCE

I articulated on this idea several pages back as the simplest, 1 day of programming cure to this entire dilemma from a permanent Loyalist standpoint, and BROARL was the one who posted in this thread. PGI is ignoring the reality that Loyalists Unit leaders can build queues by inspiring and pulling together pilots and spending their time and effort training and building up, which creates loyalty to the game and the Unit. The problem is general population and not permanent Loyalists creating queue problems because they won't switch sides. How sad. Spectre has said it many times, the MERC and FREELANCER option is for pilots who want to switch back and forth and when those were introduced it fixed the problem and gave venue to "switchers" who could help queue problems if all they wanted was a fight.

Fix the problem (general population engaging for reasons beyond just getting a "fight" as soon as they sit down) and don't treat the symptom. Letting Unit leader (who reach 20th level) give a Drop Deck out of coffers (to guys who won't buy mechs anyway or WILL) will create long term loyalty to the game and the Unit. Long Term loyalty BREAKS the quarterly issue Russ mentions (because I have seen it over and over with steadfast and Loyal pilots).

Killing Loyalty has knocked out a massive pillar to this game. In my 10 QPs tonight, no one - not one - was at all associated with any of the two "options" for FW. This has been pretty common, and pointed out by many. Sad day.

Concerning giving C-Bills from Unit Coffers to Unit Members: it is a short sighted business model to not see (again Loyalists see this clearly): 1) People who take it seriously this is a "free" game will not buy mechs anyway. C-Bills earned by a Unit and contributed by Unit Members shows loyalty and belief the Unit is going in the right direction. Someone plays and earns those!!! So gametime is not lost!!! Mutually exclusive. 2) People with money and believe in the game will spend money. 3) Nothing is lost and sales would not decline. General population would have higher participation for longer times, which impacts queue problems. 4) Unit leader would be more eager to recruit and the more confidence pilots get the longer they play and stay. 5) Solves 20th level problem. Only 20th level Unit Leaders can do this. 6) They still have to skill them out, so they are committed to playing those mechs! 7) Obviously limit this per Unit member to not upset the economics of the game.

Edited by BaronDeath, 11 June 2019 - 10:48 PM.

[BenMillard]

Faction Play 'Meta' Trial Mechs
Rather than a system of Unit-owned 'rentable' drop decks, update the Trial Mechs with current meta on the Champion builds. Allow these to be duplicated across a Drop Deck.

In the current Trial Mechs, 3x Hellbringer (with ECM) and 1 Nova would be a half-decent Clan vomit deck and let players new to FP get to grips with it.

On the IS side, 3x Warhammer with a Crab (make it Medium Pulse instead of Large Pulse) would also be a decent 'Trial Deck'. Being unable to repeat these Mechs means a PUG can't learn so easily.

Clanners can run 4 heavies at 60-65 tons which is ideal for newer players. 4x Rifleman at 60T is an option for IS, although a bit light. New players can learn just one or two Mechs at a time. Let them respawn that mech 4 times (or those 2 mechs 2 times each) so they can join immediately and get better, faster.

These won't be skilled up, of course. That means newer players will be a bit squishy and lacking some electronic intel compared to their experienced competitors. That's all fair and proper, it's the same model as Quick Play. Once they find a drop deck of Trial Mechs they like, they save up to buy those Mechs, save up the buy the meta loadout, now put the owned Mechs in thier owned Drop Deck, grind through the skill tree.

It reduces the barrier to entry while still requiring the same amount of play time to truly complete these Mechs and make them fully competitive. That play time improves the player skill.

"Go where I go, shoot what I shoot" only works if the new player has the same Mech and - crucially - same loadout as their Unit or temporary Group.

We all want a big FP population but new players won't stick with it if it's too hard to get started. Help them onto that first rung of the ladder and they might grow into true Mechwarriors for this 'endgame' mode.

Mech Bay Tour
As a new(ish) player, I'm quite enjoying the experience and rewards of getting the first two levels in each Faction during each phase. The frequent switching of sides gives each day a different feeling. The quick ranking up is a positive new player experience and provides a gateway for PUGs to become unit members and start taking FP seriously.

There's a completionist gamer mentality "gotta catch them all" with regards to the first mech bay for each Faction. It does get more people playing FP, which is Job Number One for the mode at this point.

Obviously this is a corruption of what Loyalist actually means. There are no consequences for desertion and no probation matches upon joining.

I do read the story text, in its inexplicably tiny porthole with broken scrollbar, to give a thin vaneer of lore to the stomping.

For players with a lot of LP and hundreds of Mechs this isn't much of a draw. But they are either committed to FP or sick of it by now and nothing will really change their minds.

There is a second Mech Bay tour at level 6 (31,800LP) and a third at level 10 (154,750LP) which might be of interest to semi-new players and those who are playing the mode a lot.

Level 20+ (1,060,000LP)
A fourth Mech Bay at level 14 (318,000LP) and 1,500MC at level 15 (397,500LP) are probably not achievable until the Alliances LP model is implemented. Those levels are more for long-term Loyalists who tended to have one Faction for Clan and another for IS out of necessity.

I think it's right that the MC reward is too far down the tree to be part of a PUG tour of Factions. Looping the final 5 reward levels, without needing 20% more LP each level, could make the post-level-20 experience feel better.

This means 1,500MC would be rewarded at Level '21' (1,060,000+397,500=1,458,166LP) with healthy C-Bill boosts at regular although lengthy intervals and GXP injections in the latter 3 levels of this cycle.

Obviously you don't loop the title, just the rewards. A sort of 'salary' or 'dividend' for committed players who achieved this very high level and remain active, playing hard for their Faction when the opportunity arises in the FP story. (Realistically, this will be via Alliances most of the time now.)

Edited by BenMillard, 12 June 2019 - 01:13 AM.

[SeventhSL]

Paul Inouye, on 10 June 2019 - 04:04 PM, said:

1) What is your thought on MC to switch factions from being a 'permanent' loyalist? To be 100% honest, I personally think this is a bit heavy handed. I know it has precedence in other faction based games (mostly MMOs).

2) Reduce FP rewards to a single tree to prevent reward chasing and flip flopping Factions. e.g. You earn that small laser you've been grinding for in Smoke Jaguar. You switch your Faction to Steiner (dunno why but let's roll with it), and grind your way up to that small laser reward level but you don't get it cause you already did with Smoke Jaguar. Thoughts?

Some thoughts to think about as well:

3) If we increase Loyalist ranks by another 20 ranks (Hero of Marik I, Hero of Marik II, Hero of Marik III... Legend of Marik X) as well as expand the reward table accordingly, is this something that would be of interest? Remember, these are additional ranks past the current Rank 20 and each rank is higher on the LP requirement curve.

4) Faction LP gains being 100% when playing for an ally instead of being reduced. Thoughts? The 'permanent' loyalist still gets a bonus for playing while their Faction is in a Conflict.

1. Yes. If you are going to have permanent loyalists then I think MC is the correct call.

2. Yes. It is a step in the right direction. As I said at the very start, the issues with faction swapping, penalties etc is due to the flaws in the underlying reward system. If the reward system was fixed so switching/staying gave no benefit then faction swapping becomes a none issue. BUT you must also implement point 4 with this. if you are going to put in place a fractional LP reward system (Faction swap for 100% LP all the time vs Loyalist for low LP most of the time) then there is no point fixing the reward system as the LP system immediately blows any advantage you may have gained.

3. Quick fix but not a long term solution. You swap "Level 20 then what?" for "Level 40 then what?". Unless you make the levels practically impossible to reach which will just irritate a lot of players. If LP as a currency isn't possible how about a faction play supply cache bar. You earn a faction play supply cache every X amount of LP. No level limit, no benefit for swapping factions.

4. Yes. This is mandatory change to make point 2 viable.

[Rustyplate]

Well. Given the results I have seen since the latest "Update" I am furious! Everyone plays for different reasons. I Like my Faction! Go Kurita. And I will NOT play another! Why not? I have been playing MWO for @ 2 years now. I am into the forth rank for Kurita reputation. That is a long time of steady play to gain even that! And now we have rotating factions that mine has only showed up once in the past 4 days! In short this just killed any plausible chances of building real faction score with your chosen faction. I read alot of "I think" in this forum. What about the players? What about the players that pay for this game!? I have spent well over a thousand dollars on MWO alone! I would expect to at least be listened to. Faction play has always had issues. Typical? Long wait times. Normal. One side or the other far outweighs one. That don't mean necessarily mech size either. I mean one side with seeming ridiculous firepower vs the other barely chipping paint. Really foolish mech drop selections. But that is a player duh. So either it is a major win or a major a-s whipping! I have seen very few in between. So team balance is a hilarity. But for all that I like it. I like the fun interaction with some of the players. I like the challenge. But now? Unless this current set up is undone. I will probably never run faction play again. Thank you for ruining it. Like I said on my tech forum commentary. Make a good game, then find ways to screw it up! Keep this up and I will take my time and money elsewhere! There is always World of Warcraft!

Edited by Rustyplate, 12 June 2019 - 07:09 AM.

[Nightbird]

Paul - the table of LP earnings for loyalists as proposed is too restrictive. Not going to see any improvements to FP because of it compared to pre-patch.

Pre-patch, you can earn 100% LP points for your faction as it was always IS versus Clan. You're going to lower it to, what, 70% on average?

(across all events, for participants)

[Nightbird]

@Paul continuing the above, suppose a perm loyalist made 120% fighting for their factions, 80% for their ally, 60% for their side, and 40% fighting on the other side in an inner conflict, the new perm loyalist would earn:

120% * (chances of conflict includes your faction) + 80% * (chances of conflict includes ally) + 60% * (chances of conflict includes side but not your faction or ally ) + 40% * (chances of conflict includes other side only)


Suppose 1/3 of fights are IS vs Clan, 1/3 are IS vs IS, and 1/3 are Clan vs Clan, assuming 6 per side, 3 per alliance

The odds are:

120% * (1/3 IS vs Clan * 1/6 your faction + 1/3 civil war * 1/3 your faction) + 80% * (1/3 IS vs Clan* 2/6 ally in conflict + 1/3 civil war * 2/3 ally in conflict) + 60% * (1/3 IS vs Clan * 1/2 not your alliance ) + 40% * (1/3 civil war on other side)
= 70%

You need to boost it to 100% on average

At this point in the game, do not nerf LP gains

[BaronDeath]

Rustyplate, on 12 June 2019 - 07:00 AM, said:

Well. Given the results I have seen since the latest "Update" I am furious! Everyone plays for different reasons. I Like my Faction! Go Kurita. And I will NOT play another! Why not? I have been playing MWO for @ 2 years now. I am into the forth rank for Kurita reputation. That is a long time of steady play to gain even that! And now we have rotating factions that mine has only showed up once in the past 4 days! In short this just killed any plausible chances of building real faction score with your chosen faction. I read alot of "I think" in this forum. What about the players? What about the players that pay for this game!? I have spent well over a thousand dollars on MWO alone! I would expect to at least be listened to. Faction play has always had issues. Typical? Long wait times. Normal. One side or the other far outweighs one. That don't mean necessarily mech size either. I mean one side with seeming ridiculous firepower vs the other barely chipping paint. Really foolish mech drop selections. But that is a player duh. So either it is a major win or a major a-s whipping! I have seen very few in between. So team balance is a hilarity. But for all that I like it. I like the fun interaction with some of the players. I like the challenge. But now? Unless this current set up is undone. I will probably never run faction play again. Thank you for ruining it. Like I said on my tech forum commentary. Make a good game, then find ways to screw it up! Keep this up and I will take my time and money elsewhere! There is always World of Warcraft!

Imagine after 3,000 matches or so over 2 years getting to Galaxy Commander III and seeing it vaporize, as if that was not a solid contribution to matches, and as a Loyalist Unit founder, pulling many many many along the way.

[SeventhSL]

@Paul So hopefully now after 20 something pages my initial comment on page 4 is starting to make sence. Information in brackets added to provide context.

SeventhSL, on 26 May 2019 - 10:47 PM, said:

Don’t over think it. A simple loyalty (reward) system makes these questions (penalties, faction hopping, permanent loyalty) mute. This is also an opportunity to address the “Level 20, what’s next” issue that keeps being raised by the community.

So if you simplify the FP reward system such that there is no benifit to faction hopping then there is obiously no need to penalise it either. This is why the community has been suggesting a new LP reward systems for years. LP as a currency is by far the most popular but not the only one.

Anyway, don’t over think it and add complex new systems. People just want to be able to:
1. Select a faction of their choice and play as them.
2. Swap factions if they desire.
3. Not be disadvantaged by staying loyal or swapping regularly.

Edited by SeventhSL, 12 June 2019 - 04:28 PM.

[BaronDeath]

"Adhering to the key design pillars of Mech Warfare, Information Warfare, Role Warfare and Community Warfare, MechWarrior Online adds several new layers of gameplay and tactical team planning to the franchise."

[BaronDeath]

Tanks, has 15 minute matches. 15 against 15 for 15 minutes. Reduce this to Tanks and players will go to that game because they will at least learn something historical. Now it is that.

[Sigmar Sich]

Paul Inouye, on 10 June 2019 - 04:04 PM, said:

3) If we increase Loyalist ranks by another 20 ranks (Hero of Marik I, Hero of Marik II, Hero of Marik III... Legend of Marik X) as well as expand the reward table accordingly, is this something that would be of interest? Remember, these are additional ranks past the current Rank 20 and each rank is higher on the LP requirement curve.

A temporary solution, you need something more permanent. For example:

Add only two new ranks - Faction Hero and Faction Legend. Only loyalists can progress there.

If you break loyalty to a faction, whatever progress you made over the 20 conventional ranks, is reset to rank 20.
Hero rank have a lot of LP to grind, so it will not be a casual decision to lose it.

Legend rank (the highest rank) have less LP pool, but you will have to maintain it. Every period of time (real time days, or CW phases or whole events) - if player didn't participate for their faction, he will lose some progress for Legend rank.
I know, it seems grindy and punishing, but for the very top rank effort is expected.

Both Hero and Legend ranks will not have any fixed rewards. They will have ongoing bonuses for as long as you have the ranks.
Rewards, for example:
Hero - C-bill and GXP booster for CW games; C-bills and MC discounts for mechs preferred by their faction.
Legend - small amount of MC for every CW game you play (you can already generate MC for capturing a planet, so no big deal).
Add whatever rewards players think to be cool and worth the grind.

[Paul Inouye]

Okay.. so I'll be spending most of tomorrow rewriting the original post with the updated suggestions and incorporate even more feedback so we can work further down the list. There's been a lot of cool ideas that don't blow up development time and I'll add/update all of them into the new version of this design spec. I people are generally happy with the new design spec, I'll put it in front of the engineers to get their estimates and technical responses to get back to you guys with.

Again, cannot say thanks enough for the feedback so far.