16 replies to this topic

[Ignatius Audene]

Hiho. First, i never thought that i would start such a post.

For years I played CW in mixed ts teams of all kind. 2017 etc. it was no problem, because there were plenty of teams online or u simply start a new group pretty fast. So most of the time u faced of other groups with good chances to face good teams like evil, jgx, mj12, etc.

But population and quality has dropped hard. Even with only a 4 man we can carry lots of matches with a group of casual players. Chances that u find a good red team are like 10%?
So we should prob start to avoid stacking teams to much, when there is no proper red team available (u can notice by friendlist and or streams quite fast). Just split of half of your team and play for both sides. Clubbing seals gets old quite fast.

Ok. I am rdy for the shitstorm now.

Edited by Ignatius Audene, 05 March 2020 - 04:10 AM.

[John Bronco]

Sure.

But also, nah, because people want to play with their friends, not lose, and not get skipped.

[tee5]

Maybe final goal of CW is, that the group that is so mighty that it has driven all other players away, has won?

But personally I go with this slogan: "if they are too strong, you are too weak."

[Prototelis]

Organized teams in the end game unit-centric team game mode that encourages you to group up in order to achieve greater success!

OH NO

[n00biwan]

Prototelis, on 05 March 2020 - 09:57 AM, said:

Organized teams in the end game unit-centric team game mode that encourages you to group up in order to achieve greater success!

OH NO

Absolutely right, but also wrong. I think you missed the point. I think he's thinking about being more organised, not less.

The meta meta is that you can't even meta with no opponents. Killing the queue means no fun for anyone.

So sure, play the game the way you want to, but wait times will go up if you crush too many opponents. An objectively less favorable outcome.

Also. please don't just use the "group up" argument, comp tier stacks drive out other groups also. I'm not saying don't play with your mates, but do consider splitting to face each other or maybe some other way of handicapping yourself in the name of sportsmanship (or looking at it another way, manipulating the queue to keep it buoyant, thus enabling yourself to continue playing). I dunno, maybe just do dumb **** in an organised way... It's only really an issue if it's consistent crushing defeats, some kind of mitigation can keep people interested and playing.

I'm not just being butthurt, I'll be the first to admit "if you're being farmed in the dz it's not just their fault", but those kind of games, one after another because there's 1 team dropping but only a bunch of pugs on the other side, make you want to go do something else.

[Prototelis]

n00biwan, on 05 March 2020 - 10:53 AM, said:

I think you missed the point.

No, I did not miss the point.

If you don't want to play against teams in the endgame unit-centric team game mode faction is not the place for you.

[Brauer]

n00biwan, on 05 March 2020 - 10:53 AM, said:

Absolutely right, but also wrong. I think you missed the point. I think he's thinking about being more organised, not less.

The meta meta is that you can't even meta with no opponents. Killing the queue means no fun for anyone.

So sure, play the game the way you want to, but wait times will go up if you crush too many opponents. An objectively less favorable outcome.

Also. please don't just use the "group up" argument, comp tier stacks drive out other groups also. I'm not saying don't play with your mates, but do consider splitting to face each other or maybe some other way of handicapping yourself in the name of sportsmanship (or looking at it another way, manipulating the queue to keep it buoyant, thus enabling yourself to continue playing). I dunno, maybe just do dumb **** in an organised way... It's only really an issue if it's consistent crushing defeats, some kind of mitigation can keep people interested and playing.

I'm not just being butthurt, I'll be the first to admit "if you're being farmed in the dz it's not just their fault", but those kind of games, one after another because there's 1 team dropping but only a bunch of pugs on the other side, make you want to go do something else.

What comp tier stacks? Not a whole lot of comp units run big groups. Many limit themselves to 4-6 players so there's actually some challenge. If you think specific units are dominating the mode with 12 mans who are they?

You should also consider that there can be an overabundance of frustration for strong players solo-dropping in FW as many players consistently refuse to follow fairly simple FW best practices, such as dropping in their heavies mechs first in nearly all cases, and bringing builds suited to the map.

[n00biwan]

I didn't say units, I just said stacks, most units can't get more than 4 people in the same place anymore. I often play during UK morning hours, so the fp pop is usually low.

Also, I did say stacking wasn't always an issue, when there are enough ppls around it doesn't cause a problem (or matter if your team/group takes a bath), and often when the queues are low yes, there is a deliberate effort by some guys not to overstack, which is admirable.

When the queue is popping, take your best 12, hope there's a decent 12 on the other side for a quality game, as it should be, but when the queue gets lower a 12 stack makes people leave in a hurry, maybe mix up your thinking?

Proto, so missed point... never said I didn't want to play against teams, or be in one or even that anyone else should or shouldn't group up (I kinda agree: this is what the mode is for, and players who want to pug drop should do so under the assumption that they are going to try to work with 11 other people for the good of the team). Just in the specific circumstance of low queue population you'd stand more chance of quality games if you stopped being a group of 10-12, curb stomping whatever pugs can muster and did something different, and so would your opponents (which means they're more likely to requeue = more opponents, more players playing enough to learn, etc).

I can't say I haven't been frustrated by a lot of random pug players, Brauer, totally understand your point about not being able to trust that randos to have the first idea what to do, some even get offended when you try to inform them; but overloaded groups vs pugs makes for a bad experience, if it's match after match.

There isn't a perfect solution, but the players have to power to control this kind of stuff, for sake of fun, sportsmanship and game's continued existence.

[BROARL]

BlaizerP, on 05 March 2020 - 07:40 AM, said:

Sure.

But also, nah, because people want to play with their friends, not lose, and not get skipped.

i feel you, but none of us get to play if the enemy avoids the queue.
i have had this problem for a long time (OCE tz) and it's split up and fight each other or just go to quickplay or mech 5 or whatever...
if its not fun for the other guy then the other guy may stop playing, simple reality.

[Dionnsai]

No

We will make our groups, and we will do our best to find the other groups.

End discussion.

[K O Z A K]

If the que is like 15:2 sure, but if its like 25:15 then trying to split good players is a good way to get passed for a drop

[justcallme A S H]

Just wait till it's Seige attack.you get 4-6 guys in trials / CADETs it otherwise.


Yeah I'm not going to run a 4man. I'm gonna fill the group with basically anyone that wants to listen so those players, who should not even be allowed in the mode, are not in the drops I am in because they are so far beyond frustrating and it's not enjoyable for ANYONE.

[Sjorpha]

If you're like 10+and no other units are playing I definitely like splitting up to get better games, but these days I'm lucky if I can scrape together a group of more than 3-5 players as mj12 is pretty inactive now.

I miss the old frr hub days when we organised multiple 12mans at the same time so much... In those days it was really hard to imagine that the first phase of CW would also be its peak given how barebones it was, but here I am looking back with a tear in my eye. I even miss Mech the Dane pretending to run things while never actually playing himself.

Also a reminder that the fall of CW wasn't a slow decline, pgi actively ruined it and made the big units give up and quit. They even publicly said that they perceived the big units like Ms a problem, they deliberately implemented mechanics designed to discourage large units. They kept resetting the map to eradicate the progress units had made, they then proceeded to remove all player influence over the map step by step.

The developmental history of CW is actually incredibly weird when you look back at it. They started with the concept of player driven conflict and unit play, but then got all freaked out when players actually organised and tried to play the mode as designed. Imagine if the player and unit narratives and progression had actually been encouraged, celebrated and built upon rather than deliberately destroyed. We could have had Ms taking over half the map, becoming the evil empire, the frr hub and independent units could have forged an alliance

[Dionnsai]

Sjorpha, on 10 March 2020 - 03:44 PM, said:

The developmental history of CW is actually incredibly weird when you look back at it. They started with the concept of player driven conflict and unit play, but then got all freaked out when players actually organised and tried to play the mode as designed. Imagine if the player and unit narratives and progression had actually been encouraged, celebrated and built upon rather than deliberately destroyed. We could have had Ms taking over half the map, becoming the evil empire, the frr hub and independent units could have forged an alliance

I'd love an honest response from PGI on this paragraph. Won't happen, but I'd like it.

[Ignatius Audene]

The hole player driven conflicts has it's own problems. You need a strong incentive to fight for the losing side (wait times obviously wasn't enough, see Jade Falcon era etc.) Most players simply jumpjet on the winning side. Like already mentioned playing with pugs is stress and players like to win)

[50 50]

Why can't we just have smaller team sizes based around the lances?

If you go to into FP and look at the queue and it's something like 1v0, at the moment you would simply click back to the start and hit the QP launch instead of hoping another 22 players join in to make a game.
But if you knew you could get a game at 4v4, that's a lot more appealing.
That ability to just get a game has the natural effect of drawing more people in because if you look at the queue and it's something like 5v7 you would know that there are already some 4v4 matches happening and a few more people in the queue will allow either two 4v4 or an 8v8 to occur.

And so it goes on.

Allowing for that smaller team size should also mean that you get more of and a greater variety of opponents and making a group of 4 should still be pretty easy.

[Ignatius Audene]

Thanks for the great drops yesterday. Lately I've seen JGX arange matches with dionnsai stack. Hunt each other and we will get better matches

Edited by Ignatius Audene, 12 March 2020 - 12:43 AM.