Jump to content

Looking To The Future Of Mechwarrior


544 replies to this topic

#461 Be my Guest

    Member

  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 25 October 2020 - 11:40 AM

Of course I have not read through all the 24 pages in this thread so far. So maybe my points were metioned already.

Regarding Fation Play: I dont think it will be in the focus of the upcoming changes, but I think they should at least keep it alive, bc quickplay alone is not enough for this game.
I consider myself a casual player. Real life makes it very difficult to plan my gaming times ahead. What would help me to participate faction play would be a battle plan, where you could see some days in advance, which conflicts will come up. If there is Kurita vs anonther IS faction I am much more motivated to participate. Whereas I rarly play IS vs Clan. However to invest the time needed for faction play (1+h straihgt) I would have to know in advance that IS vs IS is happing this evening. Having a webpage where you could check the conflicts of the upcoming 7 days during the day would help a lot. Also you could display the results of the past matches on this webpage to make things more interesting.

Apart from that, there should be a gamemode btw. 12vs12 and 1vs1. I liked scouting a lot. And all the people I know in this game are from scouting matches, where we formed an ad hoc team. On contrary I am not interested in 12men groups, bc for one it takes to long until every one is ready and second its no fun, bc you cant have a proper conversation btw. games in such big groups. So IMO a gamemode with 4vs4, be it scouting or a new solaris game mode, would help to bound new people to the game.

Regarding 8vs8 I m rather sceptical. I have not expiriced 8vs8 so far, but probably the size of the maps, also armour and ammunition values and other stuff had to be adjusted.

#462 T e c h 4 9

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 77 posts
  • LocationBehind you

Posted 25 October 2020 - 01:24 PM

I agree that something has to be done with Community Warfare/Faction Play, and there needs to be a reason to want to play it. That "reason" can be, and likely is, different, for different people. Some might care about the lore acpect and that might be their "reason". Others might play due to the "team" dynamic you can't get in QP. Others might like the Loyalty rewards, or payouts, or 4-mech dropdecks (basically, respawns)....the list goes on.

I like the suggestion of having a place outside the game (can be in-game as well) that one can check the upcoming battles and such (and warlog maybe?) could be a benefit to increasing CW participation. I liked the scouting 4v4's as well. Is 8v8 a move that makes sense? In QP, maybe. CW, I'm not sure. I personally think CW should be for full teams only (this would incentivize joining a team) and not allow anything but teams - no solos or small groups to "fill-in" to get to 12 v 12, so from that perspective, 8 v 8 might be better if we went to that model (teams only).

The first thing that needs to be done in my opinion is to reinstate unit rewards for capturing planets, or if not that, at least some type of bonus to the winning team. Otherwise, unless I want to play with more than 3 of my friends, why not just play QP - the wait times are likely less right now so what's the benefit? It has no "meaning" and I get nothing extra for my time, so why bother? That is what would need to be addressed I think.

#463 codynyc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 321 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Locationda Bronx

Posted 25 October 2020 - 06:51 PM

lol man ever few months i check back to see if we can get a new mech or dare i say map......still nothing.. Glad i haven't dropped a penny on this game in such a long time... sad to see this game getting neglected. i hope i end up eating my words...

#464 MW Waldorf Statler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,450 posts
  • LocationGermany/Berlin

Posted 26 October 2020 - 06:41 PM

Posted Image

#465 C337Skymaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,036 posts
  • LocationNew England

Posted 26 October 2020 - 06:43 PM

View PostMW Waldorf Statler, on 26 October 2020 - 06:41 PM, said:

Posted Image


Link to that thread?

#466 AnAnachronismAlive

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 373 posts

Posted 26 October 2020 - 10:18 PM

Just for the officials interest: the lower rate of participation in this thread / in general is not a result of a lack of ideas / proposals, but the momentum seriously starts to lose drive since there ain't a certain (if at all) degree of feedback happening. While showing yourself on some podcasts and telling us that all feedback is appreciated / taken into account) is fine though doubtful, the lack of a central status report feels like a serious issue IMHO. Know that the "lead" is having a somewhat concluding meeting this week ... hope we get some input on the potential scope of improvements soon. (Else) Folks will be fed off if 90% of the proposals are straight off the board anyhow.

Futhermore the fact only a very limited audience group consumes the Podcasts and hear-say can't spread towards the majority of the (once active) population, it feels like rethinking / broadening the general range of communications is at hand.

Edited by AnAnachronismAlive, 26 October 2020 - 10:21 PM.


#467 C337Skymaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,036 posts
  • LocationNew England

Posted 27 October 2020 - 02:54 AM

View PostAnAnachronismAlive, on 26 October 2020 - 10:18 PM, said:

Just for the officials interest: the lower rate of participation in this thread / in general is not a result of a lack of ideas / proposals, but the momentum seriously starts to lose drive since there ain't a certain (if at all) degree of feedback happening. While showing yourself on some podcasts and telling us that all feedback is appreciated / taken into account) is fine though doubtful, the lack of a central status report feels like a serious issue IMHO. Know that the "lead" is having a somewhat concluding meeting this week ... hope we get some input on the potential scope of improvements soon. (Else) Folks will be fed off if 90% of the proposals are straight off the board anyhow.

Futhermore the fact only a very limited audience group consumes the Podcasts and hear-say can't spread towards the majority of the (once active) population, it feels like rethinking / broadening the general range of communications is at hand.


Copied to the YouTube comments under Podcast 210.

#468 Absaint

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Gunsho-ni
  • 73 posts

Posted 27 October 2020 - 03:00 AM

Idea from Navid A1 in the latest podcast.

After a new player finishes the academy he can enroll to a faction and gain objectives for that faction (like the objectives on events), after these are done reward him with a iconic mech from that faction.

This could be done only once but would result in a better retention rate.

Edited by Absaint, 27 October 2020 - 06:11 AM.


#469 MW Waldorf Statler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,450 posts
  • LocationGermany/Berlin

Posted 27 October 2020 - 05:51 AM

View PostC337Skymaster, on 26 October 2020 - 06:43 PM, said:

Link to that thread?


Posted Image
https://mwomercs.com...4805#entry74805

#470 C337Skymaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,036 posts
  • LocationNew England

Posted 27 October 2020 - 06:38 AM

View PostDlardrageth said:

Expecting MWO to last more than just a year or two on the market, I'm looking forward to a two-layer development of the game. Or a vertically and horizontally one if you want. Meaning for the one part in variety of detailing, more Mechs, tech, maps, etc. ; for the other part (hopefully with equal priority) in depth, more game modes, integrated background and evolving strategic-/meta-level.

Yes, just hoping for the latter to get a decent priority, but I've experienced with WoT how it devolved or even "degenerated" since the early days of closed beta there. Due to lack of any commitment from its parent company to develop in "depth" as well. So here's hoping for a dual-pronged approach in order to get the best synergistic effect possible for PGI. Posted Image


This is just heartbreaking to read, 8 years later. He hit the nail straight on the head: We got exactly what WoT got...

EDIT: I've been reading through the rest of that 8 year old thread, and literally nothing has changed. :( All the hopes and dreams of players in 2012 are as yet unrealized in this game, 8 years later. (Randomized maps so you don't ALWAYS know where the enemy is coming from, making scouting actually important. Acceptance of a Minimum Viable Product at launch, contingent on rapid inclusion of missing features at a later date once they were on a firm developmental and financial footing. AI Infantry and Tanks. The list goes on, but it's identical to the one we've all just hashed out, here).

This makes me wonder: with Russ still in charge, what's the point in hoping?

Edited by C337Skymaster, 27 October 2020 - 07:14 AM.


#471 Sudden

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 274 posts
  • LocationK2 cockpit

Posted 27 October 2020 - 09:03 AM

this game will never be what it could have been.faction play is dead, which should be the main attraction of the game. not quick play.you dont listen to your community. broken promises almost from the start.if you want to fix the game listen to your community easy

#472 Z Paradox

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 101 posts
  • Locationozz

Posted 27 October 2020 - 10:19 AM

I guess Matt Newman is only one actually working in PGI... rest of them is just there for pictures and drinking Posted Image

#473 Wishmast3r

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 474 posts

Posted 27 October 2020 - 11:19 PM

I heard the new community manager is reading this thread?
There are tons of suggestions to improve MWO, not only in this thread, but all over the forums for years.
I myself have so many things i´d like to see updated or improved, but only 1 major problem that keeps me from having fun.
Nascar!
Quick Play has been a disaster for the last years and it´s gotten worse.
99% of the games, no matter what map or mode, is nascar. Slow mechs getting left behind and the team with the murder ball and fastest mechs wins. This is annoying.
So i have 2 suggestions.

1. Let the people choose their mech AFTER map voting.
Maybe let them choose a mech class, light, medium, heavy, assault for the matchmaker.
Or simply the option to change the mech before the game.

2. And i prefer this option, cause i think it´s easier to implement.
Get rid of the random map voting.
Players in a slow assault with short range weapons get stuck on Polar.
Players in a long range mech get stuck on Solaris City.
Let the people choose the maps they want to play (and maybe the modes).
The matchmaker can then pick the players with the same maps AND pick a random map that all players want to play.

This way players with long range mechs don´t have to fight with slow brawlers and it will reduce the urge to nascar.

#474 Alreech

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 1,632 posts

Posted 28 October 2020 - 01:05 AM

View PostWishmast3r, on 27 October 2020 - 11:19 PM, said:

I myself have so many things i´d like to see updated or improved, but only 1 major problem that keeps me from having fun.
Nascar!
Quick Play has been a disaster for the last years and it´s gotten worse.
99% of the games, no matter what map or mode, is nascar. Slow mechs getting left behind and the team with the murder ball and fastest mechs wins. This is annoying.

Noe! PGI can't change Quickplay, it's MWOs most succesfull gamemode!!!!11111 Posted Image

The only problem in Quickplay is that too many noobz are Tier 1, make tier grinding harder & keep Tier 3 away from playing with Tier 1 too improve Quickplay!!!!11111Posted Image

Quote

So i have 2 suggestions.

1. Let the people choose their mech AFTER map voting.
Maybe let them choose a mech class, light, medium, heavy, assault for the matchmaker.
Or simply the option to change the mech before the game.

2. And i prefer this option, cause i think it´s easier to implement.
Get rid of the random map voting.
Players in a slow assault with short range weapons get stuck on Polar.
Players in a long range mech get stuck on Solaris City.
Let the people choose the maps they want to play (and maybe the modes).
The matchmaker can then pick the players with the same maps AND pick a random map that all players want to play.

This way players with long range mechs don´t have to fight with slow brawlers and it will reduce the urge to nascar.

"Mech selection is in MWO possible now by Drop decks, and players don't want dropdeck otherwise they would play faction play."Posted Image

#475 Sudden

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 274 posts
  • LocationK2 cockpit

Posted 28 October 2020 - 03:49 AM

you guys are very optimistic. nothing will change. i just came back to play mwo after 3 YEARS of total absence. and faction play is worse off than it was.
faction play needs economy, it must matter. having your units name attached to a planet , for bragging rights is just pitiful. does it really matter???
just read back and you will get all the suggestions you need.
i awe struck at just how bad things have gotten,in faction play.
half of my unit has not even logged in for more than a year. what does that tell pgi. those are people that love mech warrior. most of them founders. how many more are there , that are not playing the game any more.
make your community happy, and you will be making money

#476 Sudden

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 274 posts
  • LocationK2 cockpit

Posted 28 October 2020 - 04:21 AM

View PostMatt Newman, on 05 October 2020 - 11:26 AM, said:

Posted Image


talk is cheap

#477 DAEDALOS513

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Flame
  • The Flame
  • 2,537 posts
  • LocationArea 52

Posted 28 October 2020 - 08:17 AM

View PostSudden, on 28 October 2020 - 04:21 AM, said:

talk is cheap

Indeed.. we're tired of hearing that same line of bull cocky.. we need PGI to tell us which suggestions THEY are focusing on so that we can provide counter-feedback.. cmon.. let's get this show on the road already.

#478 Garlion

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Nova Captain
  • Nova Captain
  • 42 posts

Posted 28 October 2020 - 10:07 AM

My biggest pet peeve:

I'd like the ability to do something in game while waiting for FW to form a group. Whether that be customizing mechs (usingthe UI), or, even better queuing up for FW putting you into a queue that still allows you to do QP. When a group is formed, give all players a 15 minute countdown to join up. that will give players time to finish their current QP match.

WoW did this wonderfully with BG queues way back in the day. I have no idea why this was not implemented upon inception.

Short of that, an engine / graphics update is high on my list of things that should be done.

#479 Alreech

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 1,632 posts

Posted 28 October 2020 - 12:09 PM

View PostGarlion, on 28 October 2020 - 10:07 AM, said:

My biggest pet peeve:

I'd like the ability to do something in game while waiting for FW to form a group. Whether that be customizing mechs (usingthe UI), or, even better queuing up for FW putting you into a queue that still allows you to do QP. When a group is formed, give all players a 15 minute countdown to join up. that will give players time to finish their current QP match.

I don't think that this can be done quickly.

The Mechlab is a CryEngine Level, and i don't know if that level can stay open while the matchmaking (searching) is running.
Maybe the 2D stuff of the Mechlab (Store & Dropdeck managment) could be used, but at least the Drop decks should be locked before finding a match otherwise the faction play lobby may not get the right drop deck data.
IMHO reducing group size in faction play to min 2, max 4 players would speed up match making due better compatible group sizes for 12 vs 12, but it's a no go.

#480 C337Skymaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,036 posts
  • LocationNew England

Posted 28 October 2020 - 12:32 PM

View PostAlreech, on 28 October 2020 - 12:09 PM, said:

I don't think that this can be done quickly.

I think we need to give up on "quickly" and focus on "quality". Having just read the first four pages of a pre-launch thread titled "Minimum Viable Product", and having been depressed to realize that thread reads identically to this one, I'm realizing that we've been settling for the Minimum Viable Product out of PGI for 8 years, and it's time to stop settling.

View PostAlreech, on 28 October 2020 - 12:09 PM, said:

but at least the Drop decks should be locked before finding a match otherwise the faction play lobby may not get the right drop deck data.

This is already not true: we search for minutes, or hours on end, then get locked into a match, THEN have 90 seconds to reconfigure our drop decks from whatever saved valid 'mech configurations we have in our 'mech bays. Admittedly, that's more like 80 seconds in practice, but it's still after the match is determined and before the actual game begins (and before you know who your opponents are, unless someone starts talking).





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users