149 replies to this topic

[BenMillard]

A brainstorm is only actionable if a scope and timeline have been given.

The weasel words about "if resources permit" make very clear PGI are just looking for revenue, not actual improvements to the game.

Navid's suggestion of a 2020 meta starter pack (with premade builds and skill tree) is the only idea that seems in scope and actionable so far. And entirely useless to the rest of us; aside from paying the server bill a little longer. The long tail of MW5 Steam release and Workshop modding should send a trickle of new players to MWO.

I doubt new player pockets will be deeper than £10 at a time. There could be one IS starter and one Clan starter. Maybe another pair of packs for either side of Faction; or even split into differently ranged decks with the Drop Deck itself included (as already suggested).

Then again, if the Solaris pack didn't perform, even this idea might be inadequate. (Although putting better mechs with preloaded top-performing builds and pre-skilling them to current meta might have sold better.)

So, be under no illusions. This is about profit and not about the quality of our experience. If it won't make hard cash for PGI then it will not happen.

Look how hilariously out-of-date the Trial Mech chassis and builds have become. That doesn't take programming to update. The community has even told them what to do multiple times.

Edited by BenMillard, 10 October 2020 - 08:23 AM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

we have managers, and Loyalitst from NGNG ...and no Workers ( the new Team only use UE5)and only a small team for little Bugfixing when its not a Problem of the Karl Berg Team Engine programming & Coding,,,The NGNGs now have the Cry Engine Coding Avengers in the Backyard to bring it on the Playfield????or will only help to press the last money from the dying Milkcow

Edited by MW Waldorf Statler, 10 October 2020 - 01:15 PM.

[D U N E]

Brauer, on 09 October 2020 - 12:23 PM, said:

From a balance point of view a HBK-IIC seems like it's potentially more OP than the Veagle imo as you can carry ridiculous guns in high mounts, so I can see a reason for it to be relatively less agile than the Veagle (compared to other 50 tonners). In today's game I think the agility nerfs they gave it go too far though.

Of course, though I tried to specify "Such Superior" to show, I believe it should have less agility - high mounts are godly on that thing, though once you get into the open, it's large and easy to isolate hitboxes retract from the entire chassis. Though I mainly mean in todays game, it's absurd how it's punished for existing. Give is 10-20% less agility than the Veagle and stop there. It's lower HP, worst hitboxes, and less tonnage should make up for the fact it has great high mounts in comparison to the Veagle.

[thievingmagpi]

I miss HBK-IIC superiority days

[D U N E]

Monkey Lover, on 09 October 2020 - 01:19 PM, said:

I don't think they have the staff to do this. If you look at the charts they would need civil war/cw/Solaris type updates every quarter to keep people happy. Problem is they been taking over a year to make one of these type of updates.

More successful monetization = More maps + More development
To break down.
More successful monetization means proper monetization of they assets they have/aren't too hard to make. From better mechpacks that actually create reason for purchase, E.G Starter packs, to small items players may continuously pay for that creates a steady revenue stream.

With more money, they can hire more people, undertake more development, leading to more features, such as maps, gameplay expansion, and other things people want.

Though note, the first step is the money in my argument. PGI don't need to keep sh1tting out mechpacks to keep fans happy, they have somehow kept a semi consistent player-base - 10 seasons of no content and the numbers are about equal. Just small development is enough to keep enough players, so long as they actually implement systems the current players want, alongside create a starting atmosphere that enables new players. MWO should still be able to be profitable, it's a complete game with interesting mechanics, they just need to make it more universally fun - and balance thing in a proper way.

Personally, community dev server that enables balancing testing should come back, make F tier mechs playable and competitive - look at re-vitalizing sub-par weapon systems (SPL), and overall making the game feel engaging again.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

You let the captain's hat go around on the Titanic in order to get money from the remaining passengers for sailors to seal leaks or a lifeboat for the crew, but
the money is of no use, the land is far away where there are sailors and lifeboats, which you would have to buy before you leave the Habour

Quote

With more money, they can hire more people, undertake more development, leading to more features, such as maps, gameplay expansion, and other things people want.

Money is not all ...Its give no People by the Jobmarket thats can use and handle the from Karl berg and his Team heavy coded and Modified Cry engine, its a Safe without code and Key

Collisions system ,inverse Kinetic...many many Problems thats PGI not can handle without the Old Engine Team

And Russ say self , im **** of the Founders, thanks for the Money for starting this Show , now the Esport and younger Guys my target Group ...bye bye Whales , you can leave the party

Only Hope...Bombadil have the magical Power of the Lord of the Rings Bombadil

Edited by MW Waldorf Statler, 10 October 2020 - 02:21 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

D U N E, on 10 October 2020 - 01:34 PM, said:

More successful monetization = More maps + More development
To break down.
More successful monetization means proper monetization of they assets they have/aren't too hard to make. From better mechpacks that actually create reason for purchase, E.G Starter packs, to small items players may continuously pay for that creates a steady revenue stream.

With more money, they can hire more people, undertake more development, leading to more features, such as maps, gameplay expansion, and other things people want.

Again and again, they have to make people willing to pay first, and people will NOT be willing to pay to a dying game. You must first make it a bit more alive again, more matches, better variety of things to do. You have low population count, so make do of it by having smaller matches -- 8v8s, 4v4s, or even 4-man PVE COOP to game modes with rudimentary AI.

Once it shows promise, then you monetize.

D U N E, on 10 October 2020 - 01:34 PM, said:

Though note, the first step is the money in my argument. PGI don't need to keep sh1tting out mechpacks to keep fans happy, they have somehow kept a semi consistent player-base - 10 seasons of no content and the numbers are about equal. Just small development is enough to keep enough players, so long as they actually implement systems the current players want, alongside create a starting atmosphere that enables new players. MWO should still be able to be profitable, it's a complete game with interesting mechanics, they just need to make it more universally fun - and balance thing in a proper way.

Mechpacks will only go so far. A lot of us have hangar queens at this point, and don't need anymore.

The newbies? Sure. But how are you going to retain them when they are forced to faced with seal-clubbing veterans due to low population count?

[Panoy V Knicks]

If you want more money put in server in Asia

[D U N E]

The6thMessenger, on 10 October 2020 - 03:36 PM, said:

Again and again, they have to make people willing to pay first, and people will NOT be willing to pay to a dying game. You must first make it a bit more alive again, more matches, better variety of things to do. You have low population count, so make do of it by having smaller matches -- 8v8s, 4v4s, or even 4-man PVE COOP to game modes with rudimentary AI.

Once it shows promise, then you monetize.

Mechpacks will only go so far. A lot of us have hangar queens at this point, and don't need anymore.

The newbies? Sure. But how are you going to retain them when they are forced to faced with seal-clubbing veterans due to low population count?

You seem to miss the main point of what I said: "From better mechpacks that actually create reason for purchase, E.G Starter packs, to small items players may continuously pay for that creates a steady revenue stream."
"From" - It's a start, it's not an end. MWO should even at it's current point, be monetizable. Customizations such as boltons had so much promise to be easy money makers, except most of them look like crap, they are overly priced, and fall off your mech like wet toilet paper. You go into a match and you can rely on everyone having some custom colours, though mech boltons are much, much rarer.

As I already stated, I don't think mechpacks are the answer to retaining fans - which is why I stated "Community dev servers" and in past comments "stop making monotonous events" - Though just making the game more fun does not help the fact the community play like dog-**** most the time, and new players fall into noob traps by "veterans". Proper information on meta, starter packs that help reinforce how to actually build for new players, and generally better balancing are all part to make the game better. Though for much larger things (maps, drastic new game modes, extensive development) you need money to make that happen.

Which is why I am not going to pretend "JuSt GiVe Us 10 nEw MaPs tO sAvE tHe GaMe" - Because new players, and existing early-stage players with under 50ish mechs have a high rate of leaving the game after 5 seasons. To grow the community we need to entice these players, and new game modes and maps aren't going to be as significant to these players as it would the old guard. Arguably, PGI need to focus on player retention in the early stages more than getting the old whales to start spending in droves again.

[The6thMessenger]

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 02:21 AM, said:

You seem to miss the main point of what I said: "From better mechpacks that actually create reason for purchase, E.G Starter packs, to small items players may continuously pay for that creates a steady revenue stream."

"From" - It's a start, it's not an end. MWO should even at it's current point, be monetizable. Customizations such as boltons had so much promise to be easy money makers, except most of them look like crap, they are overly priced, and fall off your mech like wet toilet paper. You go into a match and you can rely on everyone having some custom colours, though mech boltons are much, much rarer.

Preceded by: "More successful monetization means proper monetization of they assets they have/aren't too hard to make."

To which the problem is exactly, they do not have one, which was the point. The game is already monetized, and people are still leaving in droves, people aren't buying **** -- monetization isn't the problem, the problem is that the game isn't worth spending money right now.

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 02:21 AM, said:

As I already stated, I don't think mechpacks are the answer to retaining fans - which is why I stated "Community dev servers" and in past comments "stop making monotonous events" - Though just making the game more fun does not help the fact the community play like dog-**** most the time, and new players fall into noob traps by "veterans". Proper information on meta, starter packs that help reinforce how to actually build for new players, and generally better balancing are all part to make the game better. Though for much larger things (maps, drastic new game modes, extensive development) you need money to make that happen.

Proper meta? You mean you want players to just play the common styles, instead of their own. This **** is why I question the extremely free mechlab in the first place, you just end up with the common playstyles, and the common builds in the first place.

They will play dogshit, and the meta-builds while allow them to play less bad, they are playing bad at someone elses' build.

What they could do is instead remove the veteran enemies from the equation and just have PVE game modes, against hoards of might-as-well-be Zombie-Mechs, to steal **** from a base, etc. etc.

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 02:21 AM, said:

Which is why I am not going to pretend "JuSt GiVe Us 10 nEw MaPs tO sAvE tHe GaMe" - Because new players, and existing early-stage players with under 50ish mechs have a high rate of leaving the game after 5 seasons. To grow the community we need to entice these players, and new game modes and maps aren't going to be as significant to these players as it would the old guard. Arguably, PGI need to focus on player retention in the early stages more than getting the old whales to start spending in droves again.

I agree.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 11 October 2020 - 02:31 AM.

[Lovas]

The6thMessenger, on 10 October 2020 - 03:36 PM, said:

Again and again, they have to make people willing to pay first, and people will NOT be willing to pay to a dying game. You must first make it a bit more alive again...

Russ is 3 years too late to make this realization now. 5 Years too late (and still counting) before he realizes he doesn't have the right staff. He needs more than artist and people who can run events, he needs real game designers and people who know how to make maps.

[D U N E]

The6thMessenger, on 11 October 2020 - 02:30 AM, said:

Preceded by: "More successful monetization means proper monetization of they assets they have/aren't too hard to make."

To which the problem is exactly, they do not have one, which was the point. The game is already monetized, and people are still leaving in droves, people aren't buying **** -- monetization isn't the problem, the problem is that the game isn't worth spending money right now.

Look at Jarls List, game is slowly dying, though so far despite minimal development, we have (currently) the same population as 10 seasons ago. Literally just making mechpacks better value (example, throw in some GSP with them to skill up mechs) would entice more players to actually buy them. MWO can sell stuff, it's just large things like mechpacks are overpriced for their generically low value - especially when only like 1-2 mechs in that mechpack are any good.

The6thMessenger, on 11 October 2020 - 02:30 AM, said:

Preceded by: "More successful monetization means proper monetization of they assets they have/aren't too hard to make."

Proper meta? You mean you want players to just play the common styles, instead of their own. This **** is why I question the extremely free mechlab in the first place, you just end up with the common playstyles, and the common builds in the first place.

They will play dogshit, and the meta-builds while allow them to play less bad, they are playing bad at someone elses' build.

What they could do is instead remove the veteran enemies from the equation and just have PVE game modes, against hoards of might-as-well-be Zombie-Mechs, to steal **** from a base, etc. etc.

Subpar builds and bad advice is a reason why new players do ****, which means they get irritated losing to, well the few good players that know what they are talking about. MWO IS PVP, MW5 is PVE - making a PVE mode is not the answer. There are many different combinations you can do on a few mechs, and understanding what is meta, and how to build around it is important. I see too many people using lrm 5, with a MRM 10 - ECM and then adding in a MG and thinking it's a good mech for "Suppression" Also, so many Veteran players play like crap, Veteran players aren't the issue to fight against, though there is a large issue around what proper builds are in MWO.

Rebalancing with a "Community Dev Server" and making the vast majority of mechs meta (better quirks that actually raise a mech up/work well with it's hardpoints and mount locations) to make mechpacks better value overall, as well as stop players from going into the noob trap of mechs and getting something like a spider and questioning why they lose every light fight. New players need to actually learn the game, and not from the people that try to advocate for bracket builds. Might work in some circumstances, but you need to know the core mechanics and positioning before you try the real silly stuff if you want to do well while having fun.

[The6thMessenger]

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 04:57 AM, said:

Look at Jarls List, game is slowly dying, though so far despite minimal development, we have (currently) the same population as 10 seasons ago. Literally just making mechpacks better value (example, throw in some GSP with them to skill up mechs) would entice more players to actually buy them. MWO can sell stuff, it's just large things like mechpacks are overpriced for their generically low value - especially when only like 1-2 mechs in that mechpack are any good.

https://leaderboard....ats#playerchart

Um, New players are at a downward trend, and the overall players are similarly at a downward trend. 10 months is misleading, it actually went from 15K, to 17K, to 15K back. The projected reduction in player is actually down to 10K in 5 months. I'm not confident with that.

I mean, sure, fine, monetize the **** out of the players. I still don't see the population improving, but only PGI's bottom-line.

And you might think that "it gives them money to do actual work with the game", until you realize that "actual work" they have done so far isn't in a good track record. So this really comes down to the adage "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me".

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 04:57 AM, said:

Subpar builds and bad advice is a reason why new players do ****, which means they get irritated losing to, well the few good players that know what they are talking about.

...

There are many different combinations you can do on a few mechs, and understanding what is meta, and how to build around it is important. I see too many people using lrm 5, with a MRM 10 - ECM and then adding in a MG and thinking it's a good mech for "Suppression" Also, so many Veteran players play like crap, Veteran players aren't the issue to fight against, though there is a large issue around what proper builds are in MWO.

...

New players need to actually learn the game, and not from the people that try to advocate for bracket builds. Might work in some circumstances, but you need to know the core mechanics and positioning before you try the real silly stuff if you want to do well while having fun.

I love the word dogshit, it doesn't get censored.

Anyways, new players do horseshit because they aren't accustomed to the game. Bad players build subpar builds and stay bad because they do not want to improve.

My concern is putting new players at a narrow experience of the game, that it's just PVP with point-and-click from lasers/acs, and then move on. What if they don't like this? And that narrow band of effectiveness is exactly what is stopping new players from staying in the game? Expecting a stompy-swissarmy-robots, you got Robots-Point-And-Click-Adventure.

Not everyone has time to get invested and git-gud in this game. This franchise is already niche to begin with. Sure there's the pandemic right now, but honestly there are better games.

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 04:57 AM, said:

MWO IS PVP, MW5 is PVE - making a PVE mode is not the answer.

"MW5 = PVE, MWO = PVP" is irrelevant.

We are talking about game longevity here, and staying on that narrow definition isn't helping the game. If it works, let it work.

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 04:57 AM, said:

Rebalancing with a "Community Dev Server" and making the vast majority of mechs meta (better quirks that actually raise a mech up/work well with it's hardpoints and mount locations) to make mechpacks better value overall, as well as stop players from going into the noob trap of mechs and getting something like a spider and questioning why they lose every light fight.

Sure. I agree, I want to get the underperformers buffed, the overperformers nerfed.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 11 October 2020 - 06:10 AM.

[D U N E]

I'm not gonna keep quoting cause it takes too long.


It is at a downward trend, though overall it has remained pretty stable for a game with no new content, the projected populace is gonna drop, though that seems to have happened since the launch.


You miss-understand what I mean by monetizing players. Just telling people to buy stuff doesn't work, though lets look at mechpack sales which have become unprofitable, if they made more players see reason to purchase those packs now that you only really want 1 mech in the pack anyway - we might have seen more of those. Instead people see no reason to spend as there is little value in what you get. Research has suggested people that pay into something are more likely to stay and pay more. A high value pack for starting players could lead to an increase in player retention, purely as some people feel like now they have spent money they need to stick to it. - Alongside this, I would personally want to see more cool/interesting content brought to the game - even if it cost. Not P2W items, not more effort given to mechpacks, though if we look at bolt-ons - why don't they look interesting? We could have gotten a tophat for the urban mech, we could have gotten the ability to "reskin" a mech to look different **cough** Phoenix/Invasion/Etc.. mechs **cough**, the cosmetics department in many games is a gold mine, in MWO the colours/camos are all you really get. Now remodeling new mechs is expensive, and I don't see them doing that unless it proved to make money, though once again, these are the start of some things they could have looked into to make more money on existing assets. - Not the answer to make the game more interesting, that's in balancing mechs and weapons to actually be fun and interesting again.

Also thanks for that, I might use the word dogshit more. Of course new players do horseshit cause they aren't accustomed, though I remember my start to the game well, I didn't know you could see weapon stats, I mixed a uac 20 with lrm 15s and ERSmls on a timberwolf. The lrms might have farmed a little - though if I lets say, bought a Hellbringer, put 2 HLL and 4 ER meds on it, and started with a mech that was easy, engaging and taught good habits. I might have been much better much faster. - Many new players are encouraged by mechdads to go freestyle to achieve "good builds/damage" - If someone want to do that, that's fine, many elite players in the game run funky builds, though for a player to understand the game, they also need to see what the meta is to build something that works around it for them to have fun and do well. You don't need to force a narrow mind set, though you do need to show what an optimal build is - if people get creative afterwards, that's their call. Though many players don't care about the mechlab and just want to shoot mechs, you shouldn't need to force those players to have a deeper understanding to enjoy the game. The mechlab, should not be forced on people that don't want it.


MWO PVP vs MW5 PVE is important, for PGI. They at the end of the day control the game, they aren't going to divert the audience of either game to the opposite product as it lowers the sell ability of each game. Why play MWO if MW5 is PVP and you can self balance everything? Why play MW5 if MWO has overall better gameplay and has PVE - you need to try and make the arguments from PGIs perspective if you want them to listen to your proposals.

[The6thMessenger]

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 07:15 AM, said:

It is at a downward trend, though overall it has remained pretty stable for a game with no new content, the projected populace is gonna drop, though that seems to have happened since the launch.

But the thing is that, it is going to drop, which in turn compromises the potential income, that which is needed to develop the game in the first place. The game is at a downward trend, that even questions the viability of the game being updated at all -- whether it is possible, or even has a point considering the playerbase.

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 07:15 AM, said:

You miss-understand what I mean by monetizing players. Just telling people to buy stuff doesn't work, though lets look at mechpack sales which have become unprofitable, if they made more players see reason to purchase those packs now that you only really want 1 mech in the pack anyway - we might have seen more of those.

Instead people see no reason to spend as there is little value in what you get. Research has suggested people that pay into something are more likely to stay and pay more.

You mean sunk-cost fallacy? Sure.

But as a consumer, I don't see the point of paying for something, when it wouldn't really improve the experience. I bought GPS, now I don't have to grind my mechs -- as in I don't have to play them, so it's counter intuitive.

FP? Well, it's kind of barren in my experience, sure there's time of day, but not everyone could play the exact time. Solaris? Same thing.

QP? Sure, but again it comes down to, does this value-pack improve my experience? It's a resounding no. So far the only reason for me to play the game, is to grind again -- and to grind mechs for FP that barely has any people in it.

For me, people is the problem, I'm going to need more than Sunk-Cost-Fallacy.

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 07:15 AM, said:

If someone want to do that, that's fine, many elite players in the game run funky builds, though for a player to understand the game, they also need to see what the meta is to build something that works around it for them to have fun and do well. You don't need to force a narrow mind set, though you do need to show what an optimal build is - if people get creative afterwards, that's their call. Though many players don't care about the mechlab and just want to shoot mechs, you shouldn't need to force those players to have a deeper understanding to enjoy the game. The mechlab, should not be forced on people that don't want it.

Alternatively, the meta should not be forced on people that don't want it -- but they are, at least if they don't want to lose. And they have to play meta to keep winning, so they keep coming back to the game, right?

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 07:15 AM, said:

MWO PVP vs MW5 PVE is important, for PGI. They at the end of the day control the game, they aren't going to divert the audience of either game to the opposite product as it lowers the sell ability of each game. Why play MWO if MW5 is PVP and you can self balance everything? Why play MW5 if MWO has overall better gameplay and has PVE - you need to try and make the arguments from PGIs perspective if you want them to listen to your proposals.

MWO is Online, it's point is actually multiplayer, while MW5 is singleplayer. And for some people, playing with other people instead of just bots are an improvement. It doesn't have to be PVP, it can work cooperatively.

I have control of MW5 through mods, and so far that is the selling point for me, since MWO is mishandled and to me and it's quite a shame that only PGI can implement the changes I want. playing with People isn't really selling point, but an unfortunate requirement in MWO.

As to why MWO vs MW5 when either offers the feature of one another even assuming same engine, again this comes down to multiplayer vs singleplayer. Those not interested with people can just go to MW5 where they can play on demand or change aspects they don't like through mods, those who want a more comprehensive interaction with other people such as competition is MWO.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 11 October 2020 - 08:34 AM.

[D U N E]

To increase players they need to have a game which entices new players and keeps old players.
Old players want new content, new players want accessibility, both want interesting gameplay.

GSP has always been odd to think about, personally I love the stuff, helps me play comp and enjoy the game. I play less games, though I arguably spend more now it exists. Doesn't help with Match Maker, does help with increase of spending. Not really the type of think I would want PGI to look more into for continuation of the game however, as much as I love the stuff. I'd like to see more "Mini" content in the game, something they can develop that is fresh and new, adds to the experience in some way, and that people would pay for. Issue is what that is, I think an increase in the cosmetics area could be that solution - though there are likely more/better things they could do.


The meta doesn't need to be forced on people, though in other games you can equip a gun, the gun is balanced, your overall loadout might be crap, though in other games you can get away with it due to how good the gun is in the first place. In MWO you can make a mech that is just solid crap and can do nothing. It's a PVP game, the point is to fight players. Many enjoy the graphics, though at the current point there is no easy way to just get into the meta without searching for communities that will teach you or doing some research into the weapons. Why can't a new player just come into the game, see a mech titled "Long range sniper", play the mech, have fun and then log off for the day? Why does they need to go through hoops to find "long range sniper, short range brawler, skirmisher" why can't new players that just want to embrace the mech combat play the game and be meta without needing to know what's on their mech indepth. There are plenty of options to be not-meta, though near no options to be meta. Saying PGI should make a starter pack for new players that has meta mechs with easy to digest taglines on them to make playing the game easy is "Forcing players to be meta" when the store is literally full of non-meta crap is an overstatement. Solaris pack exists and many people ask "Is it good, is it worth it" players need to be able to be meta without using the mechlab, as much as I love the mechlab, it's scary to many, and is a reason that so many players don't play. It's a detriment to the gold fish gamer that just wants to have generic loadout to do generic task.

In battlefield/cod, if you want to be a sniper, you equip a sniper rifle - that's it. Your loadout can be dogshit, though you hit heads and you can do just as good as any other sniper. In MWO, if you want to be a sniper you have 4 weapons that can all kind of do that. Though depending what mech they are on changes if they are good or bad, depending on quantity, quirks, etc, all change to how that mech reacts. A arctic wolf being a ac2 sniper is not going to beat a Vapor Eagle, Rifleman or Direwolf - a a new player needs to be able to skip the mechlab if they wish. Saying they need to use it and be non-meta is gatekeeping. The option of meta should exist, PGI should promote the option exists, and it should be seen in a location that helps the new player that wants to be good. Already stated, mechlab is a reason why this game is so good, them balancing weapons can turn the entire shift of how people design mechs. Though it is also a reason why not many people play it when they first install it.

Playing with people is literally the selling point of MWO - It's Mechwarrior Online - I think some more non player interactions could be interesting, though at it's core, it's a PVP experience online. If you want MWO to be a PVE experience where you can bring your favorite builds from lore, you are looking at it wrong. The core part of a PVP experience is to beat your opponent. To be your opponent you are restricted to a set of rules, the game rules - and are given set things you can do based within those parameters. I have non-meta mechs I play. PPC locust is one of my favorite, though regardless I try to win with it, and I build it out to do what it does the best it can. Meta doesn't need to be monotonous, better balancing, as well as making more chassis better is the key to make meta diverse and interesting. Meta should not be a thing people are scared off, but rather something people should be able to embrace, and develop play around.

So far I wouldn't say anything in the game really needs a nerf in reference to your earlier comment, Veagle 3 is rather strong, Annihilator does it's job well - though I personally think (expectation to no skill Veagle), the top of the meta shouldn't be nerfed, they aren't overperformers to what the Kodiak used to be - we just need to start lifting up more chassis, and balancing mechs to interact with the meta better. The meta isn't an evil, it's literally just what is good in the game. 'Toxic' metas should not be promoted - LRM spam, Improper Nascar, they are generally a boring mechanic with an irritating betty notification soon after, Though promoting proper paring of lasers, having good aim and precision - using effective DPS builds and taking a strong point/holding ground rather than nascar. The lack of people embracing how the game is meant to be played is why nascar meta is the only meta - there are so many better ways to play, yet all we get is that.

Edited by D U N E, 11 October 2020 - 09:52 AM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Of Course Dune, for all it you must have Guys with experience ...and PGI has for the CRY MWO Engine nothing from it..an little Fixing crew ,thats was all, the MWO engine is from karl berg and his old Team heavy modiefied sealed and Locked ,a Work for Specialists,without a Change to UE5 MWO is dead

[The6thMessenger]

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 09:47 AM, said:

To increase players they need to have a game which entices new players and keeps old players.
Old players want new content, new players want accessibility, both want interesting gameplay.

...

I think an increase in the cosmetics area could be that solution - though there are likely more/better things they could do.

Mini content is what they can do, but so far it's not going to be any more than short-term improvement of their bottom line.

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 09:47 AM, said:

The meta doesn't need to be forced on people, though in other games you can equip a gun, the gun is balanced, your overall loadout might be crap, though in other games you can get away with it due to how good the gun is in the first place. In MWO you can make a mech that is just solid crap and can do nothing. It's a PVP game, the point is to fight players.

But again, isn't that being seal-clubbed is the reason why we can't retain new players? That means you inevitably have to play meta to git gud, that means you have to play meta to stay.

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 09:47 AM, said:

In battlefield/cod, if you want to be a sniper, you equip a sniper rifle - that's it. Your loadout can be dogshit, though you hit heads and you can do just as good as any other sniper. In MWO, if you want to be a sniper you have 4 weapons that can all kind of do that. Though depending what mech they are on changes if they are good or bad, depending on quantity, quirks, etc, all change to how that mech reacts.

I agree, but being "meta" ultimately means you will only be able to select a handful of mechs that work best.

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 09:47 AM, said:

Playing with people is literally the selling point of MWO - It's Mechwarrior Online - I think some more non player interactions could be interesting, though at it's core, it's a PVP experience online. If you want MWO to be a PVE experience where you can bring your favorite builds from lore, you are looking at it wrong.

But it doesn't have to be defined by PVP, only by multiplayer online experience.

No, I am not looking at it wrong, you are. If it stays exclusively PVP, then there is no hope for this game.

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 09:47 AM, said:

So far I wouldn't say anything in the game really needs a nerf in reference to your earlier comment.

ATM definitely needs a nerf, considering that it's an auto-aim weapon that deals fuckton amount of damage on it's sweet-spot, and before you say "minimum range", that's not exactly a problem to mobile mechs.

[Thorqemada]

D U N E, on 11 October 2020 - 09:47 AM, said:

'Toxic' metas should not be promoted - LRM spam, Improper Nascar, they are generally a boring mechanic with an irritating betty notification soon after, Though promoting proper paring of lasers, having good aim and precision - using effective DPS builds and taking a strong point/holding ground rather than nascar. The lack of people embracing how the game is meant to be played is why nascar meta is the only meta - there are so many better ways to play, yet all we get is that.

So, you say the most powerful armored mobile ground based weapons plattform in the history of humanity in regard to Battletech Lore should be used in a WW1 Style combat?

Man, that is as dystopian as it can get...

[D U N E]

"Alternatively, the meta should not be forced on people that don't want it -- but they are, at least if they don't want to lose. And they have to play meta to keep winning, so they keep coming back to the game, right?"
"But again, isn't that being seal-clubbed is the reason why we can't retain new players? That means you inevitably have to play meta to git gud, that means you have to play meta to stay."

It's an online PVP game, trying to make the excuse "but my PVP game doesn't have PVE so I can stop playing meta waaaah" is not an argument. MWO is based on the Battletech board game, though at a time people need to see what works in context, and what does not. I'm not going to jump down the rabbit hole of what if, especially if the chances of it happening are so extraordinary low, they are worth thinking about. MWO is PVP, MW5 is PVE, the game can run fine being purely PVP if it had a good core gameplay loop.

"I agree, but being "meta" ultimately means you will only be able to select a handful of mechs that work best."
Light Mechs:
20: Flea (2) Locust (2) Piranha (3)
25: Commando (3) Mistlynx (1)
30: Javelin (2) Osiris (?) Urban Mech (3?) Incubus (2)
35:Wolfhound (3?) Panther (2) Cougar (1) Adder (1) Firestarter (1) Jenner IIC (1?)
Forgot: Arctic Cheetah (1)
That number behind is amount of meta variants. Some maybe slight differences, commando may have a slightly smaller srm launcher, while other maybe more radical - Srm Vs medium laser Javelin. This is also just what I can remember, there are likely a few more. Though about 29 different competitive light Mechs, minimum.
It could be argued that the wolfhound works the best, though what if you want JJs, well Firestarter can be an option, but that's pretty squishy, well you might look at the Panther, then again not enough firepower for what you may want, now about the Javelin - that's overall pretty robust.
How about PPC, Panther got god quirks, then again low mounts, so you might look at the cougar, but that's so slow, the. Then the adder might have good quirks too though it's squat and doesn't change then low mount issue.
If we just assume it's 29 different mechs for each class, that's over 100 different meta mechs in the game. Saying many people don't have over 80 mechs, we can assume someone could have a diverse, top tier mechlab before needing to touch unoptimized mechs

Now back to my core argument with new player retention. Trial mechs are irritaitng most of the time, being made of old meta that just isn't that good now. I find many to give lacklustre performance that takes away how you feel you input into a match. Some people are fine doing nothing, though players need to be able to feel like they can contribute with their starting tools. Not get 25 matches done, not know how to build a mech, build it wrong, get confused and annoyed. Continue with lacklustre performance, the. Quit cause it isn't fun. If a player is given the option to do be meta and can decline it, that's on them, though if you conceal the meta and make it irritaitng to seek out, that's on the game and it's community. This is a PVP game, its core is PVP, no one cares that some guy wants to run around in a brawl centurion. Outside of lobbies the game is going to have people playing top tier meta, no one wants to get face ****** by that when they are stuck in a double standard PPC vindicator. If they are old school mechwarrior, fine, if they enjoy playing non meta and getting cucked, good for them. They should drop down tiers and have fun. Though for people wanting intense skill based PVP, the option needs to present itself. Which is something I am personally hoping to help players with in the future.