Jump to content

Monday Mechwarrior Update With Daeron


144 replies to this topic

#21 Voice of Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 97 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 09:21 PM

I am very glad that we are witnessing the emergence of a good new tradition - online conversations about MWO. However, as a player, I am still more interested in specific information:
1) What problems of this game are defined by the PGI leadership (namely, the PGI leadership). If the management forgot something or decided to ignore something, we, the players, could remind about forgotten problems;
2) What problems will be solved first;
3) What methods of solving problems will be adopted.

Daeron, I really wish you the best of luck with your work, I really hope that the game will get out of the hole it fell into. But my hope is weak.
In the spring and summer of this year, there were many discussions on the game's forum about how to make this game at least a little better, a little more interesting. The PGI leadership said it heard what the community was talking about. As a result, decisions were made that made the game even worse than it was in 2019 and early 2020.
The players asked the developers to make the games interesting, balanced, and not the kind that end with a score of 12: 0 - 12: 4.
A lot of work was done for this: developed a new system for calculating matchscores for players; reset the player tiers; set up the matchmaker for a long time. And for what? All these actions did not lead to any positive consequences because the management refuses to understand - no settings for calculating the players tier, no settings for a matchmaker will be effective as long as there is a combined queue of solo and group players in quick play. In such conditions, it would be difficult to set up a matchmaker well even in the best years of the MWO, and with the number of players currently in the game, it is simply impossible.
Previously, the matchmaker always selected teams by tonnage, by the level of players, but even then people were unhappy with the fact that the overwhelming majority of games ended with a score of 12:0 - 12:4. But now it has become even worse: now the cadets (and these are people who have not even played 25 battles!) are participating in games with level 1 players; now the matchmaker may not take into account the tonnage of the furs at all. With a pooled queue, you simply must sacrifice one thing: either tonnage balance or player level balance. But it often happens that both of these components are sacrificed and one team gets a premade out of the strongest players on assault mechs, and the second gets random players several cadets, while the second team is also inferior to the first in terms of the total number of assault mechs.
As a result, I have a reasonable question: what has become better with the introduction of spring-summer changes?
Do you understand that the combined of solo and group queues alone made all the work done in the spring and summer senseless, and this ucombined also will not allow any positive changes to be brought to life in the future?

In order to better understand the problems of MWO, I can advise you and the game developers to play this game more.
Let the developers take part in games in which one team has 10 assault mechs, and the other only 1. Let them be in a team that has 3 cadets, and four very strong players are pre-assembled in the opposing team, or they will find themselves in a situation in Conquest mode, when their team has 7 assault mechs, and the enemy team has 6-8 fast mechs. Maybe then they will begin to understand what problems prevail in fast play. Perhaps then really correct and balanced decisions will finally be made.

P.S. Sorry for such a long message. This is a cry from the heart.

Edited by Voice of Kerensky, 02 November 2020 - 09:42 PM.


#22 Miss Greene

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,535 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 09:25 PM

View PostAkillius, on 02 November 2020 - 08:37 PM, said:

- Return ALL Skill Points spent (AVOID another Full Return CBill for Modules *RENEGE* Exodus)
Reduce "Skill Tree nodes" from 239 faux-"options" to 84 solid upgrades to choose from.
Let players place up to 32 skill points per mech. (or maybe change it to 30?)
And remove "tree" structure and rename nodes to Upgrades like these 84 upgrades and values:

~SNIP~

Every other suggestion will take too much time to code-implement and MWO needs something to increase interest asap.


This is all probably more than what PGI is willing to invest at the moment, but the Skill Tree in its current form should be ditched entirely. A list of straight upgrades you can just tack onto your 'Mech, with the only persistent cost being opportunity cost, is poor and leaves newer players with un-mastered 'Mechs out to dry. Even I don't play un-mastered 'Mechs much because they are not fun compared to the ones I've already sunk so much time into getting in shape.

I would much rather the skill tree adopt a Perks vs. Drawbacks system. Every 'Mech has a point cap and every skill has a cost that counts against that cap. Skills are sorted into Perks, which provide a positive enhancement and count toward the cap, and Drawbacks, which provide a detrimental enhancement and deduct away from the cap. The point cap is intentionally not big enough to add on more than one major or a couple minor Perks; to get more, you need to apply detriments to deduct from the cost.

Example:

Let's say my point cap is 3. I want to go ham on laser range enhancement, using the below skills:

Enhanced Optics I (+5% Laser Range) = +2
Enhanced Optics II (+10% Laser Range) = +3

That's 5 points. I will need to throw on a Drawback to make this work:

Substandard Capacitors (+7% Laser Duration) = -2

Subtracting 2 from my previous 5, I can now fit my two desired enhancements.

There would also be a limit to the number of skills you can apply; this is one of two options for spending your XP. You can either buy a skill, or you can level-up the skill slot cap: Fresh (1 Skill), Basic (4 Skills), Elite (7 skills) Mastery (10 skills). The point cap and slot cap on each 'Mech can even be tuned for balance purposes.

The UI would be an uncluttered three-column drag-and-drop affair with Drawbacks on the left, Perks on the right, and Applied Skills in the center. Professional-grade rendering follows:

Posted Image

Anyway, one can hope. Meh.

Edited by Miss Greene, 02 November 2020 - 09:27 PM.


#23 evilelrond

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 48 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 09:31 PM

im in the process of watching the first circuit podcast, and i wanna through in my vote for nods to the lore. i know you mentioned it, and id love to see that. in no way should it effect the game, but if theres planetary descriptions, titles like "wolfs dragoon" that pull directly from lore, stuff like that, id love it

top unit in each faction could get access to a title from that factions leader, like the top marik team in fw could get the "captain general" title. each loyalty rank could award in lore unit camos, like a 10th lyran gaurd camo. stuff like that.

by no means should you change the actual gameplay, but theres plenty of other things you can use to represent the lore in the game.


also, map idea, hesperus 2 factory map. underground map with corridors and large hallways would be cool.

#24 martian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,685 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 09:32 PM

View PostInnerSphereNews, on 02 November 2020 - 05:12 PM, said:

You can hear all of this in greater detail on the podcasts below:


Dear Community Manager, there are three points that I would like to make:

1) Instead of all that talk in those podcasts, what about sitting down to your PC and writing some coherent text?

I think that the majority of the MWO players would appreciate it more.

2) I am interested in the official PGI's approach to various problems, but I am really not interested in the talk of various random internet guys.

We (the MWO players) need to know what Russ Bullock and PGI think, not what some random MWO players say (should I want to hear that, I have hundreds of various Youtube and Twitch videos to choose from).

3) Could you post from your actual forum account please, so that your posts are easy to find?

Thank you very much.

#25 Surn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 1,023 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationSan Diego

Posted 02 November 2020 - 09:38 PM

I am posted an elevator pitch on a subscription service to allow PGI the financial planning to make all the fixes the users want.

http://www.twitch.tv/surn/v/790143985

This pitch is followed by detailed videos explaining it more in depth.

The additional videos touch on not just the what but proposals of how to accomplish this at a very reasonable cost.

The basic idea is to trade PGI data that will help players progress for a subscription that includes some bonuses. Nothing affects gameplay beyond user training and information. The game engine is not coded against.

These are server level automated reports on battles, player progress, mechs used, etc. The reports are delivered to you Dropbox or other cloud account file transfer folder automatically. This enables them to work on mobile and desktop platforms

Edited by Surn, 02 November 2020 - 09:41 PM.


#26 byter75

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 27 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 09:43 PM

View PostThe6thMessenger, on 02 November 2020 - 09:02 PM, said:


But that is the thing. I know it's a podcast, but those unscripted heart-to-heart isn't what we are interested in. That is not to say that "don't do a podcast", not at all, but if you're ( Daeron and other CMs ) presenting something to the community, we shouldn't have to sift through 2 hours worth of content just to get the what the Community Manager has to say. Not everyone as the time and/or patience to get through those, I'd rather listen to something educational like audio-book on how to speak spanish.

We just go back to the seemingly like "meetings to schedule meetings".


You (and plenty other people I'm sure) might not be interested in (our) podcasts (and that's totally fine). Though if Daeron is taking part in podcasts and there is an audience for them, I don't see the harm in sharing them.
I actually do agree with your sentiment (about the endless meetings and talk), it was actually something I brought up in the podcast (a fair bit). Where we probably differ is whether people "have" to sit through these 2-3 hours worth of podcast.
These endless meetings (like our own rambly podcast) are going to stuffer from a poor signal to noise ratio and with how things typically go around here there's not even that much signal you really have to delineate.

(I think Martian hits the nail on the head. We are just some random mwo players, our podcast is not exactly the place where people should offically "...hear all of this in greater detail".)

Edited by byter75, 02 November 2020 - 10:05 PM.


#27 The6thMessenger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Nova Captain
  • 6,806 posts
  • Locationinside a K9, punishing lowlifes

Posted 02 November 2020 - 09:56 PM

View Postbyter75, on 02 November 2020 - 09:43 PM, said:

You (and plenty other people I'm sure) might not be interested in (our) podcasts (and that's totally fine). Though if Daeron is taking part in podcasts and there is an audience for them, I don't see the harm in sharing them.


Sure, by all means, for the guys that are actually interested. More power to them!

But that shouldn't have been his only line of communication, sure right now there's a bit of an outline, but how many other "Beard-Updates" (should have been Beard-Cast) have been, and we have to rely on others for the TL;DR? Why do we have to watch your podcast for "greater detail" just to uncover something like the Meeting Cows?

Okay, sure, there's tl;dr that comes into the forums time to time. But could have been done from the start. Even Ash had a short-form of the 3-hr discussion of twitch in the form of an official document.

#28 Miss Greene

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,535 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 10:35 PM

View PostSurn, on 02 November 2020 - 09:38 PM, said:

I am posted an elevator pitch on a subscription service to allow PGI the financial planning to make all the fixes the users want.

http://www.twitch.tv/surn/v/790143985

This pitch is followed by detailed videos explaining it more in depth.

The additional videos touch on not just the what but proposals of how to accomplish this at a very reasonable cost.

The basic idea is to trade PGI data that will help players progress for a subscription that includes some bonuses. Nothing affects gameplay beyond user training and information. The game engine is not coded against.

These are server level automated reports on battles, player progress, mechs used, etc. The reports are delivered to you Dropbox or other cloud account file transfer folder automatically. This enables them to work on mobile and desktop platforms


I'm not paying for this redundant functionality and I doubt a significant number of people will.

#29 puresense

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Predator
  • The Predator
  • 30 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationWarsaw

Posted 02 November 2020 - 10:41 PM

View PostSurn, on 02 November 2020 - 09:38 PM, said:

I am posted an elevator pitch on a subscription service to allow PGI the financial planning to make all the fixes the users want.

http://www.twitch.tv/surn/v/790143985

This pitch is followed by detailed videos explaining it more in depth.

The additional videos touch on not just the what but proposals of how to accomplish this at a very reasonable cost.

The basic idea is to trade PGI data that will help players progress for a subscription that includes some bonuses. Nothing affects gameplay beyond user training and information. The game engine is not coded against.

These are server level automated reports on battles, player progress, mechs used, etc. The reports are delivered to you Dropbox or other cloud account file transfer folder automatically. This enables them to work on mobile and desktop platforms


It is normal feature in most online games like WOT, WAR THUNDER, WOWS or DOTA.
Noone will pay for that.

EDIT: Give me camos or cosmetics with 30% - 50% c-bill or XP bonus. I will buy it.

Edited by puresense, 02 November 2020 - 11:00 PM.


#30 D U N E

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 110 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 10:41 PM

I don't see any market for something that is given for free in many other games. Alongside the fact that:
1. Not many people would pay for this.
2. The people who would want this would be competitive, which there are few.
3. Even if it was made and sold, it would be worth very little - I'd maybe value something like this at 0.5$, the information is usually widely accessible, and the mapstrat recording - might pay for it once and cancel next day after I had made personal recordings then forget it exists.

It doesn't solve core issues of MWO like player retention, interesting new players (how does it look to a new player if they need to pay for generally accessible information?) - Overall, just give players the data and eventually they will handle it.

#31 Windscape

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Participant
  • CS 2019 Participant
  • 748 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 10:43 PM

View PostSurn, on 02 November 2020 - 09:38 PM, said:

I am posted an elevator pitch on a subscription service to allow PGI the financial planning to make all the fixes the users want.

http://www.twitch.tv/surn/v/790143985

This pitch is followed by detailed videos explaining it more in depth.

The additional videos touch on not just the what but proposals of how to accomplish this at a very reasonable cost.

The basic idea is to trade PGI data that will help players progress for a subscription that includes some bonuses. Nothing affects gameplay beyond user training and information. The game engine is not coded against.

These are server level automated reports on battles, player progress, mechs used, etc. The reports are delivered to you Dropbox or other cloud account file transfer folder automatically. This enables them to work on mobile and desktop platforms


I'm sorry, but nobody is going to pay for this service. There are much better monetization options for PGI to consider first. As a free service it could be accepted, perhaps.

#32 Kurbeks

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 335 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 11:30 PM

How about license sounds from MS. And add Windows XP shutdown Warhorn. Now that would sell.

#33 Vercors

    Rookie

  • 9 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 11:46 PM

View PostVoice of Kerensky, on 02 November 2020 - 09:21 PM, said:

no settings for calculating the players tier, no settings for a matchmaker will be effective as long as there is a combined queue of solo and group players in quick play.


I agree Posted Image, I made a proposition here:

https://mwomercs.com...players-option/

Hope it can help ! Thanks for your works.

Edited by Vercors, 02 November 2020 - 11:48 PM.


#34 Tenchuu

    Member

  • Pip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 12 posts
  • LocationHouston, TX

Posted 02 November 2020 - 11:51 PM

View Postpuresense, on 02 November 2020 - 10:41 PM, said:


It is normal feature in most online games like WOT, WAR THUNDER, WOWS or DOTA.
Noone will pay for that.

EDIT: Give me camos or cosmetics with 30% - 50% c-bill or XP bonus. I will buy it.


THIS. This is how World of Warships runs things. You can do missions to get flags and paint schemes, they're temporary, or you can buy them, but they actually DO something. It's not much, it's a 4% bonus in something and +50% experience, but it's enough to A) give you a reason to make your mechs look fun Posted Image might give you that little edge C) is available to all. They also have six or seven different sets of mission paths going on simultaneously. The prizes are sometimes lore items, sometimes cbills, sometimes paint schemes or flags. Also look at how they present what they're doing. All the information about events and things in MWO pops up in a tiny window and takes me to an external site. World of Warships drops you on a full loading screen of news. Why am I reading about Solaris 7 when I log into the website? Why does the website look so dated? Different parts look newer, others older, there is no continuity or excitement to it. The really alarming thing is the site looks very dead to a new player. It looks old, it doesn't look inviting, and it's not taking you to any new content right off the bat. Honestly if it hadn't been for the Steam integration I don't know when I would have come back.

Edited by Tenchuu, 02 November 2020 - 11:58 PM.


#35 Tenchuu

    Member

  • Pip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 12 posts
  • LocationHouston, TX

Posted 02 November 2020 - 11:55 PM

And one huge thing that I honestly (though I have not looked at the engine) do not think would be difficult: When I queue up for a game, let me choose one from each class! Let me choose one light, one medium, one heavy, one assault. Then when I get dropped into a game it drops me in as the category that needs the most mechs. This feels like an incredibly simple way to take care of balance issues as well, since I assume most people would be OK with picking out four mechs, so you'd always at least have the right spread of tonnages. I'm constantly trying to set myself in the least popular mech class at that second as I queue currently. Just take that misery away and give us more consistent gaming and a bit of a surprise each game with which of our chosen mechs we get.

#36 Lurm God

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Bludgeon
  • The Bludgeon
  • 71 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 11:58 PM

It’s great you are interacting. Can we get some low hanging fruit now in good faith that is universally accepted like spawn adjustment, cadets not starting in tier 3 etc and maybe a real colourblind overlay. I would understand no further development etc as it’s what was foretold a few years ago. But this lip service then extremely slow feedback loop about a game that hasn’t changed in years is just feeling a bit redundant. So let’s see something even small ASAP and show us we aren’t being trolled harder than the year of faction updates please.

#37 Vercors

    Rookie

  • 9 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 11:59 PM

View PostTenchuu, on 02 November 2020 - 11:55 PM, said:

Let me choose one light, one medium, one heavy, one assault. Then when I get dropped into a game it drops me in as the category that needs the most mechs.


Nice idea ! selection can be made in order of preference.

Edited by Vercors, 03 November 2020 - 12:16 AM.


#38 Bistrorider

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Howl
  • The Howl
  • 236 posts

Posted 03 November 2020 - 12:37 AM

Cool update, welcome aboard.

#39 rascje

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Privateer
  • The Privateer
  • 395 posts

Posted 03 November 2020 - 01:31 AM

Thank u so much!

#40 IanDresarie

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 83 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 03 November 2020 - 02:07 AM

So this week is kinda more of an "Here's how I'll communicate" Update. I hope people understand that. :)
Personally I am quite interested (and shall I say even somewhat excited) for next week, when we'll hopefully get the rough outline of a roadmap/list of priorities.

View PostKurbeks, on 02 November 2020 - 11:30 PM, said:

How about license sounds from MS. And add Windows XP shutdown Warhorn. Now that would sell.

That would be hilarious. "I shall hold your power button for 5 seconds!"





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users