Jump to content

Mechwarrior Eternal War / Escalation


52 replies to this topic

#1 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 12:08 AM

Mechwarrior Eternal War/Escalation

This proposal is for the next MMO Mechwarrior successor to MWO, with priority on delivering an enjoyable and profitable game with a tight budget for version 1.0. It is directed at PGI, with hopes they will read it, sleep on it, and realize that this plan, or something close to it, is a viable way forward with the Mechwarrior IP.

To explain how the goals of enjoyability and profitability are met, this post lists the initial game features, monetization strategy, and a discussion why the ideas presented here are able to thread the needle between the diverse expectations of the player base, realities of customer satisfaction, and investment constaints.

The proposal is separated into two phases, Eternal War, which is an evolution of MWO's QP and FP experience that caters to the existing MW playerbase, and Escalation, which is designed to expand the appeal of the MW Franchise to the general gaming community. (The names I gave are for ease of reference only)

There is obviously flexibility within the proposal, details to fill in, and what is presented is strictly a version 1.0 with many updates to follow if proven economically viable. I did differentiate components I deemed critical (!) to success versus optional (o) components included to paint a clear picture.


Mechwarrior Eternal War Features

(!) A player performance database and a Match Maker that takes a statistical approach to making teams in order to create the most balanced and fun matches possible. In addition to stats tracked in MWO, it records mech variant, build, game mode, and frequently grouped teammates to feed into the Match Maker. The required result is that all players will experience a WLR between 0.9 and 1.1. (Details on why a better Matchmaker is critical to player retention here: https://mwomercs.com...hmaker-is-king/)

(!) All players (solo and groups) for all game modes will go in one queue for PvP matches. This is to present the most players possible to the Match Maker, enable team creation with players of similar skill level. Until the simultaneous online pop reaches 10k, do not consider splitting the queue.

(!) Groups will start with a limit of 4 players until it is proven the Match Maker delivers on the 0.9 to 1.1 WLR requirement for all players (including those in groups). If you can't figure out how to make it work, get a professional involved. From there, slowly increase group limit up to 12 only so long as the WLR range requirement continues to be satisfied.

(!) For accounts with a low number of games, a fire break-like detection code will pull dramatically over-performing players out of a match intended for low-skilled players and elevate their database skill level to proper levels. Griefers can be detected the same way and dealt with.

(o) While there is only one PvP queue, there are separate entry points into the queue: Quick Battle and War mode (Loyalist/Mercenary). Each entry point has their own unique restrictions catering to player preferences. The Match Maker will be aware of the point of entry if the mode restrictions modify player skill.

(o) Each game mode will require a drop deck with mechs selected in order to drop.

(o) In Eternal War, skill grinding is separate for Pilot and Mech. You can hire multiple pilots. The pilot skill tree takes 100-200 games to fill, and cannot be modified afterwards. The mech skill tree takes 10-20 games to fill, and can be modified. When dropping PvP, both pilot and mech can be selected in match to add a layer of strategy. For PvE, multiple pilots can be used at the same time.

(o) Quick Battle (QB) - Similar and different from QP today, playing from this screen makes all mechs and mech lab customizations (except cosmetics) available from the start for no C-bill nor real money cost. However, the drop deck has 4 slots locked with random flavor of the day mech variants (you can still mech lab and customize them) and one slot the user can select their mech choice. This mode is for learning about the game, testing builds, earning C-bills risk free (no mech repair cost), and skilling up both mechs and pilots.

(o) War Galactic Map - Both the Loyalist and Mercenary play styles will use the map to choose which conflict the player fights in, the risks and rewards. The map displays the location of faction battle fleets, of which each faction will control 2 or more. The location of these fleets determines the conflict points for PvP battles. All other planets will have PvE. Loyalists move battle fleets via voting per cycle (25-27 hrs?), and Mercs move their dropship via banked time (earn 7? days per match, up to 60? days banked). Due to the one queue system, loyalties are not displayed in matches and each player's contribution goes to the conflict they select on the map.

(o) Loyalist War mode - Every loyalist has access to the influence screen, which makes decisions pertaining to the faction. Unlike votes which are one per person, influence is based on contribution to the faction (monthly faction leaderboard). Voting takes place for decisions on where to move fleets, alliance/war declarations, and how to spend faction taxes. For drop decks, Loyalists have the following limitations: free access to faction stock mechs with free repairs, can use earnings to upgrade faction mechs and buy personal mechs. However, upgrades (customized mech value - stock mech value) and personal mechs do not have free repair, with the loyalist having to cover 5% of repair costs. Personal mech price is also subject to import cost, modified by global faction relations.

(o) Mercenary War mode - To access mercenary mode, you need to first lease a ship and hire a crew ~30 million C-bills per realtime month for a Leopold (with fixed tonnage inventory capacity by dropship type), paid in advance. You can buy any mechs for sale in the faction space you are in, pay to customize them, and use them in PvP missions. However, factions will only cover ~95% of repair costs. Most new merc companies hoping to go after lucrative military contracts go bankrupt in the first year. Potential pay is the highest however... Initially, mission reward is only paid with C-bills but salvage and other mission types can be added later.

(o) Once clan factions are available, QB have will both a Clan and IS drop deck, however when launching you may select if you are willing to use one only, or both to save searching time.

(o) In War mode, you may use mechs from any faction, however purchase and repair cost will vary based on location, relations, import costs and may be prohibitively expensive. (For example, due to distance and poor relations, your mech of choice has to be smuggled in and costs 5x list price for purchase and repairs)

(!) The one queue PvP game modes last ~10-15 minutes and allow different tactics. I quote 10-15 based on the most popular games out today, feel free to change as needed.

(!) Game modes utilize AI mechs/vehicles, support assymetric teams 12vs12, 12vs11, 12vs10, etc... as determined by the Match Maker if necessary, auto-balance capabilities to detect DC/AFK and dropping extra AI to compensate.

(!) PvE is balanced as an easy if slow way to earn Cbills and XP. PvP C-bill earning is balanced around being certain but slow in Quick Battle, harder in Loyalist mode, and hardest in Mercenary mode. This due to the repair cost associated with customized mechs being applied in the War modes making it easy to have minus earnings.

(o) Game Mode - Battle Line - a procedural map with 3 domination points. A city/PoI(point of interest) in the center and 2 smaller PoI on either side (~1-2KM distant) in a line. 3 AI Lances drop every 2 minutes, 1 heading to each of the 3 cap points. There are two victory conditions, one is depletion of the other team's resources (each team starts with 2000-2500 tons and each player mech dropped subtracts its weight in tons from the total). Once depleted, players cannot respawn. The second victory condition is by domination bar. Respawns can choose on a map where to respawn, and be dropped via Dropship or Drop pod on the team's side of the map.

(!) For group play, all players can be added to a group and engage in PvP without limitation to QB or War mode Conflict Location/Faction. Each player will have to follow their own drop deck limitations, and they will earn contribution points from the match towards their conflict. If players in the group are on opposite sides of a conflict, their contribution points will cancel out so it is suggested to group smartly.

Eternal War Monetization

(!) The monetization strategy is based on how a player wants to maintain positive C-bill earnings. This can be done by engaging in Quick Battle and PvE, which offers the F2P option of grinding C-bills for use in War mode. Net positive C-bill earning is intended to be hard in War mode, with cash options primarily around increasing C-bill earning to the point that grinding C-bills in easier modes is not necessary, therefore saving time.

(!) All cosmetics (skin, color, decal, bolt-ons, cockpit items) are free, but with a C-bill cost that has to be paid per drop with battle damage to fix the external items or per destroyed mech for cockpit items. This is not covered by mission damage coverage, and exists as a C-bill sink for all modes including Quick Battle.

(!) All mechs can be purchased for C-bills for mercs and loyalists. No direct $ purchase price, but one can buy C-bills with Micro Transaction (MT). In War mode, repairing damaged or destroyed mechs will be pricy as the repair cost will scale depending on the upgrades done and also parts availability. Adding expensive updates such as XL-engine, DHS kit, and Endo-steel to all drop deck mechs, will greatly increase the repair bill. For the average player, running fully customized drop decks will necessitate playing QB or PvE missions for C-bills, or buying C-bill earning bonuses with real money.

(o) For 9.99$ per month Premium subscription, grants 50% bonus to C-bill and XP earnings from missions, and free cosmetic usage

(o) For 19.99$ per month Platinum subscription, grants 100% bonus to C-bill and XP earnings from missions, and free cosmetic usage

(o) For 4.99$ per month Mercenary subscription, grants free lease of a Leopold dropship and hiring a crew and salary costs for 4 pilots. More dropships can be added to offer greater inventory capacity at a higher lease cost...

(o) For 4.99$ per month Loyalist subscription, grants doubles personal mech bays available (depends on Loyalist rank), doubles influence during voting, eliminates personal mech maintenance cost, and covers salary costs for 4 pilots.

(o) To help fund development of MWEW, offer 20/50/100/200$ packages that gives the equivalent amount of goodies for both MWO today and MWEW in the future. Can offer new items such as mechs in MWO as well but that requires asset costs...

(o) premium currency MC still purchasable in bundles and noted as (MT) micro transaction below

(o) For 5$(MT), make a mech variant premium with 10% cbill bonus if in drop deck (stacks with multiple mechs)

(o) C-bills can be purchased for about 5mil Cbills/1$(MT) (saves 10 matches time)

(o) For 1$(MT), a mech variant has free C-bill cosmetic customization unlocked

(o) For 1$(MT), premium time for 1 day, 3$ for 1 week

(o) For 5$(MT), respec a pilot (saves 100-200 matches time)


Eternal War Discussion

I feel the most valuable lesson from MWO is that both sides needs a challenging game they feel they can win or lose. Month to month player retention data tells us that players with low or high Win Loss Ratio (WLR) have 2x-3x attrition rates compared with players with WLR around 1. Yes, people complain about features, tech balance, and maps, but plotting data shows exactly how many people leave because of the MM. This means the benefits for resolving this problem is visible from past data. The MM is also an easy fix, just data mine player performance and use math to create a good Match Maker. You can hire a statistician, I'd even do it for free,

After addressing player attrition rates, the next step is giving the paying players what they want. In MWO today, QP is the most popular mode and this is inherited by QB. As for the rest, data trends show that population collapsed when FP development was given up upon (30% of the pop was lost when Solaris was released instead of CW/FP improvements). War mode is intended to add enough features to bring back players that wanted CW/FP. While the proposed features are light, it provides a foundation for future development, such as more granular inventory management, planetary effects on the war effort, economy, war material production, bases, etc. All this in addition to a promise of better match making should bring people back.

I offered only one game mode suggestion to showcase the issues it should address. MWO QP is often criticized for being too friendly to brainless deathball (nascar) tactics. The Battle Line game mode I proposed may seem similar to QP Conquest. where multiple cap points do not work to stop deathballing, but this is due to the snowball effect from players having only one mech. With respawns, the number of active players will not reduce for most of the duration of the match, keeping the snowball effect from starting. Once it is impossible to take an early kill lead and do objectives later, splitting of teams will occur naturally. By tweaking the domination timers and tonnage resource, it is possible to choose the proportion of games that end by either objective.

Making QB mechs unlocked and free is intended to solve multiple problems. 1) It's impossible to sell mech packs over again to the MWO community, even C-bill grinding for mechs from the beginning will likely be unwelcome, 2) The new player experience in MW is difficult, it is hard enough to learn the game controls. Moving the need to grind C-bills for mechs and mechlabbing cuts the pain points in half. 3) The end game for MW has always been accumulating mechs, and meaningfully risking them in battle. However this is too hard on a new player, hence this part of the game has been entirely moved to War mode.

Adding an influence system for Loyalist War mode is intended to both offer FP/CW players some macro strategic depth and also to distribute the population naturally. If the monthly leader-board is used to award influence, the top units will want to go to under-populated factions to gain greater influence. By having a faction budget, a faction with a large military (large active Loyalist population) will have less to offer as incentives to Loyalists and Mercenaries (in terms of mission C-bill bonuses or reduced repair costs).

Adding pilots serves as a C-bill sink, adds an interesting dimension of being able to pick pilot and mech at time of drop, and moderates the grind by removing unskilled mech grind (after you level the first pilot, you will have 10 leveled mechs, and from there on, you can choose to use unskilled pilots with skilled mechs or vice versa to avoid starting with nothing)

From a development cost perspective, I hope it can be recognized that the number of new assets needed to start MW Eternal War is minimal. Going from MW5 to this UE MW MMO is mostly UI work, net server code, and Match Maker. It can re-use MW5's procedural map, most UIs, mechs of course, MWO's inventory system, and match database(expanded). I estimate that a budget of 2-3 million should be sufficient for this minimalist alpha version, PGI please correct me if I am wrong.

Monetization in this proposal is centered around C-bill sinks. PvE and QB allow easy if slow grinding of C-bills, while 10-15$ per month will make that grinding unnecessary to play War mode PvP continuously. This toes the line between F2P and P2W without crossing it. The subscription model will also generate more stable revenue than the mech pack model, as long as people can be enticed into playing War Mode and have money to spend, it should be possible to earn a sub from them.

The reason the Match Maker is listed first is because putting queues together is impossible without it. A player's skill is not just one number, but varies depending on the mech and build they are using, whether they are QB/Merc/Loyalist, and the skill of the group they are playing in. To give good match experiences, only the Match Maker that considers and adjusts for all impacting factors will be successful. Without it, team balance will suffer.

To succinctly explain how this proposal is economically viable: This proposal makes the game easier to learn by 1) eliminating early pain points by making mechs and mech labbing free in QB, 2) importing PvE modes, and 3) investing in a MM and better designed games modes that improve a player's PvP experience. Once a new player got to enjoy MW in QB and PvE, they will have earned C-bills. There is however no way of spending C-bills in QB only. This encourages players to try War mode. War mode is a challenge when playing for free because pilots that learned using QB will have gotten to try many mechs (4 random mechs in drop deck), and have developed mech and loadout preferences. To buy and maintain their preferred drop deck, players will need a constant stream of C-bill earnings. This can be done by grinding QB and PvE occasionally, or for players with the means, by subscribing. To keep people in War mode, developments in addition to those I listed would be needed, but unlike one-time revenue from mech packs, these developments will earn long term loyal customers. By addressing concerns for new players, adding QoL for current players, developing campaign features for past supporters, tying it all together with a natural game flow that earns subscriptions while remaining F2P, with hope to grow the game's player base, a self-reinforcing cycle results.



Mechwarrior Escalation Features

(!) Escalation is intended to expand the appeal of the Mechwarrior Franchaise, and as such, takes more risks. This part of the proposal is only recommended if MW:EW is successful and a gamble to dramatically increase the player base is possible.

(!) FPS games are far more popular than Simulation games, and can serve as an entry point to introduce someone to mechs.

(o) Escalation is the latest blood sport developed on planet Solaris for the enjoyment of fans. The winners of the Escalation Grand Prix are acclaimed as the greatest warriors in the galaxy.

(o) Escalation is a free-for-all mode, where players are dropped onto a map in their pilot suit and side-arm.

(o) In the first of three phases, players fight using small arms, collect C-bills by finding caches and defeating other players.

(o) C-bills can be spent at any time to drop weapons and supplies from a dropship overhead, or helpful items such as cover, smoke, automatic turrets, UAVs.

(o) In the second of three phases, players can use the C-bills they amassed to buy battle armor which provide more firepower and armor and speed than any human can hope to match. Players can still fight without it, but at an enormous disadvantage. (Switching out of a damaged battle armor by buying a new one is possible)

(o) In the last phase, players can use C-bills to buy mechs. (Pilots that eject can buy another mech if funds are available). Last man standing.

(o) Destructible buildings

(o) The map shrinks as time progresses, players that spend too much time outside forfeit.

(o) In MW fashion, different battle armor chassis are available and can be customized, and a player should prepare different price points in consideration of the C-bills available during an Escalation match. Same for mechs.

(o) In MW fashion, rather than having all players be the same size, you can customize your pilot's strength (more increases body size, hitbox, hp, and slows speed accel/decel), agility (increases speed, accel, decel), and intelligence (increases initial and maximum skill points)

(o) Yes, a skill tree, and you can train multiple pilots.

(o) In a monthly competitive tournament, for 3 hours, you pick 3 of your pilots to create a team and play 10 matches. However, unlike regular matches where deaths do not happen, in Competitive Escalation (Grand Prix), if you are downed by a battle armor while in a pilot suit, or downed by a mech as an elemental, or you are head shot in a mech, your pilot dies permanently. Teams with at least one surviving pilot earns ranking and prizes.

Escalation Monetization

(o) Premium time can apply here with C-bill earning, XP gain and free customization, and other similar games demonstrate many MT options

Escalation Discussion

It should not be too hard to implement a basic shooter in Unreal Engine, however a great number of new assets would be needed to implement Escalation. I would not expect to see the amount of polish as other big budget FFA games. If starting with 3 each of pistols, smgs, assault rifles, a sniper, a shotgun, 3 battle armor/elemental chassis that can reuse small mech weapon assets, a hand crafted map, and the game mode itself, my rough estimate is a 5 million dollar commitment (correct me if wrong). I know it's not exactly an easy sale, however, the critical questions are: does this sound fun? To the current MW player base? What about a larger player base? Being utilizing a successful FFA formula, and leveraging the BT IP, you can create something unique.


Comments on this proposal appreciated. I will refine the post based on your feedback before tweeting PGI. (Please start a new thread if you want to write about your own idea)

Edited by Nightbird, 22 November 2020 - 08:49 AM.


#2 martian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,578 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 01:38 AM

View PostNightbird, on 15 November 2020 - 12:08 AM, said:

This proposal is for the next MMO Mechwarrior game on Unreal Engine, with priority on delivering an enjoyable and profitable game with a tight budget for version 1.0. It is directed to PGI, with hopes they will read it, sleep on it, and realize that this plan, or something close to it, is a viable way forward with the Mechwarrior IP.

The first sentence of your text makes sense and I am sure that any future developer of some MechWarrior game will read you post with a great interest.

The second sentence of your text does not make sense. The maximum possible of what PGI has been capable of doing during the last few years was adjusting a few numerical values by editing some already existing XML files. What you have described goes far beyond PGI's abilities.

#3 The6thMessenger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Nova Captain
  • Nova Captain
  • 8,045 posts
  • LocationFrom a distance in an Urbie with a HAG, delivering righteous fury to heretics.

Posted 15 November 2020 - 01:46 AM

Cool as the idea is. I don't think PGI is competent enough to pull this off. They barely pulled of MWO, and MW5 isn't really worth anything if it's not moddable.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 15 November 2020 - 01:51 AM.


#4 RRAMIREZ

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 183 posts
  • LocationIn the Blob

Posted 15 November 2020 - 03:38 AM

I'll have to re-read that...
Not sure about how I feel about all the points.

But there's a vision there. Good job.

#5 MW Waldorf Statler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,457 posts
  • LocationGermany/Berlin

Posted 15 November 2020 - 04:06 AM

thats all the Ideas ,posted by Beginning of MWO since 2013 ...and since 2015 MWO has not longer a Programmer and Coding Crew with expirience thats can more doing as Maps (ok the last Years only working to MW5 for the further License)and editing of XML Files ,all other from the Modified Cry3 Engine is now like a ancient unknown leaguage or the German WK II ENIGMA Machina

#6 Horseman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 4,694 posts
  • LocationPoland

Posted 15 November 2020 - 05:40 AM

Pitching a whole new game to PGI is out of scope.
Moreover, I can guarantee that nobody at PGI will read your pitch for legal reasons.
If they did, it would be too easy for you to sue them later claiming they used your concept without crediting you, even if similarities are minimal or purely coincidental.
The same goes for every unsolicited pitch sent to any game dev company, movie/tv studio, author or publishing company.

#7 martian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,578 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 06:02 AM

View PostHorseman, on 15 November 2020 - 05:40 AM, said:

Pitching a whole new game to PGI is out of scope.
Moreover, I can guarantee that nobody at PGI will read your pitch for legal reasons.
If they did, it would be too easy for you to sue them later claiming they used your concept without crediting you, even if similarities are minimal or purely coincidental.
The same goes for every unsolicited pitch sent to any game dev company, movie/tv studio, author or publishing company.

You are right.

There was even a time* when BattleTech writers were legally forbidden to visit some sections of their own forums (subforums like "Fan fiction" or "Fan designs") because of such possibility.

*I do not know if the rule still stands

#8 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 06:51 AM

View PostHorseman, on 15 November 2020 - 05:40 AM, said:

Pitching a whole new game to PGI is out of scope.
Moreover, I can guarantee that nobody at PGI will read your pitch for legal reasons.


Scope for the MWO update? Obviously since it's not an MWO idea. People can communicate anything to PGI for any reason, it's up to them to read or not read it, act or not act on it. I did create this in part because the list of updates being considered have terrible potential revenue to cost ratio, and as much as some people may want PGI to let go of the IP, it would be a long time before any other company gives it another try.

Writers may want to avoid ideas, but they do read fan fics and suggestions if they want to. There may be exceptions, but that is not the rule. If it is needed I am willing to sign away any rights I have over the idea for free. I don't think any applies for this proposal. If you look at what I deemed critical components, there is nothing visible to the end user and be in violation of some weird public domain copyright, completely different from a plot line.

View Postmartian, on 15 November 2020 - 01:38 AM, said:

The maximum possible of what PGI has been capable of doing during the last few years was adjusting a few numerical values by editing some already existing XML files. What you have described goes far beyond PGI's abilities.


MW5 could be made with just some XML line tweaks? PGI does not have a Cryengine dev, but that does not impact this at all.

View PostMW Waldorf Statler, on 15 November 2020 - 04:06 AM, said:

thats all the Ideas ,posted by Beginning of MWO since 2013 ...and since 2015 MWO has not longer a Programmer and Coding Crew with expirience thats can more doing as Maps (ok the last Years only working to MW5 for the further License)and editing of XML Files ,all other from the Modified Cry3 Engine is now like a ancient unknown leaguage or the German WK II ENIGMA Machina


PGI has the Unreal Engine developers today if they choose to they can work on this idea. Also, my proposal addresses match making, queuing, FP expansion, and monetization in a holistic way. I welcome you to link to a prior post that does all that. I don't deny individual pieces may exist scattered across the forum, but assembling it form ready for implementation? I'm not aware of any attempt prior to this but feel free to prove me wrong. Ideas from nothing is rare, most of the best ideas come from assembling pieces of existing thought.

Edited by Nightbird, 15 November 2020 - 07:18 AM.


#9 martian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,578 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 07:19 AM

View PostNightbird, on 15 November 2020 - 06:51 AM, said:

Writers, yes, for a game it does not apply. I am also willing to sign away any rights I have over the idea for free. At this point in MW dev, we can't afford any more mishaps.

Better be safe than sorry and avoid even some remote possibility that some lawsuit could happen. That's why CGL has started to use only their homegrown things for the future BattleTech development, even though they perfectly owned rights for some other materials made by external artists.

For some closer example, PGI had some legal dealings with Harmony Gold a few years ago and it was nothing simple.

And of course (just as an interesting fact), one guy who instigated a series of massive lawsuits against FASA (the original BattleTech company) is a member of this very forums.

On Russ Bullock's place, I would refuse to use anything other than things directly invented by PGI, since the history of BT/MWO is filled with lawsuits and legal dealings.

View PostNightbird, on 15 November 2020 - 06:51 AM, said:

MW5 could be made with just some XML line tweaks? PGI does not have a Cryengine dev, but that does not impact this at all.

MW5 was conceived as a predominantly single player game. It is something different in scope in comparison with multiplayer games of the MechWarior Online type.

And honestly, how many people would be willing to finance some future MWO2, knowing that Russ Bullock and Paul Inouye are still in charge?

#10 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 07:48 AM

I appreciate discussions on whether it's OK to offer ideas, and whether PGI is trustworthy, but not here. I will ask further posts in this line to be removed, and ask instead for comments and criticisms of the content of the idea itself. Thank you.

#11 My Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Major General
  • Major General
  • 475 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 09:11 AM

View PostNightbird, on 15 November 2020 - 12:08 AM, said:

This proposal is for the next MMO Mechwarrior game on Unreal Engine

Considering they've already said they're going to keep working on MWO on the Cryengine this seems a bit pointless, but whatever.

Quote

(!) A player performance database and statistical approach to making teams to create the most balanced and fun matches possible. In addition to stats tracked in MWO, it is compiled by mech variant, build, game mode, and frequently grouped teammates to feed into the Match Maker. The required result is that all players will experience a WLR between 0.9 and 1.1.

Working matchmaker, got it.

Quote

(!) All players (solo and groups) for all game modes will go in one queue for PvP matches. This is to present the most players possible to the Match Maker, enable team creation with players of similar skill level.
(!) Groups will start with a limit of 4 players until it is proven the Match Maker delivers on the 0.9 to 1.1 WLR for all players requirement (including in groups), and from there slowly increased up to 12 only so long as the WLR range requirement continues to be satisfied.

I think we've established well enough that 4 man groups in a 12v12 game offer way too much sway over a match being won or lost. Groups being in the same queue as solos is still a contentious issue anyway.

Quote

(!) For accounts with a low number of games, a fire break-like detection code will pull dramatically over-performing players out of a match intended for low-skilled players and elevate their database skill level to proper levels.

While this prevents smurfs from clubbing seals, it'd also mean someone who gets lucky and does well in their initial matches gets thrown way out of their proper skill bracket. It was one of the advantages of the accelerated tier progression for good performance still requiring you to play the game.

Quote

(o) While there is only one PvP queue, there are separate entry points into the queue: Quick Battle and War Mode (Loyalist/Mercenary). Each entry point has their own unique restrictions catering to player preferences. The Match Maker will be aware of the point of entry if the mode restrictions modify player skill.

One queue with two entry points with unique restrictions, why? That seems overly complex.

Quote



(o) Each game mode will require a drop deck with mechs chosen in order to drop.

No. No, no, no, no. A huge appeal of MWO is that the average match is like 5 minutes, they're short and sweet. If you want to play longer matches you can go into FP and get that fuller, longer experience.

Forcing people into FP style matches that have an average time of at least triple that of a normal QP match will just serve to drive off the players who want a quicker and more casual experience.

Quote

(o) In Eternal War, skill grinding is separate for Pilot and Mech. You can hire multiple pilots. The pilot skill tree takes 100-200 games to fill, and cannot be modified afterwards. The mech skill tree takes 10-20 games to fill, and can be modified. When dropping PvP, both pilot and mech contribute to final modifiers.

Why make pilots not something you can modify when there is such a huge investment of time to grind one out?

Quote



For PvE, multiple pilots can be used at the same time.

Play Mechwarrior 5.


Quote

(o) Quick Battle (QB) - this mode makes all mechs and mech lab customizations (except cosmetics) available from the start for no C-bill nor real money cost. However, the drop deck has 4 slots filled with locked flavor of the day mech variants (you can still mech lab and customize them) and only one slot the user can select their own mech choice. This mode is for learning about the game, trying out mech builds, and while C-bill earnings is the lowest of the modes, you do not need to pay for mech repair and can skill up both mechs and pilots.

(o) War Mode Galactic Map - Both the Loyalist and Mercenary play styles will use the map to choose which conflict the player fights in, the risks and rewards. The map displays the location of faction battle fleets, of which each faction will control 2 or more. The location of these fleets determines the conflict points for PvP battles. All other planets will have PvE. Loyalists move battle fleets via voting per cycle (25-27 hrs?), and Mercs move their dropship via banked time (earn 7? days per match, up to 60? days banked). Due to the one queue system, loyalties are not displayed in matches and each player's contribution goes to the conflict they select on the map.

(o) Loyalist War Mode - Every loyalist has access to the influence screen, which makes decisions pertaining to the faction. Unlike votes which are one per person, influence is based on contribution to the faction (monthly faction leaderboard). Voting takes place for decisions on where to move fleets, alliance/war declarations, and how to spend faction taxes. For drop decks, Loyalists have the following limitations: free access to faction stock mechs with free repairs, can use earnings to upgrade factions mechs and buy personal mechs. However, upgrades (customized mech value - stock mech value) and personal mechs do not have free repair, with the loyalist having to cover 5% of repair costs. Personal mech price is also subject to import cost, modified by global faction relations.

(o) Mercenary War Mode - To access mercenary mode, you need to first lease a ship and hire a crew ~30 million C-bills per realtime month for a Leopold (with fixed tonnage inventory capacity), paid in advance. You can buy any mechs for sale in the faction space you are in, pay to customize them, and use them in PvP missions. However, factions will only cover ~95% of repair costs. Most new merc companies hoping to go after lucrative military contracts go bankrupt in the first year. Potential pay is the highest however...

This is basically just a FP proposal and I'm not invested enough in how FP works to care but I do take issue with how this massively restricts player's choice of mechs and ultimately comes back to the QP/FP divide. This offers me two choices, I can either be forced to run set mechs or have a significant investment to be able to play whatever I want.

Quote

(!) PvP game modes last ~10-15 minutes and allow different tactics

What about the core MWO audience in QP that prefer shorter less complex matches?

Quote

(!) Game modes utilize AI mechs/vehicles, support assymetric teams 12vs12, 12vs11, 12vs10, etc... as determined by the Match Maker if necessary, auto-balance capabilities to detect DC/AFK and dropping extra AI to compensate.

Sounds it could be very easily gamed and would take far more effort to impliement than just having a robust game that isn't prone to crashing and a fairer penalty system.

Quote

(!) PvE is balanced as an easy if slow way to earn Cbills and XP. PvP C-bills earning is balanced around being certain but slow in Quick Battle, but hard in Loyalist mode and hardest in Mercenary mode. This due to the repair cost associated with customized mechs being applied in the War Modes.

I bought Mech 5 to play PvE, I play MWO for PvP and I expect the same of any successor.

Quote

a procedural map

Don't care what else you have to say, instantly dropped. Procedurally generated maps for PvP are a terrible idea.

Quote

(o) For 9.99$ per month subscription, Premium time 50% bonus to C-bill and XP earnings from missions, and free cosmetic usage



(o) For 4.99$ per month subscription, Merc path covers leasing a Leopold dropship and hiring a crew and salary costs for 4 pilots. More dropships can be added to offer greater inventory capacity at a higher lease cost...

(o) For 4.99$ per month subscription, Loyalist path pack doubles personal mech bays available (depends on Loyalist rank), doubles influence during voting, eliminates peronal mech maintenance cost, and covers salary costs for 4 pilots.

Why a opt-in sub model over what is currently present?

(o) For 5$(MT), make a mech variant premium with 10% cbill bonus if in drop deck (stacks with multiple mechs)

Quote



(o) For 5$(MT), respec a pilot (saves 100-200 matches time)

What a terrible idea, I mean making pilots no respecable is already bad but then making people pay if they want to change their grinded pilot or find how they built them is sub-optimal?


Quote

(!) FPS games are far more popular than Simulation games, and can serve as an entry point to introduce someone to mechs.

So EW is a simulator? No buy then, I'd much prefer this proposal because its a shooter.

Quote

-snip-

Woah scratch that, I'd rather have a simulator if this is your idea of a nice casual centric game.

#12 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 09:43 AM

View Postjustcallme C L O U D, on 15 November 2020 - 09:11 AM, said:

Quote


Hey, I really appreciate your comments! Here are my responses to your concerns.

1. 4 man teams too much sway - only because our MM is not based on statistical modelling (science if you're unfamiliar with that specific term)

2. Falsely ranked up for being lucky - maybe, it would be equivalent to a new player to the MW franchise stepping into their first mech and doing 1000 damage and 8 kills. There may be false flags, but on a whole, matches will benefit and anyone falsely bumped up will naturally be bumped down after a few games.

3. Restrictions cater to the people's playing preferences - People that like MW5 for example enjoy not having all mechs available that MWO players do. Quick Battle is for people that like MWO QP. War Mode is for people that want a PvP version of MW5.

4. Match time duration preference - PGI can put it up to a vote, I picked 10-15 minutes because that is where the most popular games have dialed it in at. I hear people today are annoyed with 4-5 mins of playing followed by 5 minutes of searching and loading but maybe I'm wrong. What is important is where the player base want on average rather than individually. FP is currently 20-30 minutes so it is a compromise for both sides.

5. This is just a faction play proposal - no, it caters to both QP and FP players. Quick Battle for QP players. War Mode for FP players, it is specifically for the people that left when MWO CW/FP development stopped. Keep note I labelled this part as optional, other approaches are OK as well as long as it satisfies the one queue critical suggestion, reasoning is explained.

6. Forced to run a set mechs - no, you pick one mech you want to use, and you will always be able to use it. The rest are spares for if you need it.

7. Balance for DC/AFK - I don't see how it can be gamed, people may need to leave or their computer/internet may crash. No amount of coding can fix that. The important part is the rest of the team doesn't feel like the game is hopeless because of 1 or 2 DC.AFK.

8. You don't have to play PvE. It is there as an almost free to implement Academy, with C-bill earning.

9. Why a opt-in sub model - What is currently present is mech packs mostly, and most people I talk to are no longer willing to buy them. PGI is welcome to poll the community.

10. Pillot skill respec - You will need more than one pilot anyways - focusing on weapons, defense, info war, etc. MT is for people with more money than time, that's all. If you have time, don't spend money.

11. EW is a simulator? MWO is a simulator according to PGI, EW is no more a simulator.

12. casual centric game - sure, it's not different from most FFAs with a MW flavor. Note what I considered critical, free feel to replace optional parts.

Just make sure to consider cost, since most other FPS MW hybrids I can think of are far more expensive to dev and yet not more likely to be successful.

Edited by Nightbird, 15 November 2020 - 09:54 AM.


#13 My Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Major General
  • Major General
  • 475 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 10:54 AM

View PostNightbird, on 15 November 2020 - 09:43 AM, said:

Hey, I really appreciate your comments!

If you did, you wouldn't insult my intelligence in the first part of your response.

Quote



1. 4 man teams too much sway - only because our MM is not based on statistical modelling (science if you're unfamiliar with that specific term)

Even if MM took into factor skill you'd still have a third of the team in a group which is still powerful. Being able to pre-plan and min-max your group is very effective.

Quote

2. Falsely ranked up for being lucky - maybe, it would be equivalent to a new player to the MW franchise stepping into their first mech and doing 1000 damage and 8 kills. There may be false flags, but on a whole, matches will benefit and anyone falsely bumped up will naturally be bumped down after a few games.

Since you didn't say where new players start its presumed they start near the bottom. The only skills I consider unique to MWO is mechlabbing and twisting, even then twisting is something you can get away with not knowing in smaller mechs where simply moving unpredictably is where most of your tank comes from.

So in this hypothetical you have say, an average World of Tanks player who knows how to move in a game with somewhat similar movement and can obviously shoot. Yeah, I'd say they could perform very well early on if pitted against lower skilled players.

Quote

3. Restrictions cater to the people's playing preferences - People that like MW5 for example enjoy not having all mechs available that MWO players do. Quick Battle is for people that like MWO QP. War Mode is for people that want a PvP version of MW5.

But in your proposal it says it goes into one queue, so no there isn't something catering to different player preferences. Its how much restrictions you want on your experience, there is no quick and easy pick-up-and-play gamemode like QP.

Quote

4. Match time duration preference - PGI can put it up to a vote, I picked 10-15 minutes because that is where the most popular games have dialed it in at. I hear people today are annoyed with 4-5 mins of playing followed by 5 minutes of searching and loading but maybe I'm wrong. What is important is where the player base want on average rather than individually. FP is currently 20-30 minutes so it is a compromise for both sides.

Having a drop deck (and presumably respawns because thats implied with a drop deck) would naturally lead to longer matches. The annoying part is the waiting compared to the play time, the issue is with the waiting.

Quote

5. This is just a faction play proposal - no, it caters to both QP and FP players. Quick Battle for QP players. War Mode for FP players, it is specifically for the people that left when MWO CW/FP development stopped. Keep note I labelled this part as optional, other approaches are OK as well as long as it satisfies the one queue critical suggestion, reasoning is explained.

But it goes into the same game queue, its the same game. I was going to compare it to how a lot of people disliked QP modes being added into FP but its worse, it'd be like if all the soup queuers were thrown into FP as well.

Quote



6. Forced to run a set mechs - no, you pick one mech you want to use, and you will always be able to use it. The rest are spares for if you need it.

Your three options were. Set 4 mechs with one player mech, faction mechs, or a grind to be able to use all your own mechs.

Quote

7. Balance for DC/AFK - I don't see how it can be gamed, people may need to leave or their computer/internet may crash. No amount of coding can fix that. The important part is the rest of the team doesn't feel like the game is hopeless because of 1 or 2 DC.AFK.

Go AFK for like half the match, the AI replacement has soaked up damage and dealt it, you become active and have effectively gotten half a mech worth of damage taken/dealt for free.

You're right that people may need to leave, but I'm willing to say the vast majority of D/Cs are from game issues or them just quitting on a bad match.

Quote

8. You don't have to play PvE. It is there as an almost free to implement Academy, with C-bill earning.

But why add PvE when PGI has a game focused on it? If someone wants to play PvE there exists Mech 5.

Quote

9. Why a opt-in sub model - What is currently present is mech packs mostly, and most people I talk to are no longer willing to buy them. PGI is welcome to poll the community.

There is still plenty to get out of the mechpack business model, the issue is that its not been changed for so long.

Quote

10. Pillot skill respec - You will need more than one pilot anyways - focusing on weapons, defense, info war, etc. MT is for people with more money than time, that's all. If you have time, don't spend money.

Why can't we have a system like the current skill tree where on a mech you can in theory unlock all skill nodes and change them as you change the build? Why force someone to grind multiple pilots?

Most people would still do that because its just convient to have multiple, same reason people buy multiple drop decks for FP or multiple of the same variant for specific roles.

Quote



11. EW is a simulator? MWO is a simulator according to PGI, EW is no more a simulator.

Posted Image
https://mwomercs.com/game/user-guide

Edited by justcallme C L O U D, 15 November 2020 - 10:56 AM.


#14 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 11:28 AM

View Postjustcallme C L O U D, on 15 November 2020 - 10:54 AM, said:

snip


I hope it's OK to disagree without it being an insult?

1. On the match maker, here is an independent analysis of my proposed Match Maker versus our current Match Maker. 60% of player get placed into a 0.95 to 1.05 WLR range, compared with 25% with the MM today.

2. Posted Image

3. Multiple pilots allow you to change the skills during the match. The total grind is also reduced as once you have all the pilots you need, you only need 10-20 matches per mech compared with today.

#15 LordNothing

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 16,735 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 03:08 PM

i just want a game that blows me away like living legends did. mwo/mw5 did not do this. i have my doubts that pgi could pull that off. just make a game thats better than a mod i played 10+ years ago, thats all you have to do.

#16 LordNothing

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 16,735 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 03:13 PM

View PostI O O percent KongLord, on 15 November 2020 - 02:37 PM, said:

[redacted]


problem with that was that they wanted to change the existing game to a sub model. that would piss off so many subsets of players that nobody will remain.

its a completely different matter to make a new game entirely.

Edited by Ekson Valdez, 15 November 2020 - 10:45 PM.


#17 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 05:46 PM

View PostLordNothing, on 15 November 2020 - 03:13 PM, said:

problem with that was that they wanted to change the existing game to a sub model. that would piss off so many subsets of players that nobody will remain.


They broached the topic a tiny bit, almost as a plea to the community for funding, and they also shared with us the mech pack model wasn't sustainable - the profit was diminishing with the player base.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with a subscription model, if the game is designed for it, but I agree it's impossible to covert MWO over to it.

Edited by Nightbird, 15 November 2020 - 05:46 PM.


#18 Anjian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 3,735 posts

Posted 15 November 2020 - 11:23 PM

Something that reminds me about Chromehounds here. Did the OP play it?

#19 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 16 November 2020 - 07:25 AM

View PostAnjian, on 15 November 2020 - 11:23 PM, said:

Something that reminds me about Chromehounds here. Did the OP play it?


I'm afraid I haven't, any specific similarities?

#20 Anomalocaris

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 671 posts

Posted 16 November 2020 - 08:12 AM

View PostNightbird, on 15 November 2020 - 09:43 AM, said:


5. This is just a faction play proposal - no, it caters to both QP and FP players. Quick Battle for QP players. War Mode for FP players, it is specifically for the people that left when MWO CW/FP development stopped. Keep note I labelled this part as optional, other approaches are OK as well as long as it satisfies the one queue critical suggestion, reasoning is explained.

6. Forced to run a set mechs - no, you pick one mech you want to use, and you will always be able to use it. The rest are spares for if you need it.


I respect your contributions to the MM and PSR discussions Nightbird. That said, as a solo queue QP only type of player, I would never play the game you propose. You need to have a simple, single mech, no respawn QP solo mode because that's what most people want. Guys like me don't care about anything else. And given how the playerbase has sorted out over the years in MWO, guys like me are a big plurality, if not majority, of players.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users