Jump to content

- - - - -

Mechwarrior Online 2021: Modes

2021 modes

94 replies to this topic

#61 Horseman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • 3,477 posts
  • LocationPoland

Posted 20 November 2020 - 02:19 AM

View PostVoice of Kerensky, on 19 November 2020 - 07:20 PM, said:

I also continue to insist that the game needs a matchmaker. No, the misunderstanding that is working now is not a matchmaker.
Do it faster.
And the day before yesterday I had a fight in which my team had three cadets and not a single assault mech, and the enemy team did not have cadets, but had three assault mechs (moreover, at least two of them weighed 100 tons). Since when is one cadet on the first team equal to one hundred-ton mech on the second team?
I have a lot of screenshots of the results of battles, the terrible result of which was caused by the lack of adequate work of the matchmaker (largely, by the way, precisely because of the combined solo and group queue).
We can have fast matchmaking or we can have good matchmaking. Pick one, I know I'd rather wait longer for a balanced match.

Quote

P.S. Consider giving people a choice of mech just before dropping onto the map in quick play (as in FP). Let the choice be limited to the tonnage of your current mech.
It's hard to think of anything worse than falling into battle on the polar highlands in a mech with a close build. Especially when almost all of your team went into battle on close builds, but there were a couple of people on LRM/ERPPC/ERLL/AC2 with a multiplier of 10-12 who decided that they had the right to condemn the whole team to suffering because of their whim. At the same time, they themselves also suffer defeat.
I mean, you can either pick a mech before dropping and vote for a map that suits you or you can get a random map and then make a choice between a "drop deck" of mechs you've prepared. Being both able to control the map and fine-tune the mech would vastly reduce build diversity and variety of situations you'd encounter in QP

View PostSheridan Mackison, on 19 November 2020 - 08:24 PM, said:

24 mech capture the facility non-combat mode...Two teams, the goal being to be the first team to capture a strategic facility such as a mech factory or research lab. You can destroy bridges or cause landslides to slow the other team but get penalties for directly destroying a mech.
Terrible idea. Pew pew with giant mecha minus the pew-pew? Me not likey.

#62 Reno Blade

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 3,405 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 20 November 2020 - 02:32 AM

I hope this is the right section...

I would love to build my own "base" or "equip" my base/map with turrets.
It was something that was planned for the FactionPlay and unit coffers...
e.g.

You have possible slots on maps to place turrets, walls, platforms etc and you as a owner/defender can invest in placing and upgrading pieces there.


Then, (as next step) make it possible to attack someones base.
e.g.

in Faction Play, you can see all the bases of the Units that have their own base and see certain values (number and level of turrets/walls/etc).
then you can decide to raid the units base. the owning unit can also sponsor/hire mercs/freelancers (automatic call to arms like now, with enabled priority to unit members).
each raid could give additional bonus, depending on the target base (similar to placing a bet in solaris)

#63 MovinTarget

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Field Marshal
  • Field Marshal
  • 3,822 posts
  • LocationGreen Acres

Posted 20 November 2020 - 10:18 AM

I like the idea of having a "tonnage-based drop deck" for being flexible in QP so that you can pick within a tonnage range based on your queueing mech.

I agree that you forgo voting for map/mode when doing this since it would be a challenge for new players to be competitive if they can't field a comparable set of mechs and/or their mechs are not so highly customized.

Additionally, if you are leveling several mechs you can at least pick one that has the best chance of making progress.

#64 Kodan Black

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • Moderate Giver
  • 132 posts
  • LocationMassachusetts, USA

Posted 20 November 2020 - 12:58 PM

The current matchmaker is a problem. I've had times with zero assault mechs on our team and 5-6 on the other. Those games are over fast. It should look at tonnage and pilot experience if not skill. The current skill rating system is horrible. I've gotten down arrows for 500 damage and 2 kill games but up arrow for 1 kill and 300 damage? There needs to be a floor. If you kill another mech above your tonnage you get an up arrow as you contributed more than you brought. Same with damage. Losing 11-12 is vastly different than losing 1-12 but they get scored the same. Stomps in either direction are boring.

#65 Edeljoker

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 27 posts

Posted 21 November 2020 - 03:47 AM

Undo the changes that made many players quit and many might return:
  • reduce ghost heat for laser boats
  • reduce srm spread, it must be possible to hit a side torso, without spreading damage all over the mech)
  • no groups in solo queue - FW should be the only group mode - maybe with 10 people
  • much more FW rewards - so steamrolled players get al least something for the wait and the one sided slaughter
other important things:
  • the hit detection was much better in the past - improve it
  • new engine is really needed - you have ue4 programmers, so change mwo to an engine, where your people are capable of programming it (at the moment i have the impression, that even making a leaderboard for FW that works, is a challenge too big for your cry engine programmers, if you have such people at all)


#66 Marx Headroom

    Rookie

  • 3 posts
  • LocationRhode Island

Posted 21 November 2020 - 09:39 PM

The ranking system also makes things weird for new players. It seems to heavily weight towards Damage done. If you're trying to improve your rank by maximizing your damage done, it's very easy to get sucked into the LRM/sniper role. New players tend to lack an intuition for good sniping spots or timing. They often wander off on their own in search of these opportunities and their fear of death (because dying early is the surest way to tank your Damage stat) makes them hesitant to stick with the group.

I know a more intelligent ranking system is a complicated problem (eg how can you detect a tactical defeat responsible for a strategic victory?) but reducing the weight given to Damage done would probably go a long way to delivering the kind of feedback new players need to build confidence.

#67 Vercors

    Rookie

  • 9 posts

Posted 21 November 2020 - 10:21 PM

In quick play, an other way to equilibrate team and accelerate matchmaker is:

- let the player choose between four category of tonnage, in the order he prefers to play them (assault, ligth, heavy, medium, for exemple).
- click the play button.
- the machmaker place the player according to the waiting list, balancing tonnage in each team.
- choose map and gameplay (like now).
- when the matchmaker have decide the category of tonnage you will play, the player can choose a mech (that he have, or trial mech for new players) in this category.

Some players will dislike this method for some reasons (they don't like to play in a particular category, they want to skill up one mech, ect...). Give them the option to choose the mech they want (or just one category of tonnage), but at the price of not choosing map and type of gameplay. And because the matchmaker will now make balanced team, this player might wait more long to play (if the category is full when he click the play button). I don't thing this is a big penalty but enough to allow for balanced play.

Edited by Vercors, 21 November 2020 - 11:21 PM.


#68 Vercors

    Rookie

  • 9 posts

Posted 21 November 2020 - 11:57 PM

Or simpler than above :

- let the player chose between ONE TO FOUR category of tonnage (more category chosen means less time wait for the player), in the order he prefers to play them (assault, ligth, heavy, medium, for exemple).
- click the play button.
- the machmaker place the player according to the waiting list, balancing tonnage in each team.
- choose map and gameplay (like now).
- when the matchmaker have decide the category of tonnage you will play, the player can choose a mech (that he have, or trial mech for new players) in this category.

Edited by Vercors, 22 November 2020 - 12:00 AM.


#69 Timber Ghost

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 47 posts

Posted 22 November 2020 - 09:41 AM

Need to change the starting tier. A new player should not be playing in T1 or T2 until they have the psr to do so, just like everyone else.

There needs to be a way that a new player can earn 4 mechs/ bays with enough GSP to level each mech. Maybe not all while doing the tutorial, but maybe a way they can choose a faction, and earn a mech/ bay after so many matches. Come out of the tutorial, and choose a faction. Upon joining said faction, that faction will give you a medium mech with some GSP for it. Now you can go play QP matches, and that faction will reward you with a new mech every so many matches. (maybe a light after 25 qp matches, a heavy after 100, and an assault after 200, or something of the sort) After a mere 200 matches, that player has a solid stable of mechs the play FP with, and enough c-bills to make any changes they want. I think that would keep new players around.

Edited by Timber Ghost, 22 November 2020 - 09:42 AM.


#70 MovinTarget

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Field Marshal
  • Field Marshal
  • 3,822 posts
  • LocationGreen Acres

Posted 22 November 2020 - 12:19 PM

View PostEdeljoker, on 21 November 2020 - 03:47 AM, said:

Undo the changes that made many players quit and many might return:
  • reduce ghost heat for laser boats
  • reduce srm spread, it must be possible to hit a side torso, without spreading damage all over the mech)
  • no groups in solo queue - FW should be the only group mode - maybe with 10 people
  • much more FW rewards - so steamrolled players get al least something for the wait and the one sided slaughter
other important things:
  • the hit detection was much better in the past - improve it
  • new engine is really needed - you have ue4 programmers, so change mwo to an engine, where your people are capable of programming it (at the moment i have the impression, that even making a leaderboard for FW that works, is a challenge too big for your cry engine programmers, if you have such people at all)



The reasons for the the GH and SRM spread was to mitigate high skill players versus less skilled in a shrinking playerbase. To take these things away would require something else in their place to continue to mitigate since there is no "shallow end of the pool" really.

If we were to go down that route my vote would be reduction of weapons convergence to make pinpoint damage less likely.

They are not changing the engine any time soon.

#71 Hammer Hand

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 65 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio

Posted 22 November 2020 - 02:31 PM

I love the idea of removing groups from QP and group play is FW. The current FW wait times are a population issue. More players in a que means shorter waits, in theory. A big complaint in QP is Nascar, and that does not happen much in FW. Weights limits manage themselves in FW. I do not think that group size should be limited in FW. I know their will be stomps. I don't enjoy them either but you can learn from them. There used to be units we NEVER beat, ever, we just decided to do the best we could and then set a goal for how many mechs we could kill. Matchmaker is not used in FW and should not be. So that issue is solved. There would need to be units to teach new players how to play FW. Maybe not units but groups that offer times when you can join with them and learn FW. I have always thought FW was the best opportunity for growth and competition in this game. MWO is not meant to be Battletech, and PGI has said that plainly (it was a while ago, but they did).

FW Scouting needs to be brought back too. That is lance on lance, very fast and there were some epic fights in Scouting. Knife fight in a phone booth stuff!

I also like the idea of adding some fight classes for Solaris. Lance on lance would be fun.

I don't think that sync dropping should be limited in QP. You are just as likely to fight the players in your unity as be on the same side. I don't think anyone brought it up, but I'm jus say'n

Would it be possible to bring back VIP with a slight alteration and designate a player on one of the teams to be the VIP? Then mark on the map where he needs to go, so the drop ship can pick him up. Another option would be have a single mech that a played could drop in so it would be 12 vs 13 with the VIP.

#72 Sawk

    Member

  • PipPip
  • @ui_title_%s_Rank_9
  • @ui_title_%s_Rank_9
  • 39 posts

Posted 22 November 2020 - 03:26 PM

Hmm i have to agree with KODAN BLACK, the whole tier level thing is a mess, the whole drop thing is bad, who keeps changing stuff, least week i did great waiting for a drop, seems last few days i get right in, and i am not doing so well, its a little hard to move up in tier level, if you keep changing to rules : )
i want also say bring back SCOUTING MISSIONs, the 2 on 2 format, its easy already got the software, makes it cheap, allow for heavies, up the tonnage a little, we have less folks playing, smaller format, should be a no brainer, --give us-- fallen tier level guys somewhere to play, i may be solo, but i bet i could atleast 1 pilot that would say YES, to a all out 2X2 slug out for a planet : )

Sawk

#73 Voice of Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 94 posts

Posted 22 November 2020 - 04:45 PM

View PostKaeseblock, on 19 November 2020 - 10:32 PM, said:

Good point. It's always annoying having a brawler on polar highlands. An alternative here would also be to add more cover that brawlers can use to escape the LRM rain when approaching.


Thanks for the support.
I think this is not very difficult to do, because such a system has been in place for many years in FP.
I see the implementation of such a mechanism something like this.
You can only change mech from the current weight class, but not any, but +/- 5 tons. If you are playing on a 20 ton mech, you can change it for a 20 or 25 ton mech.
If you are playing on a 25 ton mech, you can use a 20, 25 or 30 ton mech.
If you dropped in 30 ton mech, 25, 30 and 35 ton mechs are available to you.
In case you enter the game in 35 ton mech, you have 30 and 35 ton mech available.
In order not to inflate the text, I will simply say that this scheme can be applied to other weight categories.

#74 Voice of Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 94 posts

Posted 22 November 2020 - 04:58 PM

View PostHorseman, on 20 November 2020 - 02:19 AM, said:

We can have fast matchmaking or we can have good matchmaking. Pick one, I know I'd rather wait longer for a balanced match.

Not certainly in that way. Let me be clear, this vicious system of choosing between bad and very bad is largely due to the combined solo and group queuing.
Thanks to such a combination, the creation of teams that are truly equal in strength is impossible purely mathematically, which means that in practice it is simply not feasible. By the way, six months of practice showed us all (including the management) exactly this result. Although many smart people talked about this even when the PGI just announced this merger.

View PostHorseman, on 20 November 2020 - 02:19 AM, said:

I mean, you can either pick a mech before dropping and vote for a map that suits you

You know, if I started playing this game two weeks ago, I probably would have believed you.
But I have been in the game for four and a half years and this time was enough for me to understand that my own vote very often does not decide anything.
Damn, just like in real life)))

View PostHorseman, on 20 November 2020 - 02:19 AM, said:

or you can get a random map and then make a choice between a "drop deck" of mechs you've prepared.


You may not believe me, but for a large number of the players who lose the map vote, this is the exactly that case. These people are dropped onto a random map that they did not choose Posted Image

View PostHorseman, on 20 November 2020 - 02:19 AM, said:

Being both able to control the map and fine-tune the mech would vastly reduce build diversity and variety of situations you'd encounter in QP

When I go out on a SRM- mech to the Polar Highlands or some lurm-warrior gets into Solaris City ... Well, this is so-so variety ... such a variety does not bring benefit and pleasure to both the individual player and his team.

Edited by Voice of Kerensky, 22 November 2020 - 09:42 PM.


#75 Mycroft000

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Partisan
  • The Partisan
  • 495 posts
  • LocationArizona

Posted 22 November 2020 - 06:56 PM

View PostMovinTarget, on 22 November 2020 - 12:19 PM, said:



The reasons for the the GH and SRM spread was to mitigate high skill players versus less skilled in a shrinking playerbase. To take these things away would require something else in their place to continue to mitigate since there is no "shallow end of the pool" really.

If we were to go down that route my vote would be reduction of weapons convergence to make pinpoint damage less likely.

They are not changing the engine any time soon.


Yep, shrinking the spread of SRMs to the point where you can reliably target a component is flat out absurd.

The further MWO gets from table top the more pointless it is, may as well play any other FPS on the market that has a large player base. Part of the draw for MWO is that it is a Battletech sourced game.

#76 Tamerlin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Patron Saint
  • The Patron Saint
  • 335 posts

Posted 22 November 2020 - 11:12 PM

Review / Update Game Modes -
Assault - I love my Skirmish (see below), but this should be the default game mode. The reason Assault has not worked is due to the map sizes - MWO has the largest maps by far compared to competing game. World of Tanks allows you to damage enemy from one map edge to the other, whereas there are MWO maps where max weapon range is less than 10% of the map. Since the maps were so large fast 'Mechs could sneak around the main battle and back-cap.

I advise something that Steel Ocean (a World of Warships clone) did - cap time depends on the number of enemy still alive. 12 still alive? Cap time is over 5 minutes. Only one left? Cap time is 1 minute or less. You could also give cap points sensors so LRMs can lock on cappers.

In other games when someone on the cap is shot they lose all the cap tickets. I like how MWO does it, so don't change that. But I must admit, there is something exciting about someone doing a last-second 99% cap reset in World of Tanks (or others) that you don't get with MWO...

Conquest - This has become the default mode because it becomes it has a ticket counter. One team can't just hide. However, on most maps each team owns one or two caps, so this becomes a battle over the middle cap, thus becoming Domination.

I'd like to see the caps have a max ticket each. Armored Warfare has a mode called "Global Operations", where they have cap points that deactivate after a set time, with new caps now activating. This makes the battle move around the combat area.

Domination - I like Domination, but it gets a bit "samey". Maybe have multiple places the cap could be on each map?

Incursion - I appreciate PGI trying to give lights a unique mission since the game does not have vision control, but the batteries just aren't worth it. I'd rather see the FP Invasion maps without gates or turret controls, no respawn.

Skirmish - This is the standard, two teams in a movement to contact. Nothing in the way, just kill the bad guys. However, when one team is down to a fast light and the others are slow heavies/assaults this mode is painful. Yes, I sign up to play a match up to 15 minutes long, but spending 10 minutes waiting for the light to get dumb is a bit painful.

No other game has a skirmish mode. For good reason. If assault can be fixed, skirmish should be removed.

Escort - I like the idea of a moving objective. The problem with this mode was the Atlas never told the team where it was going. If it used the command wheel to indicate its next check point, it would be more viable. PS: give the Atlas laser AMS, maybe two.

PVE - I'd love to see some kind of PVE mode, but I understand if CryEngine makes that too hard. The joy of a PVE mode in a free-to-play title is it allows players to gain skill tree nodes without being so outclassed by playing against mastered 'Mechs. However, there is a problem. For example - Armored Warfare's PVE mode is so good people don't play the PVP modes. An MWO PVE mode would need to start giving less rewards after 30 skill points (assuming 91 for mastery) and completely stop giving rewards after a 'Mech gets 60. Exception - a player grouped with other players in 'Mechs with low skill tree nodes. Let the 'Mech Senpai guide their rookies.

Solution for Faction Play / Solaris - I advise not even thinking about these until after everything else is done.

General Match Maker Improvements - In addition to player tier and 'Mech class, if would be great to also include 'Mech Battle Value into MM. That way if someone shows up with an Assault armed only with TAGs and flamers they won't be matched against an well-configured Assault on the other team.

See below re: quick play groups.

8v8 vs 12v12 - This should be dynamic. If there aren't many people playing, shift of 8v8. I wouldn't mind seeing 6v6 (small maps only) or 10v10, but I don't know how built-in the concept of lances are in MWO.

Solo / Group Queues - No other game has separate solo vs group queues. World of Tanks PUG is 15 v 15 - they only allow a single pre-made group of up to 3 players (20% of team). Other games have similar rules. The current problem with merged queue in MWO is that MM allows too many groups. The rule for Quick Play should be:
  • Only one group per match on each team
  • No more than three in a group
  • Max 200t (or even less) for 3-player group
If you want larger groups, play FP. I hate that answer, as I love dropping 12-man with my company/unit. But that is just not fair in QP, and no competing game allows it.

Examine Match Scoring (AMS) - Match Score should reflect a player's actions, not automatic equipment. In addition, structure damage should be worth more than armor damage. That way players that scan targets and aim at weak locations are rewarded more than LRM spam.

Remove 2 Minute Requirement for Reconnection - I don't know what this means. I would like to see the 80-seconds match start timer reduced.

Private Lobby Updates (More Options, Maps, Host Assignment, More Spectators) - I would assign this to MWOComp, since comp is the major user of private lobbies. Items include:
  • Button to switch team sides
  • More than two teams (if servers can handle that), even battle royale
  • Conquest - options to set which caps are active
Dailies/Weeklies - Sure, but since I already own all the 'Mechs, these don't do much for me. What I'd like to see is some kind of "Earn a Free 'Mech" events. For example, World of Tanks have linked campaigns that if you do over a dozens missions in each vehicle class you earn a unique, can't-get-any-other-way tank. MWO could do something similar.

While I appreciate PGI giving free "loyalty" 'Mechs for those who buy packs, thus funding the game, for a free-to-play title you should also reward those who play a lot, thus populating the queues. You could build a linked mission "event" requiring players to use all classes and tech bases, perhaps even involving QP, FP and Solaris. Then give them something that can never be sold, a unique 'Mech (Mackie?), camo pattern, war horn or bolt on. Something that says "I worked hard and didn't need to spend a dime."

#77 tingod

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Leutnant-General
  • Leutnant-General
  • 60 posts

Posted 23 November 2020 - 01:59 AM

what about a jump in? a never ending fight, when you are dead you can jump in. no waiting of other for a group. when you have killed 5 others you must wait 30 min, to fight against cheaters or other fighters with no honor...



#78 Aidan Crenshaw

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 1,980 posts

Posted 23 November 2020 - 03:38 AM

View PostVoice of Kerensky, on 22 November 2020 - 04:58 PM, said:

When I go out on a SRM- mech to the Polar Highlands or some lurm-warrior gets into Solaris City ... Well, this is so-so variety ... such a variety does not bring benefit and pleasure to both the individual player and his team.


Would you rather drop on polar Highlands with 18 lurmboats and 6 AMS boats?
I think any kind of drop deck selection after the map is chosen will nothing but reduce combat diversity. When have you last seen a short range defender on Boreal Defense? (Don't get me wrong here, FP is a good place for this kind of mechanic)

#79 AlinonMo

    Rookie

  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 4 posts

Posted 23 November 2020 - 06:27 AM

Most likely unpopular suggestion.

Seeing as it's all the rage these days, add a battle royal mode. (just to split the queues further, but may bring more people in)
Drop 10 to 25 lances on a huge map, last surviving lance wins. Arty/air strikes, UAVs, cool shots are all pick ups on the map.
Lance leader can choose where on map your lance's dropship lands.

Huge map = stitch together Polar Highlands, Frozen City, Alpine peaks and Boreal Vault. (or just design a new big map)

To fix currently available game modes, just add infinite respawns so that the match ends when the objective is complete or time runs out. (except for skirmish, then dead is dead.)

#80 mfcm Whiskers

    Rookie

  • Survivor
  • 1 posts

Posted 23 November 2020 - 10:25 AM

Just my two cents, and probably unpopular opinions. I'm a big Mechwarrior (mostly 2 and 4) fan who occasionally stops by and plays MWO for a few weeks and then moves on. This is usually due to frustration with games or slowly loosing interest in playing. (Potential target audience for player retention?)

Quickplay IMO does not feel like quickplay in other games, and in fact, feels more like "Laddering" or "Ranked" to me. Playing single elimination with skill based matchmaking in a game (12v12 with possibility of objectives) that is very team dependent, does not say quickplay to me. Don't get me wrong, I still really like that kind of game mode, but I would classify that as "Ranked" play or something similar.

What I see as quickplay is something like: smaller overall player size (8v8?) open to solos or full groups, with either no skill based matchmaking or hidden mmr etc.. Matchmaking via mech type would be necessary or having a lobby system. Also, I would like to either have infinite respawns in a timed match, or a ticketing respawn system akin to the Battlefield series (light mechs cost fewest tickets, assaults most).

Here's the reasoning. If I hit "Quickplay," I want to get into a game fast and just start playing. The reduced player size, lack of SBMM, and solos + groups should help with that. I also want to have some easy going fun, maybe try new builds, meme builds, or lore builds without having to think about my team comp. I don't want to think about how much mmr I'm going to lose in exchange for trying out new mechs or because my team wanted to NASCAR vs. firing line or vice versa. There's also less emphasis on team tactics and everyone moving as a single unit, hopefully in part due to smaller match size and the ability to respawn. As a player I'd also like this new quickplay system to further differentiate objective games vs. deathmatch style games. Maybe this part is unnecessary but I'd prefer a "Quickplay Skirmish" and "Quickplay Objectives," (btw CTF anyone?) Choose one, jump in, and have some fun.

I want to re-emphasize, I really like the current 12v12 format, but in the context of a "Ranked" queue or similar. Having this designation (or whatever name it takes) would indicate to players that a.) how you play will affect your ranking b.) coordinating with your team is essential and voice comms may be necessary for this c.) expect longer queue times for finding "balanced" matches across skill and mech choice and d.) if you're going in solo you'll likely find coordinated groups both on your team and the opponent's.

As a final note, I've never played any Faction Play (even though it looks interesting) so I'm unsure if having a "Ranked" queue would crossover with some of Faction Play's features. Perhaps the FP players would know best.





3 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users